Re: Code in the database or middle tier (the CLR controversy)

[Quoted]     Generally speaking; for performance, security and maintenance reasons, any programming which updates, inserts or deletes from a datbase table should be tied as close to the database as possible and managed by the DBA or a designated SQL Developer. If someone needs to update transactions in an account table, then provide them with an SP, grant them exec only rights, and document the parameters.

    Every time a developer asks for direct access to the database, I can't help recalling that Capital One commercial where the barbarians come crashing through the gates of the castle with axes and swords!

<SAN3141_at_netscape.net> wrote in message news:1117621720.962502.258120_at_g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> There doesn't seem to be consensus about when to put code in the
> database or in the middle tier. There was a long discussion about this
> in an Oracle newsgroup (message ID:
> ULcQb.466$KU5.37_at_nwrddc02.gnilink.net).
>
> Elsewhere there's been discussion about Microsoft SQL Server 2005
> adding the CLR to support stored procedures in languages such as C#. A
> scan of the Web and discussion forums finds differing opinions about
> this.
>
> Two authors have written articles that fall on different sides of the
> debate.
>
> "Keys to the Database"
> http://www.intelligententerprise.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=50500830
>
> "SOA, Multi-Tier Architectures and Logic in the Database"
> http://www.sqlsummit.com/Articles/LogicInTheDatabase.HTM
>
> Joe Celko wrote the first article, but his objections point to
> Microsoft SQL Server 2005:
>
> "I have an article at WWSUG.com on how much I hate the CLR stuff that
> Microsoft is putting out."
> http://blog.intelligententerprise.com/archives/002419.html
>
> "The bad news is that SQL Server 2005 will you define your own
> aggregate
> functions in a CLR language."
> Message id: 410d9a51.0502190442.bd68cbe_at_posting.google.com
>
> IBM DB2 and Oracle are doing the same thing with the .NET CLR. Is this
> a non-issue or are all three companies misguided?
>
Received on Wed Jun 01 2005 - 16:13:10 CEST