"""All of the business logic was in stored procedures. I've seen a stored procedure with triple nested cursors spanning 2000 lines. Our 'senior' developer would take weeks to make changes to this thing."""
I remember when this was the thing to do; to store as much as possible in stored procs. Fat server (the server here being the database server), thin client.
That has changed, and changed again, and no doubt it will be different in the future again. The problem with our profession is that it isn't always easy to determine which changes are actual progress, and which are a fad or fashion.
(Anecdotally: I also remember having to replace ~100 lines of Python with ~60 stored procs and views in Access. This was code that was very unsuitable to be done in a database. The Python code did the job fast, and was readable and understandable; the Access queries were NOT, and it took them minutes to do the same thing. But, management considered Python "unmaintainable" because it was "an obscure language"... so they preferred the Access "solution".)
I remember when this was the thing to do; to store as much as possible in stored procs. Fat server (the server here being the database server), thin client.
That has changed, and changed again, and no doubt it will be different in the future again. The problem with our profession is that it isn't always easy to determine which changes are actual progress, and which are a fad or fashion.
(Anecdotally: I also remember having to replace ~100 lines of Python with ~60 stored procs and views in Access. This was code that was very unsuitable to be done in a database. The Python code did the job fast, and was readable and understandable; the Access queries were NOT, and it took them minutes to do the same thing. But, management considered Python "unmaintainable" because it was "an obscure language"... so they preferred the Access "solution".)