5 ms·
Just because you have an example of a probably poorly designed, over-engineered system that could be completely replaced with some hand written SQL code, doesn'
by escoz 15y ago
Just because you have an example of a probably poorly designed, over-engineered system that could be completely replaced with some hand written SQL code, doesn't mean that is the best solution for everything.
Come back when you have an example of a system running on top of 500 tables, doing read-writes in a big iron server, communicating with dozens of other servers, that uses distributed caching to improve performance, and that you can explain how you can replace an ORM with SQL.
- russell 15y agoMy point was not that ORMs are bad, but that SQL is required knowledge to communicate with a databases, including getting around the problems an ORM causes. It is hard for me to believe that someone who doesnt understand SQL can be a competent ORM programmer. The system I mentioned was well designed with hundreds of tables, multiple replicated database servers, dozens of web servers, caching and all that. The problem was a specific case where knowledge of SQL was able to produce a 50x performance improvement. I think SQL essential to learn because it bends your mind. You have to think in terms of sets instead of sequential processes. Just like functional programming and BNF are mind stretching.
- escoz 15y agocool, we agree on that.