in reply to Re: N-tier, client/model, and business rules?
in thread N-tier, model/view, and business rules?

First off, I agree. Having a decent set of stored procs can really simplify migration and changing situations, a stored proc might even return results from a totally different DB than the one the user is connected to. But I was wondering about one thing, I am a Sybase user, iirc you are as well. Ive noticed that a heavy use of stored procs is favoured by Sybase users. Since I've not had much exposure to other DB's I cant really say, but I have noticed that it seems users of other DB's tend not to go that way. Any thoughts from your point of view?


---
demerphq

<Elian> And I do take a kind of perverse pleasure in having an OO assembly language...

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: N-tier, client/model, and business rules?
by pfaut (Priest) on May 15, 2003 at 20:32 UTC

    I've used Oracle, PostgreSQL and SQL Server. I push as much as possible into stored procedures on all of these platforms. It saves a lot of data moving back and forth between the program and the database. Oracle and PostgreSQL have very powerful procedural languages that can be used to write stored procedures (PostgreSQL stored procedures can even be written in perl). SQL Server seems a little weaker in this regard but seems to be getting better in newer versions.

    90% of every Perl application is already written. ⇒
    dragonchild
[reply]
Re: N-tier, client/model, and business rules?
by Abigail-II (Bishop) on May 15, 2003 at 19:52 UTC
    My main database experience is with Sybase and MySQL. Sybase has stored procedures, but MySQL doesn't have them. Which is one of the many reasons MySQL can't be taken seriously.

    AFAIK, Oracle has stored procedures as well. I've done some db2 work, but that was mostly writing an qmail-db2 interface (in C); I don't know whether db2 has stored procedures.

    Abigail

[reply]

      I don't know whether db2 has stored procedures.

      It does, as do Informix and SQL Server.

      I believe, but am not certain, that the concept of stored procedures (and triggers) began with DB2 in order to support CICS and IMS respectively.

      I agree that MySQL has a long way to go before it can be consider a substitute for any one of the commercial RDMBSs. I've heard that PostGRE is moving up quite rapidly, but also still has a ways to go. That said, given the contrast in the funding for the commercial -v- "free" RDBMSs, they aren't doing at all badly given their relatively short histories.

      Examine what is said, not who speaks.
      "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham
      "When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong." -Richard Buckminster Fuller
[reply]

In Section Meditations