6 ms·
lack of version control, clunky language mechanics, performance issues, etc.
by tibbar 5mo ago
lack of version control, clunky language mechanics, performance issues, etc.
- bob1029 5mo agoVersion control might not be a big deal if you are all-in on the database. Stored procedures are easiest to version by simply defining multiple variants and then incrementally moving the callers in the direction you want. The durability comes from (hopefully) your backups. Point-in-time-recovery is often easier for the business to reason about than a git repository.
- tibbar 5mo agoHaving worked for a business that made a serious go of running everything out of stored procedures, I have to say that lack of version control was a huge problem and effectively limited all development to a single person who held all the rules in their head.
- whattheheckheck 4mo agoCan you not have a repo with conventional commits wired to do cicd for deployment?
- rcv 4mo agoThis is essentially what we do. All of our stored procedures, views, etc are kept in *_api schemas. Those schemas just get fully dropped and reinstalled whenever we migrate. It works really well, and has basically zero cognitive load overhead for developers.
- agumonkey 5mo agohmm lack of version may be tooled (reminds me of smalltalk, lisp file-less culture)