News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by dorgo on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @01:13PM (#23009197)
>On the other hand, "is deleted" flags end up causing issues when you forget to put "where not is_deleted" in your queries.

My solution would be a view for every table. Are there drawbacks? Other solutions?

Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by perl4ever on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @01:53PM (#23009774)
Eh, the situation that I've been in, if I recall correctly, is that one has read/write access to all data for reporting, but not the ability to create views (or stored procedures etc) to share.

Where I am now, (as far as Oracle goes) you can't even create your own tables under your own schema. A view requires a meeting with a DBA and their manager and really special, compelling arguments.

Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by lilyball on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @05:39PM (#23012437)
Can you just have a general policy where every table that has an is_deleted flag also automatically gets a view, and clients must use the view unless they have a particular need to access deleted data?
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by capableweb on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @01:25PM (#23009377)
Not sure about drawbacks but another solution would be to change the point where you do the queries instead. So you have a "user" object that is largely saved the same as most other "crud" objects, so you have a layer for those, add the flag there.
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by dbbk on Wednesday April 29, 2020 @09:39AM (#23018969)
Most ORMs have built-in support for this. For example Laravel's Eloquent automatically filters out `deleted_at` records