将SQL保存在c#源代码或Stored Procs中有哪些优点/缺点?我一直在和一个朋友讨论这个问题,我们正在做一个开源项目(c# ASP。网论坛)。目前,大多数数据库访问都是通过在c#中构建内联SQL并调用SQL Server DB来完成的。所以我在试着确定,对于这个特定的项目,哪个是最好的。
到目前为止,我有:
in Code的优点:
更容易维护-不需要运行SQL脚本来更新查询 更容易移植到另一个DB -没有pros到移植
存储Procs的优点:
性能 安全
将SQL保存在c#源代码或Stored Procs中有哪些优点/缺点?我一直在和一个朋友讨论这个问题,我们正在做一个开源项目(c# ASP。网论坛)。目前,大多数数据库访问都是通过在c#中构建内联SQL并调用SQL Server DB来完成的。所以我在试着确定,对于这个特定的项目,哪个是最好的。
到目前为止,我有:
in Code的优点:
更容易维护-不需要运行SQL脚本来更新查询 更容易移植到另一个DB -没有pros到移植
存储Procs的优点:
性能 安全
当前回答
我更喜欢使用O/R映射器,如LLBLGen Pro。
它为您提供了相对轻松的数据库可移植性,允许您使用强类型对象用与应用程序相同的语言编写数据库访问代码,并且在我看来,允许您更灵活地处理所拉回的数据。
实际上,能够使用强类型对象是使用O/R Mapper的充分理由。
其他回答
存储过程。
如果出现错误或者逻辑稍有变化,您不必重新编译项目。此外,它允许从不同的来源访问,而不仅仅是在项目中编写查询的一个地方。
我不认为维护存储过程更难,你不应该直接在数据库中编写它们,而应该先在单独的文件中编写,然后你可以在任何你需要设置的DB上运行它们。
Definitely easier to maintain if you put it in a stored procedure. If there's difficult logic involved that will potentially change in the future it is definitely a good idea to put it in the database when you have multiple clients connecting. For example I'm working on an application right now that has an end user web interface and an administrative desktop application, both of which share a database (obviously) and I'm trying to keep as much logic on the database as possible. This is a perfect example of the DRY principle.
CON
我发现在存储过程中进行大量的处理会使您的DB服务器在扩展您的行为时成为一个单一的不灵活点。
然而,如果您有多个服务器运行您的代码,那么在您的程序中进行所有这些处理而不是sql-server,可能会允许您进行更多的扩展。当然,这并不适用于只进行正常获取或更新的存储procs,而是适用于执行更多处理(如在数据集上循环)的存储procs。
PROS
Performance for what it may be worth (avoids query parsing by DB driver / plan recreation etc) Data manipulation is not embedded in the C/C++/C# code which means I have less low level code to look through. SQL is less verbose and easier to look through when listed separately. Due to the separation folks are able to find and reuse SQL code much easier. Its easier to change things when schema changes - you just have to give the same output to the code and it will work just fine Easier to port to a different database. I can list individual permissions on my stored procedures and control access at that level too. I can profile my data query/ persistence code separate from my data transformation code. I can implement changeable conditions in my stored procedure and it would be easy to customize at a customer site. It becomes easier to use some automated tools to convert my schema and statements together rather than when it is embedded inside my code where I would have to hunt them down. Ensuring best practices for data access is easier when you have all your data access code inside a single file - I can check for queries that access the non performant table or that which uses a higher level of serialization or select *'s in the code etc. It becomes easier to find schema changes / data manipulation logic changes when all of it is listed in one file. It becomes easier to do search and replace edits on SQL when they are in the same place e.g. change / add transaction isolation statements for all stored procs. I and the DBA guy find that having a separate SQL file is easier / convenient when the DBA has to review my SQL stuff. Lastly you don't have to worry about SQL injection attacks because some lazy member of your team did not use parametrized queries when using embedded sqls.
我非常支持代码而不是SPROC。第一个原因是保持代码紧密耦合,第二个原因是源代码控制的便利性,而不需要大量自定义实用程序。
在我们的DAL中,如果我们有非常复杂的SQL语句,我们通常将它们作为资源文件,并在需要时更新它们(这也可以是一个单独的程序集,并在每个db中交换,等等……)
这使得我们的代码和sql调用存储在同一个版本控制中,而不会“忘记”运行一些外部应用程序进行更新。
较小的日志
存储过程的另一个小优点是没有提到的:当涉及到SQL流量时,基于sp的数据访问产生的流量要少得多。当您监视流量进行分析和分析时,这一点变得非常重要——日志将会更小且可读。