I am wondering has anybody tried to do it with D?

http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/adding-udf.html

By looking on the processing chain for rendering a web page, based on mysql data,
I thought it would be very efficient, to let mysql deliver the datasets already rendered as html using a template engine like vibe.d diet templates.

At the end of this integration process even the web server could be integrated in the db engine. I know this has been done as prove of concept for an other (db) system to deliver json data via http.

Any suggestion?

Regards mt.

On Thursday, 12 January 2017 at 09:49:08 UTC, Martin Tschierschke wrote:
> I am wondering has anybody tried to do it with D?
>
> http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/adding-udf.html
>
> By looking on the processing chain for rendering a web page, based on mysql data,
> I thought it would be very efficient, to let mysql deliver the datasets already rendered as html using a template engine like vibe.d diet templates.
>
> At the end of this integration process even the web server could be integrated in the db engine. I know this has been done as prove of concept for an other (db) system to deliver json data via http.
>
> Any suggestion?

1. I don't see, why moving HTML rendering task from vibe.d thread to MySQL thread will give CPU benefit.
2. HTML usually bigger then data used to construct it (sometimes much more bigger) so it will be more traffic in pipe/socket between MySQL and vibe.d
3. MySQL database more hard to scale than WEB frontend so moving more work to MySQL makes application less scalable.
4. This will add complexity to maintain changes

So my resume: this is bad case for UDF. Really good case is then we have a lot of initial data to consider but relatively small result. For example, ForceAtlas2 UDF, I think, is more interesting idea.

On Friday, 13 January 2017 at 09:31:38 UTC, crimaniak wrote:
> On Thursday, 12 January 2017 at 09:49:08 UTC, Martin Tschierschke wrote:
>> I am wondering has anybody tried to do it with D?
>>
>> http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/adding-udf.html
>>
>> By looking on the processing chain for rendering a web page, based on mysql data,
>> I thought it would be very efficient, to let mysql deliver the datasets already rendered as html using a template engine like vibe.d diet templates.
[...]
>> Any suggestion?
>
> 1. I don't see, why moving HTML rendering task from vibe.d thread to MySQL thread will give CPU benefit.
> 2. HTML usually bigger then data used to construct it (sometimes much more bigger) so it will be more traffic in pipe/socket between MySQL and vibe.d
> 3. MySQL database more hard to scale than WEB frontend so moving more work to MySQL makes application less scalable.
> 4. This will add complexity to maintain changes
>
> So my resume: this is bad case for UDF. Really good case is then we have a lot of initial data to consider but relatively small result. For example, ForceAtlas2 UDF, I think, is more interesting idea.

Thank you for your thoughts!

My thought was that the main benefit of using the DB engine to do the layout rendering, would be that you do not need to convert db values to serialized data, and than convert them to values before you convert them to stings again.
My first idea was to make a not compiled stored procedure and just concat() the output together with some html, but I was told, that concat usually is quite ineffective, I tested it and the result was: It is really slow.

The second thought is: When you get the power of vibe.d inside mysql, than everyone who is using mysql could use vibe to do the dataset rendering and by this you may speedup every system using mysql without having to change the complete front end to vibe allowing a smooth migration. (?)

Now I will try to use vibe.d as a service layer between rails and mysql,
to do some time consuming rendering of partials.

Regards mt.

On Friday, 13 January 2017 at 12:30:51 UTC, Martin Tschierschke wrote:
>
> My thought was that the main benefit of using the DB engine to do the layout rendering, would be that you do not need to convert db values to serialized data, and than convert them to values before you convert them to stings again.
I think, MySQL binary protocol is very efficient. In any case, first it need to check how much it costs, else it will be classic premature optimization.

> Now I will try to use vibe.d as a service layer between rails and mysql,
> to do some time consuming rendering of partials.
 The most correct approach, I think. 👍 In the style of microservices. Testable, interchangeable, scalable.