More fun CLR conversation
, this time from SQL advocate Joe Celko.
Surprise, surprise, Celko is not a big fan of CLR integration. Yet he
mentions the SQL/PSM standard as a better alternative, even though it
has the same issues he mentions. But it's open-source (Java-based), so
it must be better. Right?
Why is the CLR integration getting so much attention? Oracle,
DB2, PostgreSQL, and other DBMSs have had these kinds of features for a
long time. Where was Celko when those were being added? Why argue with
Microsoft now? And how much damage has been done by the inclusion of
these features in those database systems?
That said, I do agree with a lot of what Celko has to say;
application developers will be able to do a lot of damage with these
features, if DBAs let them. If management lets them. If
they don't get appropriate training. These are all very valid points.
Watch this space in the coming months for a lot of discussion on best
practices for using these new tools. I think that MS marketing has
taken things too far (see my post from yesterday on the related topic of "CLR replacing T-SQL"), but at the same time I do believe these tools have their place and with very careful use will prove to be extremely valuable.
I think it's time for DBAs to accept the fact that they're not going to
be able to get by any longer as just database geeks. Learn about
application architectures. Learn how and why applications are using
your databases. And most importantly, learn enough to argue with the
application developers who might otherwise bring ruin to your pristine
database systems. But do not, like Celko, fear change. Instead, learn
how to wisely integrate these new tools into your arsenel.