[POSTGRESQL的新解决方案]嘿，我知道这是一篇很老的文章，但我最近遇到了类似的问题，但我们使用的是Postgresql。我想使用有效的膨胀剂，但结果很难。我在这个数据库上找不到合适的免费库。我只找到了这个助手：https://bytefish.de/blog/postgresql_bulk_insert/也在Nuget上。我编写了一个小映射器，它以实体框架的方式自动映射财产：

public static PostgreSQLCopyHelper<T> CreateHelper<T>(string schemaName, string tableName)
        {
            var helper = new PostgreSQLCopyHelper<T>("dbo", "\"" + tableName + "\"");
            var properties = typeof(T).GetProperties();
            foreach(var prop in properties)
            {
                var type = prop.PropertyType;
                if (Attribute.IsDefined(prop, typeof(KeyAttribute)) || Attribute.IsDefined(prop, typeof(ForeignKeyAttribute)))
                    continue;
                switch (type)
                {
                    case Type intType when intType == typeof(int) || intType == typeof(int?):
                        {
                            helper = helper.MapInteger("\"" + prop.Name + "\"",  x => (int?)typeof(T).GetProperty(prop.Name).GetValue(x, null));
                            break;
                        }
                    case Type stringType when stringType == typeof(string):
                        {
                            helper = helper.MapText("\"" + prop.Name + "\"", x => (string)typeof(T).GetProperty(prop.Name).GetValue(x, null));
                            break;
                        }
                    case Type dateType when dateType == typeof(DateTime) || dateType == typeof(DateTime?):
                        {
                            helper = helper.MapTimeStamp("\"" + prop.Name + "\"", x => (DateTime?)typeof(T).GetProperty(prop.Name).GetValue(x, null));
                            break;
                        }
                    case Type decimalType when decimalType == typeof(decimal) || decimalType == typeof(decimal?):
                        {
                            helper = helper.MapMoney("\"" + prop.Name + "\"", x => (decimal?)typeof(T).GetProperty(prop.Name).GetValue(x, null));
                            break;
                        }
                    case Type doubleType when doubleType == typeof(double) || doubleType == typeof(double?):
                        {
                            helper = helper.MapDouble("\"" + prop.Name + "\"", x => (double?)typeof(T).GetProperty(prop.Name).GetValue(x, null));
                            break;
                        }
                    case Type floatType when floatType == typeof(float) || floatType == typeof(float?):
                        {
                            helper = helper.MapReal("\"" + prop.Name + "\"", x => (float?)typeof(T).GetProperty(prop.Name).GetValue(x, null));
                            break;
                        }
                    case Type guidType when guidType == typeof(Guid):
                        {
                            helper = helper.MapUUID("\"" + prop.Name + "\"", x => (Guid)typeof(T).GetProperty(prop.Name).GetValue(x, null));
                            break;
                        }
                }
            }
            return helper;
        }

我使用它的方式如下（我有一个名为“承诺”的实体）：

var undertakingHelper = BulkMapper.CreateHelper<Model.Undertaking>("dbo", nameof(Model.Undertaking));
undertakingHelper.SaveAll(transaction.UnderlyingTransaction.Connection as Npgsql.NpgsqlConnection, undertakingsToAdd));

我展示了一个事务的示例，但它也可以通过从上下文中检索到的正常连接来完成。undertakingsToAdd是普通实体记录的枚举，我想将其批量插入数据库。

这个解决方案，我经过几个小时的研究和尝试后得到的，正如你所期望的那样，速度更快，最终易于使用和免费！我真的建议你使用这个解决方案，不仅因为上面提到的原因，而且因为它是唯一一个我对Postgresql本身没有问题的解决方案，许多其他解决方案都可以完美地工作，例如SqlServer。

这种组合可以很好地提高速度。

context.Configuration.AutoDetectChangesEnabled = false;
context.Configuration.ValidateOnSaveEnabled = false;

使用SqlBulkCopy：

void BulkInsert(GpsReceiverTrack[] gpsReceiverTracks)
{
    if (gpsReceiverTracks == null)
    {
        throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(gpsReceiverTracks));
    }

    DataTable dataTable = new DataTable("GpsReceiverTracks");
    dataTable.Columns.Add("ID", typeof(int));
    dataTable.Columns.Add("DownloadedTrackID", typeof(int));
    dataTable.Columns.Add("Time", typeof(TimeSpan));
    dataTable.Columns.Add("Latitude", typeof(double));
    dataTable.Columns.Add("Longitude", typeof(double));
    dataTable.Columns.Add("Altitude", typeof(double));

    for (int i = 0; i < gpsReceiverTracks.Length; i++)
    {
        dataTable.Rows.Add
        (
            new object[]
            {
                    gpsReceiverTracks[i].ID,
                    gpsReceiverTracks[i].DownloadedTrackID,
                    gpsReceiverTracks[i].Time,
                    gpsReceiverTracks[i].Latitude,
                    gpsReceiverTracks[i].Longitude,
                    gpsReceiverTracks[i].Altitude
            }
        );
    }

    string connectionString = (new TeamTrackerEntities()).Database.Connection.ConnectionString;
    using (var connection = new SqlConnection(connectionString))
    {
        connection.Open();
        using (var transaction = connection.BeginTransaction())
        {
            using (var sqlBulkCopy = new SqlBulkCopy(connection, SqlBulkCopyOptions.TableLock, transaction))
            {
                sqlBulkCopy.DestinationTableName = dataTable.TableName;
                foreach (DataColumn column in dataTable.Columns)
                {
                    sqlBulkCopy.ColumnMappings.Add(column.ColumnName, column.ColumnName);
                }

                sqlBulkCopy.WriteToServer(dataTable);
            }
            transaction.Commit();
        }
    }

    return;
}

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();
        }

    }
}

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