> SPs at a time were a good idea, because on older hardware you could save some significant time by precompiling the SQL statements. However they have lost much of their value along the way.
>
>They are still a good idea.

Tell me why it is a good idea, because all the regular arguments just don't make sense.

>They allow developers to test result sets independently of the application.

errr.? So testing it in the QA or in a VFP program is no alternative. There are dozens of ways to test independly of the application. Regardless, you'll have to test the application as well, in case the parameter definition has been changed. If nothing changed there, It still would be a good idea to test the application. After all, the application is the front end for the users, not the database itself.

>If I had a nickel for everytime an I.S. person breathed a sigh of relief when I told him/her that an application change meant nothing more than a stored proc change, I'd be pretty rich.

Which means that only the internal logic has been changed. Which in the alternative only means an EXE replacement on the server, which is even easier.

You're not doing a very well job in making a point for SPs. I don't see any valid argument from you that makes the difference here:

- You ignore the inflexible part.
- You totally ignore the fact that when using SPs you have to force good practises that avoid huge maintenance cost when something changes in the database schema, as well as in the application logic (sp calls).
- You are not looking outside of your SP world and understand the arguments of the counter arguments.
- You do not seem to understand that the contents of a SP can be passed as SPT as well, producing the exact same result in about the same time with the same performance characteristics in server execution time (debunk roudtrip arguments).

So, what is the REAL motivation to use SPs? Isn't it just that you are comfortable with it?


Kevin, I respect that you have made a choice on doing SPs and you think you have made the right choice. However reality is something different. Things change, and the changes over time have reduced the need for SPs. Sometime you have to go back to square one and oversee the list of advantages and disadvantages. Many people already have done that and you can read their story all over the web, just google on "Stored procedures bad". It is time to swallow your pride and face reality, in stead of making more victims in spreading incorrect information in the validness of stored procedures.

Walter,