在SQL Server 2005中，有两种方法可以创建临时表:
declare @tmp table (Col1 int, Col2 int);
or
create table #tmp (Col1 int, Col2 int);
这两者之间有什么区别?关于@tmp是否仍然使用tempdb，或者是否所有事情都发生在内存中，我读过相互矛盾的意见。
在哪些情况下，一个会优于另一个?
当前回答
只要看看公认答案中的声明，即表变量不参与日志记录。
通常情况下，似乎不存在日志记录数量上的差异(至少对于表本身的插入/更新/删除操作而言是如此，尽管后来我发现由于额外的系统表更新，存储过程中缓存的临时对象在这方面存在一些小差异)。
在下面的操作中，我观察了@table_variable和#temp表的日志记录行为。
成功的插入 多行插入语句因违反约束而回滚的位置。 更新 删除 释放
所有操作的事务日志记录几乎相同。
表变量版本实际上有一些额外的日志条目，因为它将一个条目添加到sys. log中(然后从sys. log中删除)。Syssingleobjrefs基本表，但总的来说记录的字节更少，因为表变量的内部名称比#temp表少消耗236个字节(少118个nvarchar字符)。
要重现的完整脚本(最好在单用户模式下启动并使用sqlcmd模式的实例上运行)
:setvar tablename "@T"
:setvar tablescript "DECLARE @T TABLE"
/*
--Uncomment this section to test a #temp table
:setvar tablename "#T"
:setvar tablescript "CREATE TABLE #T"
*/
USE tempdb
GO
CHECKPOINT
DECLARE @LSN NVARCHAR(25)
SELECT @LSN = MAX([Current LSN])
FROM fn_dblog(null, null)
EXEC(N'BEGIN TRAN StartBatch
SAVE TRAN StartBatch
COMMIT
$(tablescript)
(
[4CA996AC-C7E1-48B5-B48A-E721E7A435F0] INT PRIMARY KEY DEFAULT 0,
InRowFiller char(7000) DEFAULT ''A'',
OffRowFiller varchar(8000) DEFAULT REPLICATE(''B'',8000),
LOBFiller varchar(max) DEFAULT REPLICATE(cast(''C'' as varchar(max)),10000)
)
BEGIN TRAN InsertFirstRow
SAVE TRAN InsertFirstRow
COMMIT
INSERT INTO $(tablename)
DEFAULT VALUES
BEGIN TRAN Insert9Rows
SAVE TRAN Insert9Rows
COMMIT
INSERT INTO $(tablename) ([4CA996AC-C7E1-48B5-B48A-E721E7A435F0])
SELECT TOP 9 ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY (SELECT 0))
FROM sys.all_columns
BEGIN TRAN InsertFailure
SAVE TRAN InsertFailure
COMMIT
/*Try and Insert 10 rows, the 10th one will cause a constraint violation*/
BEGIN TRY
INSERT INTO $(tablename) ([4CA996AC-C7E1-48B5-B48A-E721E7A435F0])
SELECT TOP (10) (10 + ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY (SELECT 0))) % 20
FROM sys.all_columns
END TRY
BEGIN CATCH
PRINT ERROR_MESSAGE()
END CATCH
BEGIN TRAN Update10Rows
SAVE TRAN Update10Rows
COMMIT
UPDATE $(tablename)
SET InRowFiller = LOWER(InRowFiller),
OffRowFiller =LOWER(OffRowFiller),
LOBFiller =LOWER(LOBFiller)
BEGIN TRAN Delete10Rows
SAVE TRAN Delete10Rows
COMMIT
DELETE FROM $(tablename)
BEGIN TRAN AfterDelete
SAVE TRAN AfterDelete
COMMIT
BEGIN TRAN EndBatch
SAVE TRAN EndBatch
COMMIT')
DECLARE @LSN_HEX NVARCHAR(25) =
CAST(CAST(CONVERT(varbinary,SUBSTRING(@LSN, 1, 8),2) AS INT) AS VARCHAR) + ':' +
CAST(CAST(CONVERT(varbinary,SUBSTRING(@LSN, 10, 8),2) AS INT) AS VARCHAR) + ':' +
CAST(CAST(CONVERT(varbinary,SUBSTRING(@LSN, 19, 4),2) AS INT) AS VARCHAR)
SELECT
[Operation],
[Context],
[AllocUnitName],
[Transaction Name],
[Description]
FROM fn_dblog(@LSN_HEX, null) AS D
WHERE [Current LSN] > @LSN
SELECT CASE
WHEN GROUPING(Operation) = 1 THEN 'Total'
ELSE Operation
END AS Operation,
Context,
AllocUnitName,
COALESCE(SUM([Log Record Length]), 0) AS [Size in Bytes],
COUNT(*) AS Cnt
FROM fn_dblog(@LSN_HEX, null) AS D
WHERE [Current LSN] > @LSN
GROUP BY GROUPING SETS((Operation, Context, AllocUnitName),())
结果
+-----------------------+--------------------+---------------------------+---------------+------+---------------+------+------------------+
| | | | @TV | #TV | |
+-----------------------+--------------------+---------------------------+---------------+------+---------------+------+------------------+
| Operation | Context | AllocUnitName | Size in Bytes | Cnt | Size in Bytes | Cnt | Difference Bytes |
+-----------------------+--------------------+---------------------------+---------------+------+---------------+------+------------------+
| LOP_ABORT_XACT | LCX_NULL | | 52 | 1 | 52 | 1 | |
| LOP_BEGIN_XACT | LCX_NULL | | 6056 | 50 | 6056 | 50 | |
| LOP_COMMIT_XACT | LCX_NULL | | 2548 | 49 | 2548 | 49 | |
| LOP_COUNT_DELTA | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysallocunits.clust | 624 | 3 | 624 | 3 | |
| LOP_COUNT_DELTA | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysrowsets.clust | 208 | 1 | 208 | 1 | |
| LOP_COUNT_DELTA | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysrscols.clst | 832 | 4 | 832 | 4 | |
| LOP_CREATE_ALLOCCHAIN | LCX_NULL | | 120 | 3 | 120 | 3 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_INDEX_INTERIOR | Unknown Alloc Unit | 720 | 9 | 720 | 9 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysallocunits.clust | 444 | 3 | 444 | 3 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysallocunits.nc | 276 | 3 | 276 | 3 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.syscolpars.clst | 628 | 4 | 628 | 4 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.syscolpars.nc | 484 | 4 | 484 | 4 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysidxstats.clst | 176 | 1 | 176 | 1 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysidxstats.nc | 144 | 1 | 144 | 1 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysiscols.clst | 100 | 1 | 100 | 1 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysiscols.nc1 | 88 | 1 | 88 | 1 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysobjvalues.clst | 596 | 5 | 596 | 5 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysrowsets.clust | 132 | 1 | 132 | 1 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysrscols.clst | 528 | 4 | 528 | 4 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysschobjs.clst | 1040 | 6 | 1276 | 6 | 236 |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysschobjs.nc1 | 820 | 6 | 1060 | 6 | 240 |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysschobjs.nc2 | 820 | 6 | 1060 | 6 | 240 |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.sysschobjs.nc3 | 480 | 6 | 480 | 6 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.syssingleobjrefs.clst | 96 | 1 | | | -96 |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | sys.syssingleobjrefs.nc1 | 88 | 1 | | | -88 |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_MARK_AS_GHOST | Unknown Alloc Unit | 72092 | 19 | 72092 | 19 | |
| LOP_DELETE_ROWS | LCX_TEXT_MIX | Unknown Alloc Unit | 16348 | 37 | 16348 | 37 | |
| LOP_FORMAT_PAGE | LCX_HEAP | Unknown Alloc Unit | 1596 | 19 | 1596 | 19 | |
| LOP_FORMAT_PAGE | LCX_IAM | Unknown Alloc Unit | 252 | 3 | 252 | 3 | |
| LOP_FORMAT_PAGE | LCX_INDEX_INTERIOR | Unknown Alloc Unit | 84 | 1 | 84 | 1 | |
| LOP_FORMAT_PAGE | LCX_TEXT_MIX | Unknown Alloc Unit | 4788 | 57 | 4788 | 57 | |
| LOP_HOBT_DDL | LCX_NULL | | 108 | 3 | 108 | 3 | |
| LOP_HOBT_DELTA | LCX_NULL | | 9600 | 150 | 9600 | 150 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysallocunits.clust | 456 | 3 | 456 | 3 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.syscolpars.clst | 644 | 4 | 644 | 4 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysidxstats.clst | 180 | 1 | 180 | 1 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysiscols.clst | 104 | 1 | 104 | 1 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysobjvalues.clst | 616 | 5 | 616 | 5 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysrowsets.clust | 136 | 1 | 136 | 1 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysrscols.clst | 544 | 4 | 544 | 4 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysschobjs.clst | 1064 | 6 | 1300 | 6 | 236 |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.syssingleobjrefs.clst | 100 | 1 | | | -100 |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_CLUSTERED | Unknown Alloc Unit | 135888 | 19 | 135888 | 19 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_INDEX_INTERIOR | Unknown Alloc Unit | 1596 | 19 | 1596 | 19 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_INDEX_LEAF | sys.sysallocunits.nc | 288 | 3 | 288 | 3 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_INDEX_LEAF | sys.syscolpars.nc | 500 | 4 | 500 | 4 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_INDEX_LEAF | sys.sysidxstats.nc | 148 | 1 | 148 | 1 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_INDEX_LEAF | sys.sysiscols.nc1 | 92 | 1 | 92 | 1 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_INDEX_LEAF | sys.sysschobjs.nc1 | 844 | 6 | 1084 | 6 | 240 |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_INDEX_LEAF | sys.sysschobjs.nc2 | 844 | 6 | 1084 | 6 | 240 |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_INDEX_LEAF | sys.sysschobjs.nc3 | 504 | 6 | 504 | 6 | |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_INDEX_LEAF | sys.syssingleobjrefs.nc1 | 92 | 1 | | | -92 |
| LOP_INSERT_ROWS | LCX_TEXT_MIX | Unknown Alloc Unit | 5112 | 71 | 5112 | 71 | |
| LOP_MARK_SAVEPOINT | LCX_NULL | | 508 | 8 | 508 | 8 | |
| LOP_MODIFY_COLUMNS | LCX_CLUSTERED | Unknown Alloc Unit | 1560 | 10 | 1560 | 10 | |
| LOP_MODIFY_HEADER | LCX_HEAP | Unknown Alloc Unit | 3780 | 45 | 3780 | 45 | |
| LOP_MODIFY_ROW | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.syscolpars.clst | 384 | 4 | 384 | 4 | |
| LOP_MODIFY_ROW | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysidxstats.clst | 100 | 1 | 100 | 1 | |
| LOP_MODIFY_ROW | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysrowsets.clust | 92 | 1 | 92 | 1 | |
| LOP_MODIFY_ROW | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysschobjs.clst | 1144 | 13 | 1144 | 13 | |
| LOP_MODIFY_ROW | LCX_IAM | Unknown Alloc Unit | 4224 | 48 | 4224 | 48 | |
| LOP_MODIFY_ROW | LCX_PFS | Unknown Alloc Unit | 13632 | 169 | 13632 | 169 | |
| LOP_MODIFY_ROW | LCX_TEXT_MIX | Unknown Alloc Unit | 108640 | 120 | 108640 | 120 | |
| LOP_ROOT_CHANGE | LCX_CLUSTERED | sys.sysallocunits.clust | 960 | 10 | 960 | 10 | |
| LOP_SET_BITS | LCX_GAM | Unknown Alloc Unit | 1200 | 20 | 1200 | 20 | |
| LOP_SET_BITS | LCX_IAM | Unknown Alloc Unit | 1080 | 18 | 1080 | 18 | |
| LOP_SET_BITS | LCX_SGAM | Unknown Alloc Unit | 120 | 2 | 120 | 2 | |
| LOP_SHRINK_NOOP | LCX_NULL | | | | 32 | 1 | 32 |
+-----------------------+--------------------+---------------------------+---------------+------+---------------+------+------------------+
| Total | | | 410144 | 1095 | 411232 | 1092 | 1088 |
+-----------------------+--------------------+---------------------------+---------------+------+---------------+------+------------------+
其他回答
另一个主要区别是表变量没有列统计信息，而临时表有。这意味着查询优化器不知道表变量中有多少行(它猜测是1)，如果表变量实际上有大量行，这可能导致生成高度非优化的计划。
还要考虑到，您通常可以用派生表来替换这两个表，这也可能更快。但是，与所有性能调优一样，只有针对实际数据的实际测试才能告诉您特定查询的最佳方法。
令我惊讶的是，没有人提到这两者之间的关键区别是临时表支持并行插入，而表变量不支持。您应该能够从执行计划中看出不同之处。下面是9频道和MSDN doc上的SQL workshop的视频。
这也解释了为什么应该对较小的表使用表变量，否则应该使用临时表，正如SQLMenace前面回答的那样。
引用自;专业SQL Server 2012内部和故障处理
Statistics The major difference between temp tables and table variables is that statistics are not created on table variables. This has two major consequences, the fi rst of which is that the Query Optimizer uses a fi xed estimation for the number of rows in a table variable irrespective of the data it contains. Moreover, adding or removing data doesn’t change the estimation. Indexes You can’t create indexes on table variables although you can create constraints. This means that by creating primary keys or unique constraints, you can have indexes (as these are created to support constraints) on table variables. Even if you have constraints, and therefore indexes that will have statistics, the indexes will not be used when the query is compiled because they won’t exist at compile time, nor will they cause recompilations. Schema Modifications Schema modifications are possible on temporary tables but not on table variables. Although schema modifi cations are possible on temporary tables, avoid using them because they cause recompilations of statements that use the tables.
表变量不是在内存中创建的
有一种常见的误解，认为表变量是内存中的结构 这样会比临时表执行得更快。多亏了车管所 叫做sys。“Dm _ db _ session _ space _ usage”，显示tempdb的使用情况 塞申斯，你可以证明事实并非如此。重新启动SQL Server后清除 DMV，运行以下脚本确认您的session _ id返回0 User _ objects _ alloc _ page _ count:
SELECT session_id,
database_id,
user_objects_alloc_page_count
FROM sys.dm_db_session_space_usage
WHERE session_id > 50 ;
现在可以通过运行以下命令检查临时表使用了多少空间 脚本创建一个只有一列的临时表，并用一行填充它:
CREATE TABLE #TempTable ( ID INT ) ;
INSERT INTO #TempTable ( ID )
VALUES ( 1 ) ;
GO
SELECT session_id,
database_id,
user_objects_alloc_page_count
FROM sys.dm_db_session_space_usage
WHERE session_id > 50 ;
服务器上的结果表明该表在tempdb中分配了一个页面。 现在运行相同的脚本，但是使用一个表变量 这一次:
DECLARE @TempTable TABLE ( ID INT ) ;
INSERT INTO @TempTable ( ID )
VALUES ( 1 ) ;
GO
SELECT session_id,
database_id,
user_objects_alloc_page_count
FROM sys.dm_db_session_space_usage
WHERE session_id > 50 ;
用哪一个?
Whether or not you use temporary tables or table variables should be decided by thorough testing, but it’s best to lean towards temporary tables as the default because there are far fewer things that can go wrong. I’ve seen customers develop code using table variables because they were dealing with a small amount of rows, and it was quicker than a temporary table, but a few years later there were hundreds of thousands of rows in the table variable and performance was terrible, so try and allow for some capacity planning when you make your decision!
临时表(#tmp)和表变量(@tmp)之间有一些区别，尽管使用tempdb不是其中之一，如下面MSDN链接中所述。
根据经验，对于中小数据量和简单的使用场景，应该使用表变量。(这是一个过于宽泛的指导方针，当然有很多例外-请参阅下面和下面的文章。)
在两者之间进行选择时需要考虑以下几点:
Temporary Tables are real tables so you can do things like CREATE INDEXes, etc. If you have large amounts of data for which accessing by index will be faster then temporary tables are a good option. Table variables can have indexes by using PRIMARY KEY or UNIQUE constraints. (If you want a non-unique index just include the primary key column as the last column in the unique constraint. If you don't have a unique column, you can use an identity column.) SQL 2014 has non-unique indexes too. Table variables don't participate in transactions and SELECTs are implicitly with NOLOCK. The transaction behaviour can be very helpful, for instance if you want to ROLLBACK midway through a procedure then table variables populated during that transaction will still be populated! Temp tables might result in stored procedures being recompiled, perhaps often. Table variables will not. You can create a temp table using SELECT INTO, which can be quicker to write (good for ad-hoc querying) and may allow you to deal with changing datatypes over time, since you don't need to define your temp table structure upfront. You can pass table variables back from functions, enabling you to encapsulate and reuse logic much easier (eg make a function to split a string into a table of values on some arbitrary delimiter). Using Table Variables within user-defined functions enables those functions to be used more widely (see CREATE FUNCTION documentation for details). If you're writing a function you should use table variables over temp tables unless there's a compelling need otherwise. Both table variables and temp tables are stored in tempdb. But table variables (since 2005) default to the collation of the current database versus temp tables which take the default collation of tempdb (ref). This means you should be aware of collation issues if using temp tables and your db collation is different to tempdb's, causing problems if you want to compare data in the temp table with data in your database. Global Temp Tables (##tmp) are another type of temp table available to all sessions and users.
进一步阅读:
Martin Smith在dba.stackexchange.com上给出了很好的回答 MSDN常见问题解答:https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/kb/305977 MDSN博客文章:https://learn.microsoft.com/archive/blogs/sqlserverstorageengine/tempdb-table-variable-vs-local-temporary-table 文章:https://searchsqlserver.techtarget.com/tip/Temporary-tables-in-SQL-Server-vs-table-variables 临时表和临时变量的意外行为和性能影响:Paul White在SQLblog.com上的文章
推荐文章
- 我如何在T-SQL用逗号格式化一个数字?
- LEFT OUTER JOIN如何返回比左表中存在的记录更多的记录?
- 如何用SQL语句计算百分比
- SQL Server动态PIVOT查询?
- 如何等待2秒?
- SQL Server: CROSS JOIN和FULL OUTER JOIN的区别是什么?
- varchar和nvarchar SQL Server数据类型之间的主要性能差异是什么?
- 向现有表添加主键
- 我应该在SQL varchar(长度)中考虑电话的最长的全球电话号码是什么
- 表中标识列的显式值只能在使用列列表且IDENTITY_INSERT为ON SQL Server时指定
- 如何确定已安装的SQL Server实例及其版本?
- Scope_Identity()、Identity()、@@Identity和Ident_Current()之间的区别是什么?
- 如何在TSQL中刷新打印缓冲区?
- 如何用一个SQL查询从数据库中删除所有表?
- SQL查询返回两个表之间的差异
