使用此技术可以提高实体框架中插入记录的速度。这里我使用一个简单的存储过程来插入记录。为了执行这个存储过程，我使用实体框架的.FromSql（）方法来执行Raw SQL。

存储过程代码：

CREATE PROCEDURE TestProc
@FirstParam VARCHAR(50),
@SecondParam VARCHAR(50)

AS
  Insert into SomeTable(Name, Address) values(@FirstParam, @SecondParam) 
GO

接下来，循环遍历所有4000条记录，并添加执行存储的

该过程每100次循环一次。

为此，我创建了一个字符串查询来执行这个过程，并继续将每一组记录附加到它。

然后检查循环是否以100的倍数运行，在这种情况下，使用.FromSql（）执行它。

所以对于4000条记录，我只需要执行以下步骤4000/100=40次。

检查以下代码：

string execQuery = "";
var context = new MyContext();
for (int i = 0; i < 4000; i++)
{
    execQuery += "EXEC TestProc @FirstParam = 'First'" + i + "'', @SecondParam = 'Second'" + i + "''";

    if (i % 100 == 0)
    {
        context.Student.FromSql(execQuery);
        execQuery = "";
    }
}

如果您添加的实体（）依赖于上下文中的其他预加载实体（例如导航财产），则Dispose（）上下文会产生问题

我使用类似的概念来保持我的上下文较小，以实现相同的性能

但我只是分离已经SaveChanges（）的实体，而不是Dispose（）上下文并重新创建

public void AddAndSave<TEntity>(List<TEntity> entities) where TEntity : class {

const int CommitCount = 1000; //set your own best performance number here
int currentCount = 0;

while (currentCount < entities.Count())
{
    //make sure it don't commit more than the entities you have
    int commitCount = CommitCount;
    if ((entities.Count - currentCount) < commitCount)
        commitCount = entities.Count - currentCount;

    //e.g. Add entities [ i = 0 to 999, 1000 to 1999, ... , n to n+999... ] to conext
    for (int i = currentCount; i < (currentCount + commitCount); i++)        
        _context.Entry(entities[i]).State = System.Data.EntityState.Added;
        //same as calling _context.Set<TEntity>().Add(entities[i]);       

    //commit entities[n to n+999] to database
    _context.SaveChanges();

    //detach all entities in the context that committed to database
    //so it won't overload the context
    for (int i = currentCount; i < (currentCount + commitCount); i++)
        _context.Entry(entities[i]).State = System.Data.EntityState.Detached;

    currentCount += commitCount;
} }

如果需要，用try-catch和TrasactionScope（）将其包装起来，为了保持代码干净，没有在这里显示它们

TL；博士我知道这是一个老帖子，但我已经实施了一个解决方案，从其中一个提议开始，扩展它并解决其中的一些问题；此外，我还阅读了所提出的其他解决方案，与这些方案相比，我似乎提出了一种更适合原始问题中提出的要求的解决方案。

在这个解决方案中，我扩展了Slauma的方法，我认为它非常适合原始问题中提出的情况，即使用实体框架和事务范围对数据库进行昂贵的写入操作。

在Slauma的解决方案中，这只是一个草稿，只是用来了解​​EF的速度与实施批量插入的策略-存在以下问题：

交易超时（默认情况下，1分钟可通过代码延长至最多10分钟）；复制宽度等于事务结束时使用的提交大小的第一个数据块（这个问题很奇怪，可以通过变通方法解决）。

我还报告了一个例子，其中包括几个从属实体的上下文插入，从而扩展了Slauma提出的案例研究。

我能够验证的性能是10K记录/分钟，在数据库中插入200K宽的记录块，每个记录块大约1KB。速度是恒定的，性能没有下降，测试需要大约20分钟才能成功运行。

详细的解决方案

主持在示例存储库类中插入的批量插入操作的方法：

abstract class SomeRepository { 

    protected MyDbContext myDbContextRef;

    public void ImportData<TChild, TFather>(List<TChild> entities, TFather entityFather)
            where TChild : class, IEntityChild
            where TFather : class, IEntityFather
    {

        using (var scope = MyDbContext.CreateTransactionScope())
        {

            MyDbContext context = null;
            try
            {
                context = new MyDbContext(myDbContextRef.ConnectionString);

                context.Configuration.AutoDetectChangesEnabled = false;

                entityFather.BulkInsertResult = false;
                var fileEntity = context.Set<TFather>().Add(entityFather);
                context.SaveChanges();

                int count = 0;

                //avoids an issue with recreating context: EF duplicates the first commit block of data at the end of transaction!!
                context = MyDbContext.AddToContext<TChild>(context, null, 0, 1, true);

                foreach (var entityToInsert in entities)
                {
                    ++count;
                    entityToInsert.EntityFatherRefId = fileEntity.Id;
                    context = MyDbContext.AddToContext<TChild>(context, entityToInsert, count, 100, true);
                }

                entityFather.BulkInsertResult = true;
                context.Set<TFather>().Add(fileEntity);
                context.Entry<TFather>(fileEntity).State = EntityState.Modified;

                context.SaveChanges();
            }
            finally
            {
                if (context != null)
                    context.Dispose();
            }

            scope.Complete();
        }

    }

}

仅用于示例目的的接口：

public interface IEntityChild {

    //some properties ...

    int EntityFatherRefId { get; set; }

}

public interface IEntityFather {

    int Id { get; set; }
    bool BulkInsertResult { get; set; }
}

db上下文中，我将解决方案的各个元素实现为静态方法：

public class MyDbContext : DbContext
{

    public string ConnectionString { get; set; }


    public MyDbContext(string nameOrConnectionString)
    : base(nameOrConnectionString)
    {
        Database.SetInitializer<MyDbContext>(null);
        ConnectionString = Database.Connection.ConnectionString;
    }


    /// <summary>
    /// Creates a TransactionScope raising timeout transaction to 30 minutes
    /// </summary>
    /// <param name="_isolationLevel"></param>
    /// <param name="timeout"></param>
    /// <remarks>
    /// It is possible to set isolation-level and timeout to different values. Pay close attention managing these 2 transactions working parameters.
    /// <para>Default TransactionScope values for isolation-level and timeout are the following:</para>
    /// <para>Default isolation-level is "Serializable"</para>
    /// <para>Default timeout ranges between 1 minute (default value if not specified a timeout) to max 10 minute (if not changed by code or updating max-timeout machine.config value)</para>
    /// </remarks>
    public static TransactionScope CreateTransactionScope(IsolationLevel _isolationLevel = IsolationLevel.Serializable, TimeSpan? timeout = null)
    {
        SetTransactionManagerField("_cachedMaxTimeout", true);
        SetTransactionManagerField("_maximumTimeout", timeout ?? TimeSpan.FromMinutes(30));

        var transactionOptions = new TransactionOptions();
        transactionOptions.IsolationLevel = _isolationLevel;
        transactionOptions.Timeout = TransactionManager.MaximumTimeout;
        return new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required, transactionOptions);
    }

    private static void SetTransactionManagerField(string fieldName, object value)
    {
        typeof(TransactionManager).GetField(fieldName, BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Static).SetValue(null, value);
    }


    /// <summary>
    /// Adds a generic entity to a given context allowing commit on large block of data and improving performance to support db bulk-insert operations based on Entity Framework
    /// </summary>
    /// <typeparam name="T"></typeparam>
    /// <param name="context"></param>
    /// <param name="entity"></param>
    /// <param name="count"></param>
    /// <param name="commitCount">defines the block of data size</param>
    /// <param name="recreateContext"></param>
    /// <returns></returns>
    public static MyDbContext AddToContext<T>(MyDbContext context, T entity, int count, int commitCount, bool recreateContext) where T : class
    {
        if (entity != null)
            context.Set<T>().Add(entity);

        if (count % commitCount == 0)
        {
            context.SaveChanges();
            if (recreateContext)
            {
                var contextConnectionString = context.ConnectionString;
                context.Dispose();
                context = new MyDbContext(contextConnectionString);
                context.Configuration.AutoDetectChangesEnabled = false;
            }
        }

        return context;
    }
}

我对上面的@Slauma示例进行了一个通用扩展；

public static class DataExtensions
{
    public static DbContext AddToContext<T>(this DbContext context, object entity, int count, int commitCount, bool recreateContext, Func<DbContext> contextCreator)
    {
        context.Set(typeof(T)).Add((T)entity);

        if (count % commitCount == 0)
        {
            context.SaveChanges();
            if (recreateContext)
            {
                context.Dispose();
                context = contextCreator.Invoke();
                context.Configuration.AutoDetectChangesEnabled = false;
            }
        }
        return context;
    }
}

用法：

public void AddEntities(List<YourEntity> entities)
{
    using (var transactionScope = new TransactionScope())
    {
        DbContext context = new YourContext();
        int count = 0;
        foreach (var entity in entities)
        {
            ++count;
            context = context.AddToContext<TenancyNote>(entity, count, 100, true,
                () => new YourContext());
        }
        context.SaveChanges();
        transactionScope.Complete();
    }
}

是的，SqlBulkUpdate确实是这类任务最快的工具。我想在.NETCore中找到“最省力”的通用方法，所以我最终使用了MarcGravell的优秀库FastMember，并为实体框架DB上下文编写了一个小小的扩展方法。工作速度极快：

using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using FastMember;
using Microsoft.Data.SqlClient;
using Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore;

namespace Services.Extensions
{
    public static class DbContextExtensions
    {
        public static void BulkCopyToServer<T>(this DbContext db, IEnumerable<T> collection)
        {
            var messageEntityType = db.Model.FindEntityType(typeof(T));

            var tableName = messageEntityType.GetSchema() + "." + messageEntityType.GetTableName();
            var tableColumnMappings = messageEntityType.GetProperties()
                .ToDictionary(p => p.PropertyInfo.Name, p => p.GetColumnName());

            using (var connection = new SqlConnection(db.Database.GetDbConnection().ConnectionString))
            using (var bulkCopy = new SqlBulkCopy(connection))
            {
                foreach (var (field, column) in tableColumnMappings)
                {
                    bulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add(field, column);
                }

                using (var reader = ObjectReader.Create(collection, tableColumnMappings.Keys.ToArray()))
                {
                    bulkCopy.DestinationTableName = tableName;
                    connection.Open();
                    bulkCopy.WriteToServer(reader);
                    connection.Close();
                }
            }
        }
    }
}

我同意亚当·拉基斯的观点。SqlBulkCopy是将批量记录从一个数据源传输到另一数据源的最快方法。我用这个复制了20K张唱片，只用了不到3秒钟。看看下面的例子。

public static void InsertIntoMembers(DataTable dataTable)
{           
    using (var connection = new SqlConnection(@"data source=;persist security info=True;user id=;password=;initial catalog=;MultipleActiveResultSets=True;App=EntityFramework"))
    {
        SqlTransaction transaction = null;
        connection.Open();
        try
        {
            transaction = connection.BeginTransaction();
            using (var sqlBulkCopy = new SqlBulkCopy(connection, SqlBulkCopyOptions.TableLock, transaction))
            {
                sqlBulkCopy.DestinationTableName = "Members";
                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("Firstname", "Firstname");
                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("Lastname", "Lastname");
                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("DOB", "DOB");
                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("Gender", "Gender");
                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("Email", "Email");

                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("Address1", "Address1");
                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("Address2", "Address2");
                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("Address3", "Address3");
                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("Address4", "Address4");
                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("Postcode", "Postcode");

                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("MobileNumber", "MobileNumber");
                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("TelephoneNumber", "TelephoneNumber");

                sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add("Deleted", "Deleted");

                sqlBulkCopy.WriteToServer(dataTable);
            }
            transaction.Commit();
        }
        catch (Exception)
        {
            transaction.Rollback();
        }

    }
}