On 4 May 2016 at 13:13, Chris Travers <chris.trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A few observations
>
> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Geoff Winkless <pgsqlad...@geoff.dj>
> wrote:
>
>> On 4 May 2016 at 06:46, dandl <da...@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. I'm afraid
>> that the problem seems to me to be that your peg is rather too square.
>>
>>
> I actually agree with dandl on this. Folks can write SQL but often aren't
> really comfortable using it as core application logic.
>
> I.e. one often sees code that retrieves a bunch of records from the db,
> loops through them, and transforms the data as part of the OLTP workflow.
> It is obviously much better of one can think about SQL as business logic
> but this is not that often.
>
> I.e. people think the peg is square but indeed it is round.
>
>
>
>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", and we were still writing all the
logic outside the database.
--
regards Szymon Lipiński
