From: Phillip Gawlowski Date: 2010-11-18T00:26:58+09:00 Subject: Re: ORM's - Don't Do It! On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Mike Stephens wrote: > Skye Shaw!@#$ wrote in post #961372: > > People on this channel may be unaware of what databases can do. I > believe for a long time MySQL did not have views at all. Or subqueries > for that matter. Mickey Mouse web applications might be fine with a > handful of tables, but in corporate contexts it is normal to see 100 or > even a 1000 tables in a database. Managing all this via ORM approaches > might be more difficult than at first appears. It's the difference > between driving your car to work and running an airline. It's actually rather easy to run an airline (as easy as any transport corporation). It's difficult to get the infrastructure going, however. So, pray tell, in how far is it easy to deal with 100, or even 1000 different tables per database[0] (BTW, when you say "database" do you mean the engine, or actual database entities. IOW: 1000 tables per schema, or 1000 tables in total) in any sensible, or at least easy-ish way? Instead of bashing ORM, offer suggestions, for once. [0]Not forgetting that the only people who have access to all tables in any given database are only a select few, simply for privacy and security reasons. -- Phillip Gawlowski Though the folk I have met, (Ah, how soon!) they forget When I've moved on to some other place, There may be one or two, When I've played and passed through, Who'll remember my song or my face.