Steve Jones shares some thoughts:
I was thinking about this when I saw this article on strategies to refactor sql code. The article seems written more for PostgreSQL, but there are items that relate to T-SQL as well. The main thrust of the article is about trying to rewrite code to DRY (don’t repeat yourself). The more changes you can make to shrink code, either to make it easier to read or avoid repeating those copy/paste items, the better off your team will be. It’s easy to think those copies aren’t a big deal, but it’s easy to update code in one place because that solves the problem you were given, and forget to fix all the copies.
Strict refactoring—leaving the inputs and outputs alone and only modifying the structure of code beyond the scope of reformatting but without changing its behavior—is somewhat uncommon in T-SQL outside of performance tuning scenarios, at least in my experience. The problem I have with DRY, when it comes to T-SQL, is that you generally need to pay the performance piper. Yes, repeating the contents of a common function in a series of T-SQL queries is repetition and “wasteful” in that regard, but if it makes the queries run literally 3-9x faster just from making these changes, I don’t care. I’ll do it.
If T-SQL were an idealized implementation of a fourth-generation language, where all viable equivalent queries would have the same execution plan and thus the same performance, then we’d see a lot more code refactoring because the way we write the code would not have a direct impact on how it runs. But in practice, that’s not the case.
Leave a Comment