Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I've been writing asp.net apps with SQL Server back ends for the past 10 years. During that time, I have also written some PHP apps, but not many.
I'm going to be porting some of my asp.net apps to PHP and have run into a bit of an issue. In the Asp.net world, it's generally understood that when accessing any databases, using views or stored procedures is the preferred way of doing so.
I've been reading some PHP/MySQL books and I'm beginning to get the impression that utilizing stored procedures in MySQL is not advisable. I hesitate in using that word, advisable, but that's just the feeling I get.
So, the advice I'm looking for is basically, am I right or wrong? Do PHP developers use stored procedures at all? Or, is it something that is shunned?
Whether to use Stored Procedures or not is more of a religious or political discussion at a bar than not.
What needs to be done is clearly define your application layers and not step over those boundaries. Stored procedures have several advantages and disadvantages over doing queries outside of the database.
Advantage 1: Stored procedures are modular. This is a good thing from a maintenance standpoint. When query trouble arises in your application, you would likely agree that it is much easier to troubleshoot a stored procedure than an embedded query buried within many lines of GUI code.
Advantage 2: Stored procedures are tunable. By having procedures that handle the database work for your interface, you eliminate the need to modify the GUI source code to improve a query's performance. Changes can be made to the stored procedures--in terms of join methods, differing tables, etc.--that are transparent to the front-end interface.
Advantage 3: Stored procedures abstract or separate server-side functions from the client-side. It is much easier to code a GUI application to call a procedure than to build a query through the GUI code.
Advantage 4: Stored procedures are usually written by database developers/administrators. Persons holding these roles are usually more experienced in writing efficient queries and SQL statements. This frees the GUI application developers to utilize their skills on the functional and graphical presentation pieces of the application. If you have your people performing the tasks to which they are best suited, then you will ultimately produce a better overall application.
With all that in mind there are several disadvantages.
Disadvantage 1:
Applications that involve extensive business logic and processing could place an excessive load on the server if the logic was implemented entirely in stored procedures. Examples of this type of processing include data transfers, data traversals, data transformations and intensive computational operations. You should move this type of processing to business process or data access logic components, which are a more scalable resource than your database server.
Disadvantage 2:
Do not put all of your business logic into stored procedures. Maintenance and the agility of your application becomes an issue when you must modify business logic in Sp language. For example, ISV applications that support multiple RDBMS should not need to maintain separate stored procedures for each system.
Disadvantage 3:
Writing and maintaining stored procedures is most often a specialized skill set that not all developers possess. This situation may introduce bottlenecks in the project development schedule.
I have probably missed some advantages and disadvantages, feel free to comment.
Could also be because MySQL didn't get stored procedures until version 5. If you use prepared statement you should be okay...just don't use inline SQL
A couple of years ago I ended up writing a fair amount (~3K lines) of stored procedure code for a PHP/MySQL project. In my experience:
MySQL stored procedures probably aren't going to help you performance-wise.
Executing SPs through prepared statements with MySQLi can cause headaches.
It can be hard to abstract out common patterns—I found myself repeating myself more than I liked.
Depending on the MySQL version and configuration, you might need SUPER privileges to create SPs.
If you're porting code that uses stored procedures, it might be easiest to keep them. It's certainly possible to use them with PHP and MySQL, and I wouldn't personally call it inadvisable, exactly. I just probably wouldn't choose to use them again if I were starting a new PHP project from scratch.
In general, I very much dislike stored procedures because:
It's too easy to slip in business logic that shouldn't be there.
Updates to the application that require updates to your stored procedures is a pain to synchronize, especially if you have to revert to a previous build.
For any database manipulation, I recommend going with a PHP ORM framework like http://www.doctrine-project.org or a framework that includes ORM like CakePHP. You'll have an added bonus of being able to more easily switch between SQL Server and MySQL.
Stored procedures are -- often -- a complete waste of effort.
When in doubt, actually measure the performance. You'll often find that stored procedures add complexity for no recognizable benefit. You may have no performance enhancement from your SP's.
Some folks think they're very "Important". It's essential to actually measure performance rather than quibble or debate.
Many (most?) webapps use a database abstraction layer to take care of injection vulnerabilities/etc.
If you want one for your own app, take a look at PDO. Here is a big tutorial about how to use it:
http://www.devshed.com/c/a/PHP/Using-PDO-Objects-in-PHP-5/
What about SQL injection ?
Procedures allow you to do parameter invocation on the WHERE clause, reducing injection hazards
Here is a balanced and informed article on stored procedures in MySQL: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9652?page=0,0
To dismiss them out of hand as a "waste of time" or "hard to maintain" or "providing no real benefit" in any database and application of significant size would be very unwise.
I'm working on what is turning out to be a fairly complex SELECT query. I have several hierarchical queries being nested in a single SELECT and it is getting to be quite difficult to manage.
I'm running into a few places where my inline views need to be executed in more than one place, so it seems like a reasonable idea to execute those once at the beginning of a stored procedure and then do some iteration over the results as needed.
I'm wondering if there are any reasons why I should not, or could not, execute an Oracle Stored Procedure, called via my PHP code, and return as an OUT parameter the resultset. I've tended to use SPs only to do updates/deletes/inserts but the sheer size and complexity of this query seems like it needs to be broken down.
If there aren't any technical problems with this, any comments on whether it is good or bad practice?
Im working on what is turning out to be a fairly complex SELECT query. I have several hierarchical queries being nested in a single SELECT and it is getting to be quite difficult to manage.
Ok, but why a stored procedure? Why not create a view instead?
I'm running into a few places where my inline views need to be executed in more than one place, so it seems like a reasonable idea to execute those once at the beginning of a stored procedure and then do some iteration over the results as needed.
Again - excellent use case for a view.
I'm wondering if there are any reasons why I should not, or could not, execute an Oracle Stored Procedure, called via my PHP code, and return as an OUT parameter the resultset.
If there aren't any technical problems with this, any comments on whether it is good or bad practice?
Well, I don't want to start a religous war, and I do not want to suggest the arguments against apply to your case. But here goes:
one reason why I tend to avoid stored procedures is portability - by that I mean mostly database portability. Stored procedure languages are notoriously unportable across dbs, and built-in libs like Oracle packages make things worse in that respect.
stored procedures take some additional processing power from your database server. this makes it harder to scale the application as a whole: if the capacity of your db server is exhausted due to stored procedures, and you need to upgrade harware or even buy an extra oracle software license because of that, I would not be a happy camper, especially if I could have bought cheap webserver/php boxes instead to do the computing.
Reasons where I would go for stored procedures:
language portability. If database portability is not so much an issue, but you do want to reuse logic across multiple applications, or have to ability to code in different languages, then stored procedures may save you writing language specific database invocation code.
complex permission scenarios. stored procedures give you uan extra level of permissions, since you can execute the procedure with the privileges of the definer or owner of the stored procedure. Sometimes this solves problems where a user needs to work with some tables, but cannot be allowed direct access to them.
saving rountrips: if you have to deal with complex, multistatement transactions, putting them in a stored procedures saves rountrips between the app and the db, because there is only one rountrip needed to execute the stored procedure. sometimes this can get you more performance.
I want to stress again that in all these scenarios, I would still advise to not put all your procedural logic in stored procedures. databases are best at storing and retrieving data, languages like php/java/perl/pick your poison are better at processing it.
If you are using the same inline view many times, its a good candidate for with clause
PHP can handle resultsets returned from stored procedures, by using Ref Cusrors. The Oracle+PHP Cookbook has an example.
So there are no technical impediments but as you can see from the various answers there are some philosophical aspects to your question. I think we can agree that if you are already wrapping some SQL statements in stored procedures - which you are - then you are not drastically compromising the portability of your system by extending "updates/deletes/inserts" to include selects.
The pertinent question then becomes "should you embed use a stored procedure for this particular query?" The answer to which hinges on precisely what you mean by:
the sheer size and complexity of this
query seems like it needs to be broken
down.
Deconstructing a big query into several smaller queries and then stitching results together in PL/SQL is seductive, but should be approached with caution. This can degrade the performance of your application, because PL/SQL has more overheads than SQL. Making your query more readable is not a good enough reason: you need to be certain that the complexity has a real and adverse effect on the running of your code.
A good reason for using a stored procedure rather than a view might be if you want to extend the applicability of the query by using bind variables or dynamic SQL in the body of the query.
A definitive answer to your question requires more details regarding the nature of your query and the techniques you are thinking of using to simplify it.
You could look at subquery factoring which may improve the readability of the query.
One risk of breaking up a single SQL query into a more procedural solution is you lose read consistency. As such you want to be pretty sure that someone changing data while your procedure runs won't break it. You may want to lock a table fore the duration of the procedure call. It seems drastic, but if you are pretty sure that the data is static and if there would be ugly side-effects if it wasn't, then it is a solution.
Generally if an SQL statement is complex enough, it probably isn't portable between databases anyway, so I wouldn't worry about that aspect.
Views can be a good option to hide complexity, but the downside to hiding complexity is that people start doing things that seem 'simple' but are really complex and don't work as desired. You also get another object to consider for grants etc. [Edit: As Roland commented, this applies equally to stored procedures, views, object types etc.]
If you expect to return a large resultset, you should consider a pipelined table function. That way you can avoid having the entire resultset in the Oracle session at the same time.
I'm working on a PHP web application with PostgreSQL. All of the SQL queries are being called from the PHP code. I've seen no Views, Functions or Stored Procedures. From what I've learned, it's always better to use these database subroutines since they are stored in the database with the advantages:
Encapsulation
Abstraction
Access rights (limited to DB Admin) and responsibility
Avoid compilation
I think I read something about performance improvements too. I really don't see why the team hasn't used these yet. In this particular case, I would like to know, from experience, is there any good reason to NOT use them?
Mostly when there are so many "SELECT" queries along the code, why not use Views?
I am planning on refactoring the code and start coding the subroutines on the DB Server. I would like to know opinions in favor or against this. The project is rather big (many tables), and expects lots of data to be stored. The amount of data you would have in a social network with some more stuff in it, so yeah, pretty big.
In my opinion, views and stored procedures are usually just extra trouble with little benefit.
I have written and worked with a bunch of different web apps, though none with bazillions of users. The ones with stored procedures are awkward. The ones with ad-hoc SQL queries are plenty fast (use placeholders and other best practices to avoid SQL injection). My favorite use database abstraction (ORM) so your code deals with PHP classes and objects rather than directly with the database. I have increasingly been turning to the symfony framework for that.
Also: in general you should not optimize for performance prematurely. Optimize for good fast development now (no stored procedures). After it's working, benchmark your app, find the bottlenecks, and optimize them. You just waste time and make complexity when you try to optimize from the start.
I. Views offer encapsulation, but if not carefully designed they can slow down the application. Use with caution.
II. Use functions if needed, no reason to put them in if they are unneeded.
III. Stored Procedures are a godsend, use them everywhere there is a static query!!
In response to the views vs. queries, try to use views with Stored Procedure's, the Stored Procedure's will mitigate some of the performance hit taken with most views.
The advantage of stored procedures is that, because all the processing is done on the database, you do not incur network overhead shunting intermediate result sets back and forth.
The disadvantage is that each RDBMS system out there has its own peculiar syntax for stored procedures. By implementing your business logic in stored procedures, you're pretty much restricting your app to a single database product, something you need to keep in mind if you intend your application to be database independent. Also, as gahooa pointed out, because stored procedures live in the database, your access to them as a developer may be restricted by local policy; some organisations will only let DBAs touch the database.
#WolfmanDragon: I don't know if views inherently make things slower; your mileage may vary, I guess, depending on the complexity of the view and the RDBMS you're using. Plus, some RDBMS allow you to materialise commonly-used views so access to them is as fast as a base table.
We try to use the features you mentioned only where there is a significant benefit
Being part of the "Database", they fall under "schema changes", rather than "source code changes", and are naturally harder to version control.
Whatever you do, just make sure you retain full visibility of who-changed-what-when, so that you can diff, rollback, and recover in the case of problems.
On a site with a reasonable amount of traffic , would it matter if the application/business logic is written as stored procedures ,triggers and views , instead of inside the PHP code itself?
What would be the best way to go keeping scalability in mind.
I can't provide you statistics, but unless you plan to change PHP for another language in the future, i can say keeping the business logic in PHP is more "scalability friendly".
Its always easier and cheaper to solve web server load problems than having them in the database. Your database will always need to be lighting quick and just throwing mirrors at it won't solve the problem. The more database slaves you have, the more writes you have to do.
In my experience, you should put business logic in PHP code rather than move it onto the database. Assuming your database is on a separate server, you don't want your database to be busy calculating formulas when requests come in.
Keep your database lightning fast to handle selects, inserts and updates.
I think you will have far better scalibility keeping database code in the database where it can be performance tuned as the number of records gets larger. You will also have better data integrity which is critical to the data even being useful. You don't see a lot of terrabyte sized relational dbs with all their code in the application.
Read some books on database performance tuning and then decide if you want to risk your company's data on application code.
There are several things to consider when trying to decide whether to place the business logic in the database or in the application code.
Will the same database be accessed
from different websites / web
applications? Will the sites /
applications be written in the same
language or in a different language?
If the database will be used from a single site, and the site is written in a single language then this becomes a non-issue. Otherwise, you'll need to consider the added complexity of stored procedures, triggers, etc vs trying to maintain database access logic etc in multiple code bases.
What are relational databases in
general good for and what is MySQL
good for specifically? What is PHP
best at?
This consideration is fairly straight-forward. Relational databases across the board and specifically in any variant of SQL are going to do a great job at inserting, updating, and deleting data. Generally they also handle ATOMIC transactions well. However, most variants of SQL (including MySQL) are not good at complex calculations, on-the-fly date handling, file system access etc.
PHP on the other hand is very fast at handling calculations, dates, file system accesses. By taking a little time you can even design your PHP code to work in such a way that records are only retrieved once and then stored when necessary.
What are you most familiar /
comfortable with using?
Obviously it tends to make more sense to use the tool with which you are most familiar.
As a last point consider that just because a drill can be used to cut sheet rock or because a hammer can be used to drive a screw doesn't mean that they should be used for these things. Sometimes I think that programmers do more potential damage by trying to make more powerful tools that do everything rather than making simpler tools that do one thing really, really well.
A well done PHP application should be enought, but keep in mind that it also requires you to do the less calls to the database you can. Store values you'll need later in PHP, shorten queries, cache, etc.
MySQL optimization is always a must, as it will also decrease the amount of databse calls by PHP, and thus getting a better performance. Therefore, there's no way you can't think of stored procedures, etc, if your aim is to increase performance. But MySQL by itself would't be enought if your PHP code isn't well done (lots of unecessary database calls), that's why I think PHP must be well coded, keeping in mind the hole process while developing it, so that unecessary stuff doesn't get in the way. Cache for instance, in "duet" with proper MySQL, is a great boost on performance.
My POV, even not having much experience in developing large applications is to write business logic in the DB for some reasons:
1 - Maintainability, I think that languages deprecate functions and changes many other things in a short time period, so if PHP changes version, you'll need to adapt your code to the new version
2 - DBs tends to be more language stable, so when a new version of a RDBMS comes out, it usually doesn't change many things in the way you write your queries or SPs, or it even doesn't change. Writing your logic in DB will reduce code adaptation because of a new DB version
3 - A RDBMS is more likely to be alive for a long period rather than a programming language. Also, as your data is critical, there is a big worry from the RDBMS developers for automatic migration of your whole data to the new RDBMS version, including your SPs. When clipper died, there were no ways to migrate systems to a new programming language, they had to be completely rewritten.
4 - If you think someday to change completely the language you are writing the application for some reason(language death, for example), the only thing to be rewritten will be the presentation and the SP calls, not business logic.
I'd like to know from other people here if what I pointed out makes sense, and if not, why. I'm on the same situation as Sabeen Malik, I'm thinking to begin my first huge project and I'm tending towards SPs because of what I wrote. So it's time to correct my POV if it's not so correct.
MySQL sucks at using advanced DB techniques, it's simple and fast. PHP, being a dynamic language, makes processing data very easy. Therefore, it usually makes sense to use PHP.
I'm quoting part of an answer which I received for another question of mine:
In the PHP/MySQL world I would say
stored procedures are no-go
I would like to know: Is that so? Why? Why not?
[edit]I mean this as a general question without a specific need in mind[/edit]
I develop and maintain a large PHP/MySQL application. Here is my experience with stored procedures.
Over time our application has grown very complex. And with all the logic on the php side, some operations would query the database with over 100 short queries.
MySQL is so quick that the performance was still acceptable, but not great.
We made the decision in our latest version of the software to move some of the logic to stored procedures for complex operations.
We did achieve a significant performance gain due to the fact that we did not have to send data back and forth between PHP and MySQL.
I do agree with the other posters here that PL/SQL is not a modern language and is difficult to debug.
Bottom Line: Stored Procedures are a great tool for certain situations. But I would not recommend using them unless you have a good reason. For simple applications, stored procedures are not worth the hassle.
When using stored procedures with MySQL, you will often need to use the mysqli interface in PHP and not the regular mysql interface.
The reason for this is due to the fact that the stored procedures often will return more than 1 result set. If it does, the mysql API can not handle it and will you get errors.
The mysqli interface has functions to handling these multiple result sets, functions such as mysqli_more_results and mysqli_next_result.
Keep in mind that if you return any result set at all from the stored procedure, then you need to use these APIs, as the stored procedure generates 1 result set for the actual execution, and then 1 additional one for each result set intentionally returned from the stored procedure.
I generally stay away from stored procedures because it adds load to the database which is 99% of the time, your biggest bottleneck. Adding a new php server is nothing compared to making your MySQL db replicate.
Do you have a specific need in mind which makes you consider them? Stored procedures are much less portable than "plain" SQL, that's usually why people don't want to use them. Also, having written a fair share of PL/SQL, I must say that the procedural way of writing code adds complexity and it's just not very modern or testable. They might be handy in some special cases where you need to optimize, but I'd certainly think twice. Jeff has similar opinions.
This is a subjective question.
I would personally include all calculations within PHP and only really use MySQL as a table.
But, If you feel that it is easier to use stored procedures then by all means, go ahead and do it.
There's possibly a phobia of stored procedures with mysql, partly due to not being overwhelmingly powerful ( compared to Postgresql and even MSSQL, mysqls stored procedures are greatly lacking ).
On the plus: They make interfacing with it from more than one language easier.
If somebody states that "using stored procedures is bad because its not portable to different databases" then this of course means they think you're likely to switch databases, which means they in turn saying they think you shouldn't be using mysql.
It is popular to use ORM's these days, but I personally think ORM is a BadThing (Question:82882)
I would not say "stored procedures are a no-go", I would say "Don't use them without a good reason".
MySQL stored procedures have a particularly horrible syntax (Oracle and MSSQL are pretty awful too), maintaining them just complicates your application.
Do use a stored procedure if you have a real (measurable) reason to do so, otherwise don't. That's my opinion anyway.
I think that using stored procedures can offer some abstraction in certain applications, as in any where you would use the same SQL code chunk to update or add the same data, you could then create the one sproc save_user($attr.....) rather that repeating yourself all over the place.
Agreed the syntax is hairy and if your used to MSSQL and oracle sprocs there are differences that can fustrate.
You should also be aware that stored procedures were not supported in Mysql before version 5.0. http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/stored-routines.html Also stored procedures tended to be be a bit weird in that implementation. Now that Mysql 5.1 is starting to crop up in the wild I see more use of stored procedures with Mysql.
I make limited use of stored procedures, and it works well. I am the lead dev for one of my companies clients, working on their e-comm website. The client has a stock system, we implemented a set of stored procedures on their system and built an API to communicate with it. This allowed us to abstract their database and they could implement logic in the stored procedures. Simple but met the business requirement very well.