11–20 of 210 posts
I'd say if the OPTIONS would return a JSON Schema (+ RAML/Swagger) instead of the json-fied DDL, it would be even more awesome. With a bit of code generation this would be super-quick to integrate in the frontend then.
It's like all those web framework inventors didn't read past chapter 2 of their database manuals. So they wrote a whole pile of code that forces you to add semantics in another language elsewhere in your code in a language that makes impedance stark. PostgreSQL is advanced technology. Whatever you might consider doing in your CRUD software, PostgreSQL has a neat solution. You can extend SQL, add new types, use PL/SQL in a bunch of different languages, background workers, triggers, constraints, permissions. Obviously there are limits but you don't reinvent web servers because Apache doesn't transcode video on the fly. Well, you do if you're whoever makes Rubby on Rails.
The argument that you don't want to write any code that locks you to a database is some stunning lack of awareness, as you decide to lock yourself into the tsunami of unpredictability that is web frameworks to ward off the evil of being locked into a 20 year database product built on some pretty sound theoretical foundations.
Web developers really took the whole "let's make more work for ourselves" idea and ran with it all the way to the bank.
You'd have to pay me a million dollars a year to do web development.
Example is broken. It's returning a JSON doc, so if you leave it then return, some browsers will just return the cached JSON (as text). Should add some header to say that it's JSON, or add a .json file extension for the main page data. Very interesting project though.
>Should add some header to say that it's JSON, or add a .json file extension for the main page data. The server sends `Content-Type: application/json` and provides no header related to caching. Browsers that do anything but fetching the resource again are not spec compliant. Also, the only browser to ever look at the extension of a file in the URL was IE ( https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms775147(v=vs.85).a.…
I'd forgotten about the days when we used to add something like &ft=.pdf to the end of querystrings so IE would recognise the file as PDF. I can't remember the other tricks, but there was a whole raft of things you'd do to force downloading of content, or not.
If you are using this as a web server persistence backend, I would agree with the first, more or less accept the second and reject the third. HTTP + JSON serialisation are way slower for that kind of job.
If you are just exposing the database using only the Postgres, in that case is interesting, however, I have concerns about how more complex business logics would work with such a CRUD view.
This is good work and if I ever did web development, it would be like this. Why people in the web world don't use stored procedures and constraints is a mystery to me. That this approach is seen as novel is in itself fascinating. It's like all those web framework inventors didn't read past chapter 2 of their database manuals. So they wrote a whole pile of code that forces you to add semantics in another language else…
You can blame MySQL 4.1 for that :(
Most people who call themselves "web developers" haven't even heard of PostgreSQL, or even if they've heard of it, have no use for it because their usual clients are stuck with MySQL-only web hosts who have only just managed to upgrade to PHP 5.3.
This is good work and if I ever did web development, it would be like this. Why people in the web world don't use stored procedures and constraints is a mystery to me. That this approach is seen as novel is in itself fascinating. It's like all those web framework inventors didn't read past chapter 2 of their database manuals. So they wrote a whole pile of code that forces you to add semantics in another language else…
> Why people in the web world don't use stored procedures and constraints is a mystery to me. You can blame MySQL 4.1 for that :( Most people who call themselves "web developers" haven't even heard of PostgreSQL, or even if they've heard of it, have no use for it because their usual clients are stuck with MySQL-only web hosts who have only just managed to upgrade to PHP 5.3.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why people in the web world don't use stored procedures and constraints is a mystery to me. You can blame MySQL 4.1 for that :( Most people who call themselves "web developers" haven't even heard of PostgreSQL, or even if they've heard of it, have no use for it because their usual clients are stuck with MySQL-only web hosts who have only just managed to upgrade to PHP 5.3.
Most people, really?
What is the use case of wrapping Postgres with REST? I can't think of many apps that don't require custom logic between receiving an API request and persisting something to the database. Is PostgREST trying to replace ORM by wrapping Postgres in REST? Or am I missing something. When would one use this tool. My naive perspective needs some enlightening.
I wouldn't use it a for a "normal" web app, for exactly the reasons you state.