Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Using OCI to interface to Oracle

Using OCI to interface to Oracle

From: Morton, Ronald D <rdmorton_at_switch.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2000 09:27:49 -0500
Message-Id: <10669.121060@fatcity.com>


All,

We build a product based on a three-tier architecture consisting of application clients, application servers, and a persistent storage server (currently Oracle). The application servers connect to Oracle whereas the application clients do not. This part of the architecture is cast in stone. The application server tasks link with a database interface library that we designed as a set of C++ objects that serve as 'wrappers' around the native OCI calls to the Oracle client. C++ is the language of choice for all application coding here. All SQL code is in the form of stored procedures which are invoked through the interface library. Currently, we do not allow any business rules logic to exist in the stored procedures. This is to keep them very simple in case we need to change DB vendors (occasionally a customer will dictate such things).
There is a faction here that wants to move some or all of the SQL out of the database and into the interface library.

OK, my question to all of you is this: Do any of you have any experience that would indicate which method is better in terms of portability, ease of use by the application programmers, ease of maintenance, etc.? What are the pros and cons of placing the SQL in the library vs. the stored procedures or a combination of both? I would like to hear from anyone who has an opinion on how this should be done and why they would do it that way. Any and all information will be greatly appreciated.

Thank you in advance,

Ron Morton
Database Architect/DBA
Union Switch & Signal Inc
Pittsburgh, PA
rdmorton_at_switch.com

"Knowledge comes, but wisdom lingers." - Alfred Lord Tennyson (1809-1892). Received on Fri Nov 03 2000 - 08:27:49 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US