We’ve had tremendously positive feedback on my recent article that talked about “Why SQL is neither legacy, nor low-level, nor difficult, nor the wrong place for (business) data logic, but simply awesome” both within the blog’s comment section as well as on reddit .However, one of the sections triggered very controversial feedback. Clearly, not everyone agreed to:Fallacy #5: The database is the wrong place for business logicNow this is really the biggest of all fallacies. Who said that? Some guy from the 90s who had written a book on Object-Oriented Design Patterns? Of course, if you blindly follow random architecture rules, this may apply to you. But then, beware that you’re following 10-20 year-old “legacy” principles by not using SQL (see also
Why SQL Is Neither Legacy, nor Low-Level, nor Difficult, nor the Wrong Place for (Business) Data Logic, but Is Simply Awesome!
The following fallacies are things that I hear all the time.SQL is legacy. Why can’t we work with more modern tech?– Timeless. E.g. by someone who thinks that NoSQL databases are “modern”.SQL is low level, like assembler. Would you prefer to work with assembler or with Java? Similarly, would you prefer to work with SQL or with Hibernate?– Timeless. Someone who thinks that SQL is low-level.In this article, let me clear up some common SQL prejudices and other fallacies. SQL is neither legacy, nor low-level. Here’s why: