Re: theory and practice: ying and yang
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2005 11:59:24 +0200
Message-ID: <42a2cd00$0$33283$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
>
> No, it is a major time-and-cost-saving factor, because potentially all
> changes are accessible to the RDBMS, and in theory can be scripted.
>
> And if they can be scripted, perhaps one day they can be automated
> and scheduled, rather than being performed by a DB specialist.
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2005 11:59:24 +0200
Message-ID: <42a2cd00$0$33283$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
mountain man wrote:
> Paul wrote:
>>... even if your business logic is held in stored procedures, you still >>in effect have two separate areas to update when schemas change. If you >>change the table designs, you also have to change the stored procedures >>to reflect those changes. The fact that they are stored in the database >>rather than externally is a minor point, is it not?
>
> No, it is a major time-and-cost-saving factor, because potentially all
> changes are accessible to the RDBMS, and in theory can be scripted.
>
> And if they can be scripted, perhaps one day they can be automated
> and scheduled, rather than being performed by a DB specialist.
So let's put sources and changes to them in some tables. Very good - this is what version control tools do. Any time-and-cost-saving beyond that? Received on Sun Jun 05 2005 - 11:59:24 CEST