We originally saw glass on some high-rise patios near the ocean in California. For similar reasons of not blocking the view from our kitchen. When constructing a porch onto our patio, we installed tempered glass between the posts and below our railing rather than balusters. We used 3/8" glass, had a local glass shop cut to necessary dimensions and send them out for tempering. We also have a dog. Because ours is on an egress porch, not a full patio, there isn't much activity near the glass. As far as cleaning, it really has never been a problem. Maybe once or twice a season. Here's a photo. Look behind the pergola to the egress porch. Glass is below the railing - practically invisable.

I'm sorry, I mentioned I am not buying a system and don't want one. Today I have been looking at copper pipe for the top rail. It oxidizes off to a handsome dark brown that I like as well as some galvanized pipe. If anyone has used pipe this way let me know how it worked out. As for saving a FEW bucks, I'm talking about a several thousand dollars on my 100 feet of deck railing compared to my friend's final price.

I checked in with a couple of waterproofing specialist subcontractors before finalizing a typical detail for our practice. Our default proposal for guardrail balustrade attachment is fascia mounted. This is also consistent with my recollection of best practices taught in architecture school. While there are certainly special conditions that can modify this advice, the logic is pretty straightforward in most waterproof deck circumstances. 1. A fascia mounted guardrail typically has a larger distance between the bolts that resist overturning. For this reason, the forces on these bolts typically undergo much smaller forces than bolts associated with a floor-mounted installation. 2. Because waterproof decks often have a "drip" at their edge condition; the mounting plate can be substantially sheltered over a long period of time from weathering. When we compare this logic to the floor or "deck"-mounted installation, two things become apparent. 1. The bolts on a floor-mounted installation typically need to be close to the vertical post to avoid being a tripping hazard, which increases the dynamic forces on these attachment points. 2. The upward orientation of a guardrail post could not be worse from an exposure standpoint. The installations are frequently accompanied by standing water where the "wiggling" forces imposed by their use invite water leakage. Both waterproofing contractors I spoke with sounded like this type of poor solution was ruefully a good source of their repair business. Certainly, if posts support a roof at the perimeter of a waterproof deck, surface-mounted guardrails can make sense. The roof's protection aids the waterproof deck, and the posts for the roof can effectively become part of the guardrail assembly and help with its stability. It is worth noting that many homeowners, and even commercial clients, get preliminary pricing for a simple deck and only come by the guardrail cost when required by building codes or provide a builder with more detailed documentation. In my experience, For these reasons, it is a work scope that is often "shoe-horned" into a project budget. It is also the case that, like "options" when buying a car, the options are what cost you. Decking companies and guardrail companies often charge a premium for the guardrail amenity and will provide the deck-mounted option as an "affordable" choice. The fact the guardrail can be mounted to the surface of the area under scrutiny (and not some peripheral fascia board that might not even be in the current scope of work) is often the reason why people jump at this option. It is the most convenient, which is probably the biggest reason I see people do it. I hope this helps.

First find out if either is to code where you live. I actually much prefer a glass and metal rail system to cable but that is just me.