Posted by Serge Rielau on 06/03/05 18:19

DA Morgan wrote:
> William Stacey [MVP] wrote:
>
>> But your talking design now. That has nothing to do with SQLCLR
>> integration. I don't see the DB design process changing just because
>> of SQLCLR. You will still have DBAs/ DB architects doing that work
>> (or should). The app guys are still going to be the app guys. You
>> need both. So nothing has changed in that regard.
>
>
> Sorry if I wasn't clear before but I thought I brought this up.
>
> In a DB2 or Oracle environment development will be primarily in SQL even
> if other languages are allowed inside the database. In Oracle JAVA will
> not replace PL/SQL. In DB2 allowing VB in will have a negligible effect.
I think this is where we disagree. You appear to claim that TSQL,
PL/SQL, SQL/PSM are SQL and hence RDBMS friendly.
If you take a look at the procedural constructs of each of these SQL
"extensions" you can mess things up equally fine as with VB, Java or C#.
A VB programmer will have little difficulty using the procedural
constructs of any of these SQL extensions today because they are procedural.
In fact, doesn't Oracle support PL/SQL as an application language?
Are programmers using PL/SQL on the app side any smarter w.r.t.
relational SQL than those using VB? Do they write better SQL because
they use PL/SQL?

IMHO, there is nothing inherintly worse in VB/SQL compared to PL/SQL...
While VB/SQL locks you into Windows PL/SQL locks you into Oracle.
Rather obvious considering the respective owners....

Cheers
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab

[Back to original message]