EXISTS is much faster than IN when the subquery results is very large. IN is faster than EXISTS when the subquery results is very small. CREATE TABLE t1 (id INT, title VARCHAR(20), someIntCol INT) GO CREATE TABLE t2 (id INT, t1Id INT, someData VARCHAR(20)) GO INSERT INTO t1 SELECT 1, 'title 1', 5 UNION ALL SELECT 2, 'title 2', 5 UNION ALL SELECT 3, 'title 3', 5 UNION ALL SELECT 4, 'title 4', 5 UNION ALL SELECT null, 'title 5', 5 UNION ALL SELECT null, 'title 6', 5 INSERT INTO t2 SELECT 1, 1, 'data 1' UNION ALL SELECT 2, 1, 'data 2' UNION ALL SELECT 3, 2, 'data 3' UNION ALL SELECT 4, 3, 'data 4' UNION ALL SELECT 5, 3, 'data 5' UNION ALL SELECT 6, 3, 'data 6' UNION ALL SELECT 7, 4, 'data 7' UNION ALL SELECT 8, null, 'data 8' UNION ALL SELECT 9, 6, 'data 9' UNION ALL SELECT 10, 6, 'data 10' UNION ALL SELECT 11, 8, 'data 11' Query 1 SELECT FROM t1 WHERE not EXISTS (SELECT * FROM t2 WHERE t1.id = t2.t1id) Query 2 SELECT t1.* FROM t1 WHERE t1.id not in (SELECT t2.t1id FROM t2 ) If in t1 your id has null value then Query 1 will find them, but Query 2 cant find null parameters. I mean IN can't compare anything with null, so it has no result for null, but EXISTS can compare everything with null.

我假设您知道它们的作用，因此使用方式不同，所以我将把您的问题理解为:什么时候重写SQL以使用IN而不是EXISTS是一个好主意，或者反之亦然。

这个假设合理吗?

编辑:我问的原因是，在许多情况下，您可以重写基于in的SQL来使用EXISTS，反之亦然，对于某些数据库引擎，查询优化器将区别对待这两者。

例如:

SELECT *
FROM Customers
WHERE EXISTS (
    SELECT *
    FROM Orders
    WHERE Orders.CustomerID = Customers.ID
)

可以改写为:

SELECT *
FROM Customers
WHERE ID IN (
    SELECT CustomerID
    FROM Orders
)

或者用join:

SELECT Customers.*
FROM Customers
    INNER JOIN Orders ON Customers.ID = Orders.CustomerID

所以我的问题仍然存在，原来的海报想知道什么是IN和EXISTS，因此如何使用它，或者他问是否重写SQL使用IN使用EXISTS，反之亦然，将是一个好主意?

EXISTS is much faster than IN when the subquery results is very large. IN is faster than EXISTS when the subquery results is very small. CREATE TABLE t1 (id INT, title VARCHAR(20), someIntCol INT) GO CREATE TABLE t2 (id INT, t1Id INT, someData VARCHAR(20)) GO INSERT INTO t1 SELECT 1, 'title 1', 5 UNION ALL SELECT 2, 'title 2', 5 UNION ALL SELECT 3, 'title 3', 5 UNION ALL SELECT 4, 'title 4', 5 UNION ALL SELECT null, 'title 5', 5 UNION ALL SELECT null, 'title 6', 5 INSERT INTO t2 SELECT 1, 1, 'data 1' UNION ALL SELECT 2, 1, 'data 2' UNION ALL SELECT 3, 2, 'data 3' UNION ALL SELECT 4, 3, 'data 4' UNION ALL SELECT 5, 3, 'data 5' UNION ALL SELECT 6, 3, 'data 6' UNION ALL SELECT 7, 4, 'data 7' UNION ALL SELECT 8, null, 'data 8' UNION ALL SELECT 9, 6, 'data 9' UNION ALL SELECT 10, 6, 'data 10' UNION ALL SELECT 11, 8, 'data 11' Query 1 SELECT FROM t1 WHERE not EXISTS (SELECT * FROM t2 WHERE t1.id = t2.t1id) Query 2 SELECT t1.* FROM t1 WHERE t1.id not in (SELECT t2.t1id FROM t2 ) If in t1 your id has null value then Query 1 will find them, but Query 2 cant find null parameters. I mean IN can't compare anything with null, so it has no result for null, but EXISTS can compare everything with null.

IN只支持平等关系(或前面有NOT的不平等关系)。 它是=any / =some的同义词

select    * 
from      t1 
where     x in (select x from t2)
;

EXISTS支持不能用IN表示的不同类型的关系，例如-

select    * 
from      t1 
where     exists (select    null 
                  from      t2 
                  where     t2.x=t1.x 
                        and t2.y>t1.y 
                        and t2.z like '℅' || t1.z || '℅'
                  )
;

还有另一种说法——

exist和IN之间所谓的性能和技术差异可能是由于特定供应商的实现/限制/错误造成的，但很多时候它们只是由于缺乏对数据库内部结构的理解而产生的神话。

表的定义、统计数据的准确性、数据库配置和优化器的版本都会影响执行计划，因此也会影响性能指标。

EXISTS的性能比in快。 如果大多数过滤条件在子查询中，那么最好使用in，如果大多数过滤条件在主查询中，那么最好使用EXISTS。

我相信这个问题有一个直截了当的答案。你为什么不从那些在他们的系统中开发了这个功能的人那里检查一下呢?

如果你是一个MS SQL开发人员，下面是来自微软的直接答案。

IN:

确定指定的值是否与子查询或列表中的任何值匹配。

存在:

指定子查询以测试是否存在行。