What technology should we be using for our clients?
As an attendant to the latest LOUD meeting, during the speeches we were confronted with 2 opposing statements. The first speaker stated we should go back to the roots of application development using the rich technology databases nowadays possess, like PL/SQL and triggers. The second speech was about the new development tool from Oracle, WebCenter and Web 2.0 which has all functionality in the application instead of the database.
n
WebCenter has all its functionality programmed on the client side, while the first speaker opted for having all (or most) functionality on the database side through PL/SQL and intelligent triggers. So what do you think, should we put functionality on the database side (being as powerful and feature rich as it is nowadays) which could give a performance boost as well or should we be using all kinds of exotic tools and scripting (like PHP, Drupal, etc.) for our functionality (and thereby going with the market-flow) and not be database dependent?
Leave your thoughts in the comments…
Viewed 8123 times by 1524 visitors
Posted by: 4 Responses (last comment shown first)
Although it sounds good to do lot of development on the database itself, it is inevitable to do also a lot on the front end.
And with the rise of ‘new’ Web 2.0 technologies like AJAX, you can develop things you just can’t achieve on the database.
I totally agree. There must be a certain amount of logic in the database to ensure data integrity. You don’t want to do it all over again for each interface/tool. And you certainly don’t want your performance getting worse.
Functionality in database, for sure…
As Tom puts it, if we just put data in database, then (a) we are not utilizing investment in database completely and (b) who can say, for sure, that the data will ONLY be accessed using the COOL client tool that is the latest and greatest thing that has happened to the world, TODAY ?
We don’t want them in the database, to start with! :-) What does the author of this article think?
[Reply to this comment]