Code in the database or middle tier (the CLR controversy)
Date: 1 Jun 2005 03:28:41 -0700
Message-ID: <1117621720.962502.258120_at_g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
[Quoted] [Quoted] There doesn't seem to be consensus about when to put code in the [Quoted] [Quoted] database or in the middle tier. There was a long discussion about this in an Oracle newsgroup (message ID:
[Quoted] ULcQb.466$KU5.37_at_nwrddc02.gnilink.net).
[Quoted] [Quoted] Elsewhere there's been discussion about Microsoft SQL Server 2005 [Quoted] 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
[Quoted] 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 - 12:28:41 CEST