On 18/04/14 16:27, Steve Spence wrote:
> On 4/18/2014 12:21 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
>>
>> personal opinion:
>>
>> I don't think a terminal device like a PC or an embedded system
>> should be talking directly to SQL at all. instead, they should be
>> talking to an application server which implements the "business
>> logic", and THAT talks to the database.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> When all we need to do is log sensor values, there's no business logic
> needed. It's scientific data collection, and direct to SQL works very
> nicely. It's fast and clean.
>
If you are just logging sensor values, why bother with a database?
I share John's point of view. If you find a database useful, then
architectures that shield the database from external systems and users
is preferred for a number of reasons - such as giving you far more
flexbility for adding additional functionality in the future, and
providing better security. Any processing of scientific data is
considered "business logic", in this context. Simply because people use
MySQL in a dubious ways (there are many problems in MySQL anyway, that
make me want to cringe), does not mean they are practices to be
encouraged by responsible software developers.
So if you are serious about your data integrity, and really think a
database is appropriate, then I would definitely recommend PostgreSQL
over MySQL. I have done programming and DBA work with MySQL, but I
would never recommend it (even before Oracle got their hands on it!) for
a new project.
Cheers,
Gavin