Re: [NOW ANSWER Aaron's QUESTION CELKO]

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

I personally don't care about "elegant" code. My experience with many
clients since SQL 2005 came out was that only a VERY small percentage of
them know how to use CTEs, and most still haven't even heard of them.
Primary reason is that they aren't required to solve the vast majority of
data processing problems that developers have to deal with.

--
Kevin G. Boles
Indicium Resources, Inc.
SQL Server MVP
kgboles a earthlink dt net


"Geoff Schaller" <geoffx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:GKilm.14124$ze1.9690@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
?? But you are agreeing with my prognosis. That portability is crap.

And it just doesn't happen in the real world. It is a nice aim if you can
achieve it economically but in practise it just doesn't stack up. Take one
simple example: CTE. I solve so many problems now much more elegantly with
CTE but I am hardly able to use this technique with DB2.

"TheSQLGuru" <kgboles@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:CfednbCdiYbo9wjXnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:

Disagree with the "Portability is a myth" statement. It isn't about what
a
given client will have in-house. It is about having a common
structure/code
base that can work on multiple database platforms. ERP vendors and I am
betting other high-end players try to do this (or at least they used to)
to
try to simplify their dev/maint efforts. Unfortunately when you develop
for
4 different major RDBMS systems you wind up with a
lowest-common-denominator
pile of crap that is usually horrendous from a performance standpoint.
If
you could craft code, schemas, etc to take advantage of each platform's
'peculiarities' then your customers wouldn't need to over-buy hardward to
get adequate performance.

--
Kevin G. Boles
Indicium Resources, Inc.
SQL Server MVP
kgboles a earthlink dt net



.

Relevant Pages