对于SQL Server 2008，可以使用表值参数。这有点麻烦，但可以说比我的其他方法更干净。

首先，您必须创建一个类型

CREATE TYPE dbo.TagNamesTableType AS TABLE ( Name nvarchar(50) )

然后，你的ADO。NET代码如下所示:

string[] tags = new string[] { "ruby", "rails", "scruffy", "rubyonrails" };
cmd.CommandText = "SELECT Tags.* FROM Tags JOIN @tagNames as P ON Tags.Name = P.Name";

// value must be IEnumerable<SqlDataRecord>
cmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@tagNames", tags.AsSqlDataRecord("Name")).SqlDbType = SqlDbType.Structured;
cmd.Parameters["@tagNames"].TypeName = "dbo.TagNamesTableType";

// Extension method for converting IEnumerable<string> to IEnumerable<SqlDataRecord>
public static IEnumerable<SqlDataRecord> AsSqlDataRecord(this IEnumerable<string> values, string columnName) {
    if (values == null || !values.Any()) return null; // Annoying, but SqlClient wants null instead of 0 rows
    var firstRecord = values.First();
    var metadata= new SqlMetaData(columnName, SqlDbType.NVarChar, 50); //50 as per SQL Type
    return values.Select(v => 
    {
       var r = new SqlDataRecord(metadata);
       r.SetValues(v);
       return r;
    });
}

更新 根据@Doug

请尽量避免var metadata = SqlMetaData。InferFromValue (firstRecord columnName);

它设置了第一个值的长度，所以如果第一个值是3个字符，那么它设置的最大长度为3，如果超过3个字符，其他记录将被截断。

因此，请尝试使用:var metadata= new SqlMetaData(columnName, SqlDbType. xml)。NVarChar maxLen);

注意:最大长度为-1。

我使用了一个更简洁的投票结果:

List<SqlParameter> parameters = tags.Select((s, i) => new SqlParameter("@tag" + i.ToString(), SqlDbType.NVarChar(50)) { Value = s}).ToList();

var whereCondition = string.Format("tags in ({0})", String.Join(",",parameters.Select(s => s.ParameterName)));

它循环两次标记参数;但大多数时候这并不重要(它不会成为你的瓶颈;如果是，展开循环)。

如果你真的对性能感兴趣，不想重复循环两次，这里有一个不太漂亮的版本:

var parameters = new List<SqlParameter>();
var paramNames = new List<string>();
for (var i = 0; i < tags.Length; i++)  
{
    var paramName = "@tag" + i;

    //Include size and set value explicitly (not AddWithValue)
    //Because SQL Server may use an implicit conversion if it doesn't know
    //the actual size.
    var p = new SqlParameter(paramName, SqlDbType.NVarChar(50) { Value = tags[i]; } 
    paramNames.Add(paramName);
    parameters.Add(p);
}

var inClause = string.Join(",", paramNames);

这是一个可重复使用的变化的解决方案在马克托罗特的优秀答案。

扩展方法:

public static class ParameterExtensions
{
    public static Tuple<string, SqlParameter[]> ToParameterTuple<T>(this IEnumerable<T> values)
    {
        var createName = new Func<int, string>(index => "@value" + index.ToString());
        var paramTuples = values.Select((value, index) => 
        new Tuple<string, SqlParameter>(createName(index), new SqlParameter(createName(index), value))).ToArray();
        var inClause = string.Join(",", paramTuples.Select(t => t.Item1));
        var parameters = paramTuples.Select(t => t.Item2).ToArray();
        return new Tuple<string, SqlParameter[]>(inClause, parameters);
    }
}

用法:

        string[] tags = {"ruby", "rails", "scruffy", "rubyonrails"};
        var paramTuple = tags.ToParameterTuple();
        var cmdText = $"SELECT * FROM Tags WHERE Name IN ({paramTuple.Item1})";

        using (var cmd = new SqlCommand(cmdText))
        {
            cmd.Parameters.AddRange(paramTuple.Item2);
        }

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。

这很恶心，但如果你保证至少有一个，你可以这样做:

SELECT ...
       ...
 WHERE tag IN( @tag1, ISNULL( @tag2, @tag1 ), ISNULL( @tag3, @tag1 ), etc. )

有IN('tag1'， 'tag2'， 'tag1'， 'tag1'， 'tag1')将很容易被SQL Server优化掉。另外，你可以直接搜索索引

请使用以下存储过程。它使用了一个自定义分割函数，可以在这里找到。

 create stored procedure GetSearchMachingTagNames 
    @PipeDelimitedTagNames varchar(max), 
    @delimiter char(1) 
    as  
    begin
         select * from Tags 
         where Name in (select data from [dbo].[Split](@PipeDelimitedTagNames,@delimiter) 
    end