On top of my head, I know one major drawback of browsing and stored procedure. If the stored procedure replaces stored procedures B and B, A will work correctly. But if the presentation of the A links B and B changes, A will need to be updated to work properly. IMHO this behavior looks simply sloppy and opens the door to all kinds of subtle mistakes.
Well, what about the benefits? Why do people use views at all if they can simply use equivalent stored procedures with vw prefixes for clarity?
. , , .
SQL .
1) . , .
2) 2 ,
3) , , , . , , .
"select * from vwMyView" "exec MyProc()", . , , . , , , .
/ , , where, proc .
/ proc , , .
" ", , . . B, , B, ( ), , A, . : proc B , proc A .
, , procs, procs. .
, :
Stored procedure cache plan - this will benefit SP implementation, although if the presentation is executed frequently, its plan will also be in cash.
View can be used in JOINswhich cannot be performed using SP.
JOINs