you solved isolation decoupled much of the db logic from app-logic and made security easier
you can deploy schema changes independently
you can change everything and the app should not notice
you can deploy schema changes independently
you can change everything and the app should not notice
I'm not really sure what you mean by "you can deploy schema changes independently" and "you can change everything and the app should not notice". The stored procedures are basically just an extension of the apps logic right? So you can deploy them at any time, sure, but that isn't different from an app that doesn't use stored procedures, because you could also deploy changes to any part of that app at any time.
I do think stored procedures can be more efficient, because you have a lot more control. But it's not like they are clearly superior from an organizational standpoint. If you write an ORM using stored procedures, it's still an ORM.
Why pretend your SQL database is about objects? It is not... (it is about data)
A stored procedure can act like a view or a query, or use procedural logic. Point is: your app can call it and get a concistent result, no matter what refactoring has been going on.
A direct query needs to know too much about the database (orm generated or otherwise) which prevent refactoring and couples app to database harder...
You can rename or merge tables, views functions in the database but the interface the app use (stored procedures/DAL) will stay the same and work the same way.
As for app logic... I prefer bussiness logic in the database, not the app when the data is important. Application logic stay in your application, data dependent bussiness logic stay with the data.
On the other hand, having well factored microservices (out of process) or in process modules have worked out really well with modern devops and software engineering principals - easy push button deployments and rollbacks, unit testing, A/B deployments, etc.
It probably depends on the domain/problems.
My experience is with transaction heavy financial systems or similar, with web frontends, microservices sprinkled around in different languages...
The web app or java worker should be allowed to focus in its problems, the bussiness logic needs to live in one central place, which happens to be in the database accessed through thightly controled interface in the form of stored procedures.
A rest api... how and why should it be responsible for your data? It solved a different problem.
You might not even need a database I guess, and then anything goes.
I need and like my database, and have suffered trying to get along with different ORMs. SQL is so good at what it is designed to do if you just let it.
(And why just one rest api? How about 100 restapis, some microservices, some web apps, some background workers, many different languages. One database. No ORM)
And you lose all of the benefits of microservices if there is still a tight coupling between unrelated (from a domain perspective) to tables.
One db can be a problem, or a strenght depending on the domain; And I really dislike religious design, esp microservices.
I have less problems by avoiding ORMs (and religios microservice arch, or fundamentalist interpretations of rest)
Database handles the shared state in a heterogenous environment. We need it to be centralized to keep track of money, the apps can't do that, two independent databases cant do that either. It must be one system that guarantees concistency.
It works great, there is no downtime. The interfaces are defined, the database stands alone, updates are deployed separately.
Why can't apps "keep track of money"? I'm assuming you're referring to transactions. Apps can create transactions and you can share transactions across apps using distributed transaction (I'm not saying distributed transaction is a good idea).
You dont need an ORM for testing your code...
But I think this varies from project to project. How many different applications, in different languages are using your db and do you tolerate downtime?
All of the manual sign off steps are integrated with the automated release pipeline. As soon as the required approvals sign off, the next step of the pipeline is done.
Rolling back is just redeploying the previous released version. Branching, source control, etc is also a lot easier when all of your business logic is in code and you don't have to sync up the "right" version of your source control with the right version of your stored procedures.
Of course this is even easier when you're using a NoSql solution where your schema is also defined by your class models. But that's another discussion.....
Of course this doesn't have to just apply to code. With things like Packer and Terraform you can do the same with infrastructure. Automated infrastructure deployment is not my expertise...yet