Hacker News Reader

Comment by wvenable | Hacker News Reader

The real third approach is that you can safely pretend the database is object-oriented for manipulation and simple lists and still use SQL for complex queries. Most ORMs let you safely mix and match both methods easily.

This ORM or not ORM is the wrong question. Use an ORM to save you headaches where it's appropriate and use direct SQL when it's not.

View on HN

You are absolutely correct. Using both is a very valid options.

We use ActiveRecord a lot, and then have custom SQL queries using `find_by_sql` for very complex, optimized joins. It works very well. Rails gets out of the way when we need it to.

Two caveats with find_by_sql: it’s read-only, so no insert or update commands, and it still does column-to-instance-variable monkeypatching on the object level, as opposed to the class-level monkeypatching that’s applied to normal ActiveRecord classes as soon as the DB schema is read.

For the former, there's always ActiveRecord::Base.connection.execute. For the latter, I think it's more complicated than that. There also is object-level mapping even for regular AR usage. If you do something like Foo.select("true as bar"), your Foo objects will have a bar variable available to them.

This is true.

I use this approach with Mongoose in Node.JS. If you want to update a user document, we always query the entire document, set the field, and call .save(). This triggers all kinds of very useful validation hooks and is easy to think about. But if you want to find a series of users, or build an API for a specific front-end form, I've found the ORM just gets in the way, and we have not had any trouble writing db queries inline.

We used to use Mongoose in our project[0], but found that at the volumes of interactions we were dealing with, it was orders of magnitude faster to just use the raw Node.JS driver.

[0]: https://github.com/coralproject/talk/tree/next

Reply on news.ycombinator.com