下面是一种技术，用于重新创建查询字符串中使用的本地表。这样做可以消除所有解析问题。

字符串可以用任何语言构建。在本例中，我使用SQL，因为这是我试图解决的原始问题。我需要一种干净的方法来在一个字符串中传递表数据，以便稍后执行。

使用用户定义的类型是可选的。创建类型只创建一次，并且可以提前完成。否则，只需在字符串中的声明中添加一个完整的表类型。

通用模式易于扩展，可用于传递更复杂的表。

-- Create a user defined type for the list.
CREATE TYPE [dbo].[StringList] AS TABLE(
    [StringValue] [nvarchar](max) NOT NULL
)

-- Create a sample list using the list table type.
DECLARE @list [dbo].[StringList]; 
INSERT INTO @list VALUES ('one'), ('two'), ('three'), ('four')

-- Build a string in which we recreate the list so we can pass it to exec
-- This can be done in any language since we're just building a string.
DECLARE @str nvarchar(max);
SET @str = 'DECLARE @list [dbo].[StringList]; INSERT INTO @list VALUES '

-- Add all the values we want to the string. This would be a loop in C++.
SELECT @str = @str + '(''' + StringValue + '''),' FROM @list

-- Remove the trailing comma so the query is valid sql.
SET @str = substring(@str, 1, len(@str)-1)

-- Add a select to test the string.
SET @str = @str + '; SELECT * FROM @list;'

-- Execute the string and see we've pass the table correctly.
EXEC(@str)

在默认情况下，我将通过向IN条件传递一个表值函数(从字符串返回一个表)来实现这一点。

下面是UDF的代码(我从Stack Overflow的某个地方得到了它，我现在找不到源代码)

CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[Split] (@sep char(1), @s varchar(8000))
RETURNS table
AS
RETURN (
    WITH Pieces(pn, start, stop) AS (
      SELECT 1, 1, CHARINDEX(@sep, @s)
      UNION ALL
      SELECT pn + 1, stop + 1, CHARINDEX(@sep, @s, stop + 1)
      FROM Pieces
      WHERE stop > 0
    )
    SELECT 
      SUBSTRING(@s, start, CASE WHEN stop > 0 THEN stop-start ELSE 512 END) AS s
    FROM Pieces
  )

一旦你得到了这个，你的代码就会像这样简单:

select * from Tags 
where Name in (select s from dbo.split(';','ruby;rails;scruffy;rubyonrails'))
order by Count desc

除非你有一个长得离谱的字符串，否则这应该与表索引一起工作得很好。

如果需要，你可以把它插入一个临时表，索引它，然后运行一个连接…

可以将参数作为字符串传递

这是弦

DECLARE @tags

SET @tags = ‘ruby|rails|scruffy|rubyonrails’

select * from Tags 
where Name in (SELECT item from fnSplit(@tags, ‘|’))
order by Count desc

然后你所要做的就是将字符串作为1参数传递。

这是我使用的分裂函数。

CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[fnSplit](
    @sInputList VARCHAR(8000) -- List of delimited items
  , @sDelimiter VARCHAR(8000) = ',' -- delimiter that separates items
) RETURNS @List TABLE (item VARCHAR(8000))

BEGIN
DECLARE @sItem VARCHAR(8000)
WHILE CHARINDEX(@sDelimiter,@sInputList,0) <> 0
 BEGIN
 SELECT
  @sItem=RTRIM(LTRIM(SUBSTRING(@sInputList,1,CHARINDEX(@sDelimiter,@sInputList,0)-1))),
  @sInputList=RTRIM(LTRIM(SUBSTRING(@sInputList,CHARINDEX(@sDelimiter,@sInputList,0)+LEN(@sDelimiter),LEN(@sInputList))))

 IF LEN(@sItem) > 0
  INSERT INTO @List SELECT @sItem
 END

IF LEN(@sInputList) > 0
 INSERT INTO @List SELECT @sInputList -- Put the last item in
RETURN
END

如果你从。net调用，你可以使用Dapper dot net:

string[] names = new string[] {"ruby","rails","scruffy","rubyonrails"};
var tags = dataContext.Query<Tags>(@"
select * from Tags 
where Name in @names
order by Count desc", new {names});

这里是达普在思考，所以你不用思考。当然，类似的事情也可能发生在LINQ to SQL中:

string[] names = new string[] {"ruby","rails","scruffy","rubyonrails"};
var tags = from tag in dataContext.Tags
           where names.Contains(tag.Name)
           orderby tag.Count descending
           select tag;

在我看来，解决这个问题的最佳来源是这个网站上发布的内容:

Syscomments。Dinakar Nethi

CREATE FUNCTION dbo.fnParseArray (@Array VARCHAR(1000),@separator CHAR(1))
RETURNS @T Table (col1 varchar(50))
AS 
BEGIN
 --DECLARE @T Table (col1 varchar(50))  
 -- @Array is the array we wish to parse
 -- @Separator is the separator charactor such as a comma
 DECLARE @separator_position INT -- This is used to locate each separator character
 DECLARE @array_value VARCHAR(1000) -- this holds each array value as it is returned
 -- For my loop to work I need an extra separator at the end. I always look to the
 -- left of the separator character for each array value

 SET @array = @array + @separator

 -- Loop through the string searching for separtor characters
 WHILE PATINDEX('%' + @separator + '%', @array) <> 0 
 BEGIN
    -- patindex matches the a pattern against a string
    SELECT @separator_position = PATINDEX('%' + @separator + '%',@array)
    SELECT @array_value = LEFT(@array, @separator_position - 1)
    -- This is where you process the values passed.
    INSERT into @T VALUES (@array_value)    
    -- Replace this select statement with your processing
    -- @array_value holds the value of this element of the array
    -- This replaces what we just processed with and empty string
    SELECT @array = STUFF(@array, 1, @separator_position, '')
 END
 RETURN 
END

Use:

SELECT * FROM dbo.fnParseArray('a,b,c,d,e,f', ',')

致谢:Dinakar Nethi

I think this is a case when a static query is just not the way to go. Dynamically build the list for your in clause, escape your single quotes, and dynamically build SQL. In this case you probably won't see much of a difference with any method due to the small list, but the most efficient method really is to send the SQL exactly as it is written in your post. I think it is a good habit to write it the most efficient way, rather than to do what makes the prettiest code, or consider it bad practice to dynamically build SQL.

I have seen the split functions take longer to execute than the query themselves in many cases where the parameters get large. A stored procedure with table valued parameters in SQL 2008 is the only other option I would consider, although this will probably be slower in your case. TVP will probably only be faster for large lists if you are searching on the primary key of the TVP, because SQL will build a temporary table for the list anyway (if the list is large). You won't know for sure unless you test it.

I have also seen stored procedures that had 500 parameters with default values of null, and having WHERE Column1 IN (@Param1, @Param2, @Param3, ..., @Param500). This caused SQL to build a temp table, do a sort/distinct, and then do a table scan instead of an index seek. That is essentially what you would be doing by parameterizing that query, although on a small enough scale that it won't make a noticeable difference. I highly recommend against having NULL in your IN lists, as if that gets changed to a NOT IN it will not act as intended. You could dynamically build the parameter list, but the only obvious thing that you would gain is that the objects would escape the single quotes for you. That approach is also slightly slower on the application end since the objects have to parse the query to find the parameters. It may or may not be faster on SQL, as parameterized queries call sp_prepare, sp_execute for as many times you execute the query, followed by sp_unprepare.

重用存储过程或参数化查询的执行计划可能会提高性能，但它会将您锁定在由执行的第一个查询决定的执行计划中。在许多情况下，这对于后续查询可能不太理想。在您的情况下，重用执行计划可能是一个加分项，但它可能根本没有任何区别，因为示例是一个非常简单的查询。

悬崖笔记:

对于您的情况，您所做的任何事情，无论是使用列表中固定数量的项进行参数化(如果不使用则为空)，动态地构建带有或不带有参数的查询，还是使用带有表值参数的存储过程，都不会产生太大的区别。不过，我的一般建议如下:

你的case/简单查询很少参数:

动态SQL，如果测试显示更好的性能，可能会使用参数。

具有可重用执行计划的查询，通过简单地更改参数或如果查询很复杂则调用多次:

带有动态参数的SQL。

带有大列表的查询:

具有表值参数的存储过程。如果列表变化很大，则在存储过程上使用WITH RECOMPILE，或者简单地使用不带参数的动态SQL为每个查询生成新的执行计划。