zlacker

>>legran+(OP)
Question for people writing highly complex SQL queries.

Why not write simple SQL queries and use another language to do the transformations?

Are SQL engines really more efficient at filtering/matching/aggregating data when doing complex queries? Doesn't working without reusable blocks / tests / logs make development harder?

Syntax is one thing, but actual performance (and safety/maintenance) is another deal?

>>mocamo+WB
I'm not interested in loading all the data in memory, or swapping it out if it doesn't fit, but also it may be a lot of data, and just moving it over the network is hard.

I have tests. I have reusable blocks (SQL functions, WITH blocks and views). I don't have logging though.

I can put the result in a non-materialized view and have it update in real time as the data changes. Or I can toggle it to materialized view and now it's snapshotted data.

Finally, views that depend on views that depend on views get automatically optimized by the query planner. You need a lot of very tricky custom code to start approaching that.