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.

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.

@Keith

安全?为什么scprocs会更安全?

存储过程提供了抵御SQL注入攻击的内在保护。

然而，您并没有完全受到保护，因为您仍然可以编写容易受到此类攻击的存储过程(即存储过程中的动态SQL)。

对于Microsoft SQL Server，您应该尽可能使用存储过程来帮助执行计划缓存和重用。为什么要优化计划重用?因为生成执行计划的成本相当高。

Although the caching and reuse of execution plans for ad-hoc queries has improved significantly in later editions of SQL server (especially 2005 and 2008) there are still far fewer issues with plan reuse when dealing with stored procedures than there are for ad-hoc queries. For example, SQL server will only re-use an execution plan if the plan text matches exactly - right down to comments and white space, for example, if each of the following lines of SQL were to be executed independently, none of them would use the same execution plan:

SELECT MyColumn FROM MyTable WHERE id = @id
select MyColumn from MyTable WHERE id = @id
SELECT MyColumn  FROM MyTable WHERE id = @id
SELECT MyColumn FROM MyTable WHERE id = @id -- "some comment"
SELECT MyColumn FROM MyTable WHERE id = @id -- "some other comment"

除此之外,如果你不显式地指定类型的参数然后有一个好的机会,SQL Server可能出错,例如如果您执行上面的查询与输入4,然后用@ id查询SQL Server将parametrise SMALLINT(或可能是一个非常小的整数),所以如果你然后执行相同的查询@ id的说4000,SQL Server将parametrise INT,而不会重用相同的缓存。

我认为还有其他一些问题，老实说，大多数问题都可以解决——特别是在SQL Server的后续版本中，但是存储过程通常会提供更多的控制。

@Terrapin - scprocs同样容易受到注射攻击。正如我所说:

总是参数化所有的查询-永远不要内联用户输入的东西，你会没事的。

这适用于sprocs和动态Sql。

我不确定不重新编译你的应用程序是一个优势。我的意思是，在重新上线之前，您已经针对该代码(应用程序和DB)运行了单元测试。

@Guy -是的，你是对的，sproc确实让你控制应用程序用户，这样他们就只能执行sproc，而不是底层的操作。

我的问题是:如果所有人都通过你的应用程序访问它，使用连接和用户只有有限的更新/插入权限等，这个额外的级别是否增加了安全性或额外的管理?

我的观点是后者。如果他们已经破坏了您的应用程序，可以重新编写它，那么他们还有很多其他的攻击可以使用。

如果动态内联代码，Sql注入仍然可以针对这些spprocs执行，所以黄金法则仍然适用，所有用户输入必须始终参数化。

我对存储过程的投票;作为接近数据的抽象层，集合高效，可被许多“客户端”(客户端语言)重用。T-SQL语言有点原始(我猜这是SO的大多数c#人都接触过的)，但Oracle的PL/SQL与任何现代编程语言不相上下。

至于版本控制，只需将存储过程代码放在版本控制下的文本文件中，然后运行脚本在数据库中创建procs。