RE: Green screen - it's time is over

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Walden, thank you for bringing up this point.  I like to think of stored
procedures as a different animal than raw ODBC.  Stored procedures
definitely provide a layer of insulation between the client and the host,
and that's one of the main benefits of client/server programming.  And given
it's standard nature, I think ODBC/SP (my personal acronym for ODBC calls to
stored procedures) is a valid technique, especially for query applications
and simpler transactions.

ODBC/SP is a little cumbersome when trying to send a large amount of data TO
the stored procedure, but beyond that concern, I definitely put it in a
different category than raw SQL statements passed via SQL.

Again, thanks for making the distinction.

Joe Pluta
www.plutabrothers.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walden H. Leverich
>
> Joe,
>
> With regard to your complaints against ODBC, can you be more specific? Are
> you referring to client side code that actually updates the database (SQL
> UPDATE, DELETE, INSERT) or would you include using ODBC to call stored
> procedures on the AS/400?
>
> I'll agree that I don't want my client side code (be it JSP, ASP, VB,
> Powerbuilder, Java, whatever) making direct updates into my
> database, but I
> don't see a problem using ODBC to call stored procedures. Use ODBC to call
> stored procedures (especially through ADO) is relatively simple. Case in
> point, I have an ASP-programmer in my office now calling stored procedures
> on an AS/400. He wouldn't know an AS/400 if it fell on him. I say
> "call this
> sp" and he codes up the necessary ASP code. I could replace that
> AS/400 with
> a SQL Server box and his code would never know the difference.
>
> -Walden
>
> PS. Actually, ODBC is dead. OLE/DB is the new replacement. However, I see
> them used interchangeably.