[vbezhenar]

Views will severely restrict the kinds of changes you might want to do in the future. For example now you can't just move some data from your database into S3 or REST service.

Stored procedures technically can do anything, I guess, but at that point you would be better with traditional services which will give you more flexibility.

[indigo945]

A view can also do anything - it could query a REST service, for example. (Not saying that this is necessarily a good idea, though...)

[falcor84]

Is that a real thing? What DBMSs support such views?

[jakewins]

Most of the heavy artillery RDMSes at least, eg Postgres let’s you mount arbitrary HTTP resources as tables, which you then can put views over: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Foreign_data_wrappers

[remus]

This sounds like a total minefield. You might get a response in the same format, but I imagine it'd be very easy to break an API user who accidentally depends on performance characteristics (for example).

[ttfkam]

AWS RDS and Aurora both support synchronous and asynchronous lambda invocations from the database. Should be used very carefully, but when you want/need a fully event-driven architecture, it's wonderful.

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/UserGuide/Postg...

[px1999]

It is a _phenomonal_ waste of money in licensing fees but MSSQL server can embed C# dlls and as a result run arbitrary code via its CLR integration

[fiedzia]

Postgres can run arbitrary code too, but at this point it just makes more sense to create a service that acts as a database and translates sql to whatever (people already do that). This however makes whole game pointless, as we are back where we were.