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

From: William Stacey [MVP] <staceywREMOVE_at_mvps.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 14:25:03 -0400
Message-ID: <Oh7C9ctZFHA.2124_at_TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>


Jim Gray of MS DB fame talks about 2-3 tier and other stuff on a Channel9 two part video at http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=50438#50438 Interestingly, he sees a switch back to two tiers. As for CLR support in the DB, I think is natural and a good thing. I mean why pay the comm tax if you don't have too. This will only get better. Even with the CLR, we still have the gap between managed language and TSQL. So you have to know both and talk to both. They have made this workable, but it is still not very natural. Folks are working on data access stuff for C# 3.0 so maybe much of this gap could go away and make for a pure managed experience. Will be interesting to see.

-- 
William Stacey [MVP]

<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 - 20:25:03 CEST

Original text of this message