Re: Thoughts on "Love Your Database" - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Pierre Chevalier Géologue
Subject Re: Thoughts on "Love Your Database"
Date
Msg-id 572A0C15.2050104@free.fr
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Thoughts on "Love Your Database"  (Szymon Lipiński <mabewlun@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Hi,

Le 04/05/2016 13:36, Szymon Lipiński a écrit :
> On 4 May 2016 at 13:13, Chris Travers <chris.travers@gmail.com
> <mailto:chris.travers@gmail.com>> wrote:
>     A few observations
>
>     On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Geoff Winkless <pgsqladmin@geoff.dj
>     <mailto:pgsqladmin@geoff.dj>> wrote:
>
>         On 4 May 2016 at 06:46, dandl <david@andl.org
>         <mailto:david@andl.org>> wrote:
>         > I'm a strong believer in putting the business code next to the data, not the wrong
>         > side of the object-relational divide. However, for many the challenge of writing and
>         > debugging SQL code is just too high!
>
>         Your source for this statement please? "For many" sounds rather like
>         weasel-words to me. In my experience, a wide range of people, from
>         beginners to experts, find SQL easy to write and debug.

Yes, I agree. SQL is just crystal-clear to write, read and understand. I
found out that debugging is usually not a common exercise in SQL,
because the language is so trivial.


...
>  From my perspective there is one more thing: when I tried, in couple of
> companies, to move some part of the logic to a database, then usually
> the management said "no, that's not doable, as we will have trouble with
> finding good sql programmers later",

Shocking! Apart from very few languages I know, SQL is by far more
productive and efficient, for many-many tasks.


> and we were still writing all the logic outside the database.

I used to implement the logic outside the database, like you mention,
*but* I was writing plain SQL.  Only when I had specific needs, then I
would switch to another language which would just get the results from a
well-polished plain SQL query, process, and feed back things into the
database (with another well-polished SQL, of course) or just throw the
results out somewhere else (file, screen, picture, whatever).  No ORM or
any complication.

And I find SQL fairly easy to debug and maintain, no need for fancy
tools: an editor and a console (psql or equivalent) and you're up and going!


Nowadays, things got quite different, and I tend to stuff more and more
logic inside the database. Which is often merely converting SQL queries
into views...

But it comes with a counterpart: the more you put logic inside your
DBMS, the more dependent you become. As far as I'm concerned, I recently
decided to just stick to PostgreSQL forever! (or almost)

À+
Pierre

PS: sorry for the double-reply, Szymon: I forgot *again* to hit
Shift-Ctrl-R instead of Ctrl-R, shame on me...
--
____________________________________________________________________________
Pierre Chevalier
PChGEI: Pierre Chevalier Géologue Et Informaticien
Partenaire DALIBO
     Mesté Duran
     32100 Condom
   Tél+fax  :    09 75 27 45 62
                 06 37 80 33 64
   Émail  :   pierrechevaliergeolCHEZfree.fr
   icq#   :   10432285
   jabber: pierre.chevalier1967@jabber.fr
   http://pierremariechevalier.free.fr/pierre_chevalier_geologue
____________________________________________________________________________


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Adrian Klaver
Date:
Subject: Re: ruby pg connection fails on centos - okay on debian and dev machine
Next
From: Pierre Chevalier Géologue
Date:
Subject: Re: Thoughts on "Love Your Database"