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
Temp table: A Temp table is easy to create and back up data. Table variable: But the table variable involves the effort when we usually create the normal tables. Temp table: Temp table result can be used by multiple users. Table variable: But the table variable can be used by the current user only. Temp table: Temp table will be stored in the tempdb. It will make network traffic. When we have large data in the temp table then it has to work across the database. A Performance issue will exist. Table variable: But a table variable will store in the physical memory for some of the data, then later when the size increases it will be moved to the tempdb. Temp table: Temp table can do all the DDL operations. It allows creating the indexes, dropping, altering, etc.., Table variable: Whereas table variable won't allow doing the DDL operations. But the table variable allows us to create the clustered index only. Temp table: Temp table can be used for the current session or global. So that a multiple user session can utilize the results in the table. Table variable: But the table variable can be used up to that program. (Stored procedure) Temp table: Temp variable cannot use the transactions. When we do the DML operations with the temp table then it can be rollback or commit the transactions. Table variable: But we cannot do it for table variable. Temp table: Functions cannot use the temp variable. More over we cannot do the DML operation in the functions . Table variable: But the function allows us to use the table variable. But using the table variable we can do that. Temp table: The stored procedure will do the recompilation (can't use same execution plan) when we use the temp variable for every sub sequent calls. Table variable: Whereas the table variable won't do like that.
其他回答
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 |
+-----------------------+--------------------+---------------------------+---------------+------+---------------+------+------------------+
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。
在哪些情况下，一个会优于另一个?
对于较小的表(小于1000行)，使用临时变量，否则使用临时表。
对于所有相信临时变量只存在于内存中的人
首先，表变量不一定存在于内存中。在内存压力下，属于表变量的页可以被推到tempdb。
在这里阅读文章:TempDB::表变量vs本地临时表
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!
推荐文章
- 确定记录是否存在的最快方法
- 从现有模式生成表关系图(SQL Server)
- 我如何循环通过一组记录在SQL Server?
- 数据库和模式的区别
- 如何在SQL Server中一次更改多个列
- 外键约束可能导致循环或多条级联路径?
- 如何选择每一行的列值不是独特的
- nvarchar(max)非文本
- 在SQL Server 2008 R2中重命名数据库时出错
- 将数据复制到另一个表中
- 如何在SQL中选择表的最后一条记录?
- 修改列，添加默认约束
- 在存储过程中使用“SET XACT_ABORT ON”有什么好处?
- 如何检查SQL Server文本列是否为空?
- 如何创建一个SQL Server函数“连接”多行从一个子查询到一个单独的分隔字段?
