4 ms·

> The problem is scaling your database, keeping your data secure, and iterating to meet business goals with a growing codebase and infrastructure. A mess of sto

> The problem is scaling your database, keeping your data secure, and iterating to meet business goals with a growing codebase and infrastructure. A mess of stored procedures would restrain you from doing all three. Your argument has a non sequitur right here. A mess of [foo] is a mess; the layer it is in does not matter; the language it is in does not matter. A mess of application layer code is equally effective in preventing scale, security and effectiveness. The original post is right. Web developers treat their databases poorly[1]. A database is an interface to your data that maintains integrity. Maintaining integrity almost always means stored procedures, as some validation is not expressible as relational integrity and basic type validation. Now, if you are at the point where your database fully guarantees integrity of data going in and coming out, a REST interface is a small step away. This project is very welcome. [1] The typical web developer treats a database as a data store. It is also a data store, but a well designed database is much more than than.

bkeroack 11y ago
A mess is a mess, true, but some are easier to clean up than others. GP is correct. Methods for scaling/optimizing the application layer are clear and well-known. Scaling the data layer is a huge challenge. This is why the market is filled with snake oil databases promising linear scalability and perfect consistency/reliability, etc.
- threeseed 11y ago
  Scaling the data layer is a huge challenge. No doubt. But calling databases that are designed for solving these problems "snake oil" undermines the huge amount of work that serious engineers have invested in this. No one has ever promised linear scalability and perfect consistency/reliability. No one. Cassandra, HBase, CouchDB etc even MongoDB have built in scalability as a first order priority from day one and have been largely successful at it e.g. iCloud, EA Online, PSN. Databases like this are a nightmare to work with for smaller datasets but work incredibly well with larger ones. It's always a shame to see HN act like you scale vertically and magically every problem is solved.
  - fweespeech 11y ago
    MongoDB heavily implied the linear scalability, consistency, reliability bit in its early material [particularly in their marketing]. Its only in the past couple years they really started mentioning the fact it was "tunable consistency" blatantly rather rather than burying it in a couple places in the manual.
  - AlisdairO 11y ago
    > It's always a shame to see HN act like you scale vertically and magically every problem is solved. When this is seen (and IME it's a pretty minority opinion) I think it's there as a reaction to the massive overuse and hype regarding a lot of newer-gen DBs. There's absolutely no doubt that there are good uses for them, but those cases are pretty niche compared to the level of their uptake.
    - volaski 11y ago
      You should read "innovator's dilemma"
      - AlisdairO 11y ago
        Is that comment intended to imply that companies will go under if they fail to deploy new technology that doesn't target their business needs?
3pt14159 11y ago
I purposely chose a non sequitur in the interests of speeding up the prose. It is an acceptable method frequently utilized in language. It roughly translates to: "Than (what will certainly be given the expressiveness and level of abstraction they provide) a mess of stored procedures."
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

bkeroack 11y ago

A mess is a mess, true, but some are easier to clean up than others. GP is correct. Methods for scaling/optimizing the application layer are clear and well-known. Scaling the data layer is a huge challenge. This is why the market is filled with snake oil databases promising linear scalability and perfect consistency/reliability, etc.

threeseed 11y ago
Scaling the data layer is a huge challenge. No doubt. But calling databases that are designed for solving these problems "snake oil" undermines the huge amount of work that serious engineers have invested in this. No one has ever promised linear scalability and perfect consistency/reliability. No one. Cassandra, HBase, CouchDB etc even MongoDB have built in scalability as a first order priority from day one and have been largely successful at it e.g. iCloud, EA Online, PSN. Databases like this are a nightmare to work with for smaller datasets but work incredibly well with larger ones. It's always a shame to see HN act like you scale vertically and magically every problem is solved.
- fweespeech 11y ago
  MongoDB heavily implied the linear scalability, consistency, reliability bit in its early material [particularly in their marketing]. Its only in the past couple years they really started mentioning the fact it was "tunable consistency" blatantly rather rather than burying it in a couple places in the manual.
- AlisdairO 11y ago
  > It's always a shame to see HN act like you scale vertically and magically every problem is solved. When this is seen (and IME it's a pretty minority opinion) I think it's there as a reaction to the massive overuse and hype regarding a lot of newer-gen DBs. There's absolutely no doubt that there are good uses for them, but those cases are pretty niche compared to the level of their uptake.
  - volaski 11y ago
    You should read "innovator's dilemma"
    - AlisdairO 11y ago
      Is that comment intended to imply that companies will go under if they fail to deploy new technology that doesn't target their business needs?

3pt14159 11y ago

I purposely chose a non sequitur in the interests of speeding up the prose. It is an acceptable method frequently utilized in language. It roughly translates to: "Than (what will certainly be given the expressiveness and level of abstraction they provide) a mess of stored procedures."

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]