On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 5:10 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2022-12-01 at 16:38 +0100, Dominique Devienne wrote: > > FWIW, we have a custom schema introspection and diff'ing ad-hoc framework, > > This is arguable, but my opinion is that this is not a robust way to > do development. You should use a schema versioning tool like Liquibase, > develop schema migration scripts and maintain the SQL code in a source > repository like other software. We don't maintain SQL. We maintain a *Logical* model, and generate the physical model from it. FKs, NKs, Enums, CHECK constraints, indexes, etc.. all that "implementation details" is programmatically generated, and always consistent, from a much higher-level and simpler model. And you also get auto-upgrade most of the time, greatly increasing development velocity too. I would argue that NOT doing it this way, is the non-robust way myself :) We've been refactoring a large data-model maintained manually like you advocate, and I can't tell you how many anomalies we've discovered and had to fix, using the more robust formalism of using a high-level logical model and (DDL) code gen. I guess is a DBA-versus-Developer point-of-view difference. --DD
