From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Aaron Abreu <abreual(at)bay(dot)k12(dot)fl(dot)us> |
Cc: | Some Developer <someukdeveloper(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Why are stored procedures looked on so negatively? |
Date: | 2013-07-24 13:13:14 |
Message-ID: | CAHyXU0wJqx5+mXTVtt7pTnz-F2w_e=fg5wQ4qaQ7GR2NXi70Fg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Aaron Abreu <abreual(at)bay(dot)k12(dot)fl(dot)us> wrote:
> a NON-technical version...
>
> st.procedures and automation are great...
>
> but...
> sounds like everybody is dancing around the main theme..
> so lets say it....
> that dreaded word that developers and DBA's cring to hear...
> the one part of our job that we all hate...
>
> DOCUMENTATION !!!!!
urk. your typical java programmer isn't any more likely to write
documentation and unit tests than your typical database developer.
sql is very at least somewhat self documenting; I'd rather trawl
through someone else's sql than just about any other language.
stored procedures also tend to be very robust, especially if you avoid
excessive use of variables and loops; they are tightly coupled with
the database transaction environment: errors roll back ALL DATA
STRUCTURES as well as the execution point to a known good place. also
the mvcc locking model is very clean vs your typical threaded drek.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gauthier, Dave | 2013-07-24 13:21:43 | Re: Why are stored procedures looked on so negatively? |
Previous Message | Bèrto ëd Sèra | 2013-07-24 13:10:40 | Re: Why are stored procedures looked on so negatively? |