Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Python: Just Write SQL

joaodlf.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 288 posts

Re: Python: Just Write SQL

#31

Post by badcppdev »

If you are just going to "Just Write SQL" then I really don't think you should be coding your own Object and Repository classes.

My vision of the "Just Write SQL" paradigm would be a "class" or equivalent that would take a SQL command and return the response from the server. Obviously the response has a few different forms but if you're "just writing SQL" then those responses are database responses and not models or collections of models.

(For the record I think simple ORM type functionality is actually quite useful as your use case moves past the scale of small utility scripts.

Re: Python: Just Write SQL

#32

Post by joaodlf »

bbojan wrote: post #18

The article is missing the code for creating the "users" database table. What about indexes? Migrations? Relations to other tables? I mean you can just write SQL instead of using the ORM if your project consists of a single table with no indexes that will never change, sure.

When it comes to migrations, I've been fine with https://github.com/golang-migrate/migrate

There are a multitude of extra things to consider, but none of those things are, in my opinion, imperative to having success with SQL in Python. Will it be hard to achieve the same level of convenience that modern ORMs provide? Absolutely. But there is always a cost.

I firmly believe that for most projects (especially in the age of "services"), an approach like this is very much good enough. Also, a great way to onboard new developers and present both SQL and simple abstractions that can be applied to many other areas of building software.

Re: Python: Just Write SQL

#33

Post by williamdclt »

NewEntryHN wrote: post #27

Any serious application beyond the example given in this article will include conditional SQL constructs which go beyond SQL query parameters and will therefore require string formatting to build the SQL. Think a simple UI switch to sort some result either ascending or descending, which will require you format either an `ASC` or a `DESC` in your SQL string. The moment you build SQL with string formatting is the momen…

There’s a world between a query builder and an ORM. The point of ORMs isn’t to build queries, if that’s the only need might as well just use a query builder which is a lot more lightweight and doesn’t come with all the downsides of orms

Re: Python: Just Write SQL

#34

Post by mickeyp »

khazhoux wrote: post #10
ckdot wrote: post #3

Congrats, you just wrote your own ORM. Please mind that ORM doesn’t necessarily mean ActiveRecord, which could be considered an anti pattern.

He didn't really. The SQL is right there, and this is important. What I've experienced (unfortunately) across multiple projects is that people who understand databases will write SQL with a nice collection of helper and wrapper functions as needed, and the people that think that databases are mysterious black boxes will reach for ORM. I've seen the ORM-happy teams getting scared at the idea of a million ( 1,000,000!…

I have decades of experience with databases and I happily use ORMs.

You're conflating ORM with people who know nothing about databases. Why?

Re: Python: Just Write SQL

#35

Post by joaodlf »

sergioisidoro wrote: post #22

I've used Rails AR and Django/SQL Alchemy orms, and the more I use it, the more I wish for a fusion of both. Django ORM is amazing for Schema management and migrations, but I dislike their query interfaces (using "filter" instead of "where"). I really like Rails AR way of lightly wrapping SQL, with a almost 1-1, and similar names, but does not have a migration manager - and there is always the chance that your schema…

This is also why I really like Peewee in Python. If I am not going to write SQL, at least give me an API that looks and feels like it. When I look at Peewee code, I can often see the end result query.

Re: Python: Just Write SQL

#36

Post by bakugo »

khazhoux wrote: post #10
ckdot wrote: post #3

Congrats, you just wrote your own ORM. Please mind that ORM doesn’t necessarily mean ActiveRecord, which could be considered an anti pattern.

He didn't really. The SQL is right there, and this is important. What I've experienced (unfortunately) across multiple projects is that people who understand databases will write SQL with a nice collection of helper and wrapper functions as needed, and the people that think that databases are mysterious black boxes will reach for ORM. I've seen the ORM-happy teams getting scared at the idea of a million ( 1,000,000!…

Good ORMs provide the best of both worlds. Basic tasks such as loading a single object from the database by ID and then writing it back after changes are made shouldn't require you to write any SQL, because everyone already knows what that SQL looks like, just let the ORM do it for you. A query builder component that allows you to programmatically build queries of medium complexity is also essential. And for anything not covered in the previous two cases, it should be possible to just write raw SQL or something like it without the ORM fighting you for it.

My preferred ORM is Doctrine and it provides all of these features. It has its own variant of SQL called DQL that lets you effectively write complex select queries as raw SQL with a bunch of object-specific conveniences built in, and get back an array of objects.

Re: Python: Just Write SQL

#37

Post by m000 »

bbojan wrote: post #18

The article is missing the code for creating the "users" database table. What about indexes? Migrations? Relations to other tables? I mean you can just write SQL instead of using the ORM if your project consists of a single table with no indexes that will never change, sure.

And good luck with writing tests for your sql code.

Re: Python: Just Write SQL

#39

Post by zero_shift »

mickeyp wrote: post #34
khazhoux wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't really. The SQL is right there, and this is important. What I've experienced (unfortunately) across multiple projects is that people who understand databases will write SQL with a nice collection of helper and wrapper functions as needed, and the people that think that databases are mysterious black boxes will reach for ORM. I've seen the ORM-happy teams getting scared at the idea of a million ( 1,000,000!…

I have decades of experience with databases and I happily use ORMs. You're conflating ORM with people who know nothing about databases. Why?

From my experience, ORMs allow folk who know nothing about databases to continue knowing nothing about databases

Re: Python: Just Write SQL

#40

Post by m000 »

somat wrote: post #29
bbojan wrote: post #18

The article is missing the code for creating the "users" database table. What about indexes? Migrations? Relations to other tables? I mean you can just write SQL instead of using the ORM if your project consists of a single table with no indexes that will never change, sure.

sometimes the idea is that the database lives it's own life outside the application. Probably not the case here, but under that viewpoint the application is just one of perhaps many that access the data and as such creating tables, indexes, migrations and relations are none of it's business.

But it is the application's business. You may not be altering the database schema from your application, but you still need to make sure that its code is in-sync with it.

This means that you will need extra tooling, and if you're DIYing you will need to write it yourself.

Post reply on HN