RE: Using q() to define a query
- From: Jenda@xxxxxxxxxxx (Jenda Krynicky)
- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:24:09 +0100
From: Carville, Stephen" <scarville@xxxxxxxxxx>
I've tried several different ways, global variables, local variables,
modules but, FWIW, I've found putting long scripts in a subroutine
works pretty well from a maintenance standpoint: (This is from an
older report. Now I encourage the poor guy who has to maintain my
stuff to use ? instead of %s whenever practical)
sub some_descriptive_script_name {
While prototypes are generaly not recommended this is a perfect case
for the empty prototype
sub some_descriptive_script_name () {
which will basicaly turn the subroutine into a constant that can be
inlined.
return qq{
Looks to me like you are not interpolating any variables there so q{}
would probably be better.
Of course it would definitely be preferred to use placeholders
instead if inserting the data into the SQL with sprinf(). It's safer
and more efficient (allows the database to cache execution plans).
If supported by the database, stored procedures would work even
better. Especially if you enforce a rule that all database access is
doen via stored procedures and therefore the DBA has a chance to see
all SQL used against his database and can optimize the queries and/or
indexes and schema.
Jenda
===== Jenda@xxxxxxxxxxx === http://Jenda.Krynicky.cz =====
When it comes to wine, women and song, wizards are allowed
to get drunk and croon as much as they like.
-- Terry Pratchett in Sourcery
.
- References:
- Using q() to define a query
- From: Colin Wetherbee
- Re: Using q() to define a query
- From: John Scoles
- RE: Using q() to define a query
- From: Stephen Carville
- Using q() to define a query
- Prev by Date: Re: Using q() to define a query
- Next by Date: Re: Using q() to define a query
- Previous by thread: RE: Using q() to define a query
- Next by thread: Re: Using q() to define a query
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
