Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Mladen Gogala
> <mladen.gogala@vmsinfo.com> wrote:
>
>> I always wandered why would anybody want to update a view? View is, by
>> definition, a stored query which is executed frequently enough to be given
>> its own first name, middle name and a family name. If the view is being
>> updated, the middle name is F, just as in the case of Bucky Dent. I don't
>> see any database design pattern which would necessitate updating a view.
>> That is a perversion, not unlike putting ketchup on a hot dog.
>>
>
> See C.J. Date's "SQL and Relational Theory", a good read. Page 195,
> "SQL and Views: Update Operations" talks about this. Quote:
>
>
That is all good and well. My objection wasn't to the relational theory
and the principle of interchangeability, it was to a bad practice. As a
DBA since 1989., I've never had a need for updating a view, except when
simulating "update from". That's all I've said. Furthermore, my
experience tells me that updating views usually leads to
under-performing applications. The same applies to the philosophy which
puts optimizer hints at the "unwanted" list. Hints are bad in theory,
but unless optimizer can always make a good decision, there should be a
way of influencing the optimizer decisions.
--
Mladen Gogala
Sr. Oracle DBA
1500 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
(212) 329-5251
http://www.vmsinfo.com
The Leader in Integrated Media Intelligence Solutions
