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。

我参加的Microsoft TechEd安全会议的建议之一是，通过存储过程进行所有调用，并拒绝直接访问表。这种方法被宣传为提供额外的安全性。我不确定仅仅为了安全性是否值得这样做，但如果您已经在使用存储过程，那么这样做也无妨。

我更喜欢把它们保存在代码中(使用ORM，而不是内联或特别)，这样它们就可以被源代码控制覆盖，而不必保存.sql文件。

此外，存储过程本身并不更安全。使用sproc可以像使用内联一样轻松地编写糟糕的查询。参数化内联查询与sproc一样安全。

在安全性方面，存储过程要安全得多。一些人认为，无论如何，所有的访问都将通过应用程序进行。许多人忘记了一件事，即大多数安全漏洞来自公司内部。想想有多少开发人员知道应用程序的“隐藏”用户名和密码?

此外，正如MatthieuF所指出的，由于应用程序(无论是在桌面服务器还是web服务器上)和数据库服务器之间的往返次数减少，性能可以得到很大的提高。

In my experience the abstraction of the data model through stored procedures also vastly improves maintainability. As someone who has had to maintain many databases in the past, it's such a relief when confronted with a required model change to be able to simply change a stored procedure or two and have the change be completely transparent to ALL outside applications. Many times your application isn't the only one pointed at a database - there are other applications, reporting solutions, etc. so tracking down all of those affected points can be a hassle with open access to the tables.

我还将在加分栏中加上检查，以使SQL编程掌握在专门的人员手中，并使sp更容易隔离和测试/优化代码。

我看到的一个缺点是，许多语言不允许传递表参数，因此传递未知的数据值可能很烦人，一些语言仍然无法处理从单个存储过程中检索多个结果集(尽管后者在这方面并不使sp比内联SQL差)。

@Keith

安全?为什么scprocs会更安全?

正如Komradekatz所建议的，您可以禁止访问表(对于连接到DB的用户名/密码组合)，而只允许SP访问。这样，如果有人获得了数据库的用户名和密码，他们可以执行SP，但不能访问表或数据库的任何其他部分。

(当然，执行scproc可以给他们所有他们需要的数据，但这将取决于可用的scproc。给他们访问表的权限，他们就能访问所有东西。)