I have a lot of single line select queries in my application with multiple joins spanning 5-6 tables. These queries are generated based on many conditions based on input from a form etc using String Builders. However my team lead who happens to be a sql developer has asked me to convert those single line queries to Stored Procedures.
Is there any advantage of converting the single line select queries to backend and performing all the if and else there as SP.
One advantage of having all your sql part in stored procedures is that you keep your queries in one place that is database so it would a lot easier to change or modify without making a lot of changes in application layer or front end layer.
Besides DBA's or SQL develoeprs could fine tune the SQL's if it is stored in database procedures. You could keep all your functions/stored procedures in a package which would be better in terms of performance and organizing your objects(similar way of creating packages in Java). And of course in packages you could restrict direct access to its objects.
This is more of team's or department policy where to keep the sql part whether in front end or in database itself and of course like #Gimby mentioned, many people could have different views.
Update 1
If you have a select statement which returns something use a function, if you have INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE or similar stuff like sending emails or other business rules then use a procedure and call these from front end by passing parameters.
I'm afraid that is a question that will result in many different answers based on many different personal opinions.
Its business logic you are talking about here in any case, in -my- opinion that belongs in the application layer. But I know a whole club of Oracle devs who wholeheartedly disagree with me.
If your use PreparedStatement in java then there is no big differense in performance between
java queries and stored procedures. (If your use Statement in java, then your have a problem).
But Stored Procedure is a good way to organize and reuse your sql code. Your can group them in packages, your can change them without java compilation and your DBA or SQL spetialist can tune them.
Related
Are there any performance improvement in calling a procedure which returns SYS_RECURSOR or call a query?
For example
CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE my_proc
(
p_id number,
emp_cursor IN OUT SYS_REFCURSOR
)
AS
BEGIN
OPEN emp_cursor for
select * from emp where emp_number=p_id
end;
/
and call the above from Java by registering OUT parameter,pass IN parameter and fetch the results.
Or
From Java get the results from emp table by
preparedStatement = prepareStatement(connection, "select * from emp where emp_number=?", values);
resultSet = preparedStatement.executeQuery();
Which one of the above is a better option to call from Java?
There is no performance difference assuming your prepareStatement method is using the appropriate type for all bind variables. That is, you would need to ensure that you are calling setLong, setDate, setString, etc. depending on the data type of the parameter. If you bind the data incorrectly (i.e. calling setString to bind a numeric value), you may force Oracle to do data type conversion which may prevent the optimizer from using an index that would improve performance.
From a code organization and maintenance standpoint, however, I would rather have the queries in the database rather than in the Java application. If you find that a query is using a poor plan, for example, it's likely to be much easier for a DBA to address the problem if the query is in a stored procedure than if the query is embedded in a Java application. If the query is stored in the database, you can also use the database's dependency tracking functions to more easily do an impact analysis if you need to do something like determine what would be impacted if the emp table needs to change.
Well, I don't think there is major significant difference from the Java invocation standpoint.
Some differencesI can think of are:
You will now have to maintain two different code bases: your Java code and your stored procedures. In case of errors, you will have to debug in two different places, and fix problems in two different places.
Once production-ready, making changes to the database is probably going to require some additional formalisms besides those required to change the Java code deployed.
Another important matter to take into account is database-independence, if you are building a product to work with different kinds of databases, you would be forced to write different versions of your stored procedures and you will have more code to maintain (debug, bugfix, change, etc).
This very important if you're building a product that you intend to deploy in different environments of different (possible yet unknown) clients, wich you cannot predict what RDBMS will be using.
If you want to use an ORM framework i.e. Hibernate, EclipseLink) it will generate pretty optimized queries for you. Plus, it would be more difficult to integrate it later on if you use stored-procedures.
With proper amount of logging is easy to analyze your queries for optimization purposes. You could use JDBC logging or the logging provided by your ORM provider and actually see how the query is being used by the application, how many times, how often, etc, and optimize where it matters.
I have a database with a lot of web pages stored.
I will need to process all the data I have so I have two options: recover the data to the program or process directly in database with some functions I will create.
What I want to know is:
do some processing in the database, and not in the application is a good
idea?
when this is recommended and when not?
are there pros and cons?
is possible to extend the language to new features (external APIs/libraries)?
I tried retrieving the content to application (worked), but was to slow and dirty. My
preoccupation was that can't do in the database what can I do in Java, but I don't know if this is true.
ONLY a example: I have a table called Token. At the moment, it has 180,000 rows, but this will increase to over 10 million rows. I need to do some processing to know if a word between two token classified as `Proper Name´ is part of name or not.
I will need to process all the data. In this case, doing directly on database is better than retrieving to application?
My preoccupation was that can't do in the database what can I do in
Java, but I don't know if this is true.
No, that is not a correct assumption. There are valid circumstances for using database to process data. For example, if it involves calling a lot of disparate SQLs that can be combined in a store procedure then you should do the processing the in the stored procedure and call the stored proc from your java application. This way you avoid making several network trips to get to the database server.
I do not know what are you processing though. Are you parsing XML data stored in your database? Then perhaps you should use XQuery and a lot of the modern databases support it.
ONLY an example: I have a table called Token. At the moment, it has
180,000 rows, but this will increase to over 10 million rows. I need
to do some processing to know if a word between two token classified
as `Proper Name´ is part of name or not.
Is there some indicator in the data that tells it's a proper name? Fetching 10 million rows (highly susceptible to OutOfMemoryException) and then going through them is not a good idea. If there are certain parameters about the data that can be put in a where clause in a SQL to limit the number of data being fetched is the way to go in my opinion. Surely you will need to do explains on your SQL, check the correct indices are in place, check index cluster ratio, type of index, all that will make a difference. Now if you can't fully eliminate all "improper names" then you should try to get rid of as many as you can with SQL and then process the rest in your application. I am assuming this is a batch application, right? If it is a web application then you definitely want to create a batch application to do the staging of the data for you before web applications query it.
I hope my explanation makes sense. Please let me know if you have questions.
Directly interacting with the DB for every single thing is a tedious job and affects the performance...there are several ways to get around this...you can use indexing, caching or tools such as Hibernate which keeps all the data in the memory so that you don't need to query the DB for every operation...there are tools such as luceneIndexer which are very popular and could solve your problem of hitting the DB everytime...
I have two databases. Changes like edits, insertions to one, need to be made to the second one as well and vice versa.
Actually, one database is an old legacy database (with a very bad Entity-Relationship structure) and a legacy app front-end currently used by users.
The second database is a newly built, better restructure of the legacy with a separate app. front-end.
I want both apps (accessing the legacy and the new database respectively) to run simultaneously so users can have the option to use both applications and changes in one app are visible across the other.
I want to write triggers which call stored procedures, which restructure the data and put it in the opposite database.
My question is:
Is my line of execution as it is supposed to be? I mean, triggers >call> stored procedures >call> database.
Can triggers / stored procedures be written in Java?
Any good/ recommended tips, tutorials etc etc out there?
There are many links on google but none of them are useful. I wonder if MySQL and Java work together when it comes to MySQL triggers? is it possible or not?. Is there a better way of achieving what I need?
Triggers are named database objects. They define some action that the database should take when certain database related events occur. They are written in SQL. Their execution is transparent to the user. You write your Java JDBC code as usual and the DBMS will automatically execute the appropriate trigger whenever necessary.
mysql> delimiter //
mysql> CREATE TRIGGER insert_trigger BEFORE INSERT ON Customer
-> FOR EACH ROW
-> BEGIN
-> UPDATE Customer SET Price=Price-10 WHERE CustomerGroup=32 and CityCode=11;
-> END;
-> //
This example shows you how to make your trigger write to another database. Be careful with auto-increment attributes.
I think you should forget about Java stored procedures in MySQL, but you could always move the business logic to your own Java program.
I'm working on a web based application that belongs to an automobil manufacturer, developed in Spring-Hibernate with MS SQL Server 2005 database.
There are three kind of use cases:
1) Through this application, end users can request for creating a Car, Bus, Truck etc through web based interfaces. When a user logs in, a HTML form gets displayed for capturing technical specification of vehicle, for ex, if someone wanted to request for Car, he can speify the Engine Make/Model, Tire, Chassis details etc and submit the form. I'm using Hibernate here for persistence, i.e. I've a Car Entity that gets saved in DB for each such request.
2) This part of the application deals with generation of reports. These reports mainly dela with number of requests received in a day and the summary. Some of the reports calculate Turnaround time for individual Create vehicle requests.
I'm using plain JDBC calls with Preparedstatement (if report can be generated with SQLs), Callablestatement (if report is complex enough and needs a DB procedure/Function to fetch all details) and HibernateCallback to execute the SQLs/Procedures and display information on screen.
3) Search: This part of application allows ensd users to search for various requests data, i.e. how many vehicle have been requested in a Year etc. I'm using DB procedure with CallableStatement..Once again executing these procedures within HibernateCallback, populating and returning search result on GUI in a POJO.
I'm using native SQL in (2) and (3) above, because for the reporting/search purpose the report data structure to display on screen is not matching with any of my Entity. For ex: Car entity has got more than 100 attributes in itself, but for reporting purpose I don't need more than 10 of them.. so i just though loading all 100 attributes does not make any sense, so why not use plain SQL and retrieve just the data needed for displaying on screen.
Similarly for Search, I had to write procedures/Functions because search algorithm is not straight forward and Hibernate has no way to write a stored procedure kind of thing.
This is working fine for proto type, however I would like to know
a. If my approach for using native SQLs and DB procedures are fine for case 2 and 3 based on my judgement.
b. Also whether executing SQLs in HibernateCallback is correct approach?
Need expert's help.
I would like to know (...) if my approach for using native SQLs and DB procedures are fine for case 2 and 3 based on my judgment
Nothing forces your to use a stored procedure for case 2, you could use HQL and projections as already pointed out:
select f.id, f.firstName from Foo f where ...
Which would return an Object[] or a List<Object[]> depending on the where condition.
And if you want type safe results, you could use a SELECT NEW expression (assuming you're providing the appropriate constructor):
select new Foo(f.id, f.firstName) from Foo f
And you can even return non entities
select new com.acme.LigthFoo(f.id, f.firstName) from Foo f
For case 3, the situation seems different. Just in case, note that the Criteria API is more appropriate than HQL to build dynamic queries. But it looks like this won't help here.
I would like to know (...) whether executing SQLs in HibernateCallback is correct approach?
First of all, there are several restrictions when using stored procedures and I prefer to avoid them when possible. Secondly, if you want to return entities, it isn't the only way and simplest solution as we saw. So for case 2, I would consider using HQL.
For case 3, since you aren't returning entities at all, I would consider not using Hibernate API but the JDBC support from Spring which offers IMHO a cleaner API than Session#connection() and the HibernateCallback.
More interesting readings:
References
Hibernate Core reference guide
14.6. The select clause (about the select new)
16.1.5. Returning non-managed entities (about ResultTransformer)
16.2.2. Using stored procedures for querying
Resources
Hibernate 3.2: Transformers for HQL and SQL
Related questions
hibernate SQLquery extract variable
hibernate query language or using criteria
You should strive to use as much HQL as possible, unless you have a good argument (like performance, but do a benchmark first). If the use of native queries becomes to excessive, you should consider whether Hibernate has been a good choice.
Note a few things:
you can have native queries and stored procedures that result in Hibernate entities. You just have to map the query / storproc call to a class and call it by session.createSQLQuery(queryName)
If you really need to construct native queries at runtime, the newest version of hibernate have a doWork(..) method, by which you can do JDBC work.
You say
For ex: Car entity has got more than 100 attributes in itself, but for reporting purpose I don't need more than 10 of them.. so i just though loading all 100 attributes does not make any sense
but HQL in hibernate allows you to do a projection (select only a subset of the columns back). You don't have to pull the entire entity if you don't want to.
Then you get all the benefits of HQL (typing of results, HQL join syntax) but you can pretty much write SQLish code.
See here for the HQL docs and here for the select syntax. If you're used to SQL it's pretty easy.
So to answer you directly
a - No, I think you should be using HQL
b - Becomes irrelevant if you go with my suggestion for a.
I've been writing a java app on my machine and it works perfectly using the DB I set up, but when I install it on site it blows up because the DB is slightly different.
So I'm in the process of writing some code to verify that:
A: I've got the DB details correct
B: The database has all the Tables I expect and they have the right columns.
I've got A down but I've got no idea where to start with B, any suggestions?
Target DB is for the current client is Oracle, but the app can be configured to run on SQL Server as well. So a generic solution would be appreciated, but is not nessisary as I'm sure I can figure out how to do one from the other.
You'll want to query the information_schema of the database, here are some examples for Oracle, every platform I am aware of has something similar.
http://www.alberton.info/oracle_meta_info.html
You might be able to use a database migration tool like LiquiBase for this -- most of these tools have some way of checking the database. I don't have first hand experience using it so it's a guess.
I use DbUnit to test databases. It is a Java based solution, that integrates well with Junit. It is possible to use it with almost no Java. I havent used it in exactly the same situation as you described, but it should be close enough to work.
Most generic solution would be to execute queries with select clause having the expected coulmns and from clause having table names, within try catch block. You can put where clause as 1=2 so as not to fetch any data. If query executed without throwing exception then you have got the expected table and columns.
The slightly different piece might be better handled by scripting the creation of the database in the first place. A automated process gives you a better chance of making the two identical.
Another point worth making is that you minimize your risk by making your devl and prod environments identical - same database schema and vendor for both. Change the circumstances that make the two different.
Lastly, you don't say what is "slightly" different, but sometimes these are unavoidable (e.g. Oracle uses sequences, SQL Server uses identities). Maybe Hibernate can help you to switch between vendors more reliably. It abstracts details in such a way that changing databases can mean modifying a single value in a configuration file.
What you need to have is basically Unit Tests for your database. "A column must exist named FOOBAR, the type must be Integer. No foreign keys may exist etc."
This is doable with plain JUnit and JDBC (ask the table for its meta-data) as you may want to ensure that you are absolutely certain what is being done which may be harder when using e.g. dbUnit.
You can check for the presence of tables, columns, views, etc. using these tables in Oracle
USER_TABLES
USER_VIEWS
USER_PROCEDURE
(or for everything)
USER_OBJECTS WHERE OBJECT_TYPE = '??'
To keep going... USER_TAB_COLS for table columns
Regards
K
I use MigrateDB for this. It lets you build queries that do things like check for the existence of given tables, columns, rows, indexes, etc. for a given database and use those as "tests." If a test fails, it triggers an "action" (which is just another query that knows how to remedy the problem.)
MigrateDB supports multiple database platforms (you can specify the "check for table existence query" for each platform, for example), completely configurable tests (you can make your own up), comes with fairly complete Oracle tests, and can be run in "audit only" mode so that it only tells you what the differences are.
It's a nice, robust solution.
If you're using plain JDBC, you should try utilizing this method: DatabaseMetadata.getTables and other similar methods available in the metadata class.