|
database
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stored Procedure AdvantagesAll
Can anyone advise me the performance advantages of using Stored Procedures vs. a normal SQL statement. Thanks D> Can anyone advise me the performance advantages of using Stored
D> Procedures vs. a normal SQL statement. None, unless the version of sql server is less than 7. Vadim Rapp do you mean inside SQL (like in query analyzer)
or from a client (like VB) ? David wrote: Show quote > All > > Can anyone advise me the performance advantages of using Stored Procedures > vs. a normal SQL statement. > > Thanks Hi
Check out the answer to the question "Are Stored Procedures Being Used Whenever Possible?" in http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sql_server_performance_audit8.asp John Show quote "David" wrote: > All > > Can anyone advise me the performance advantages of using Stored Procedures > vs. a normal SQL statement. > > Thanks On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 17:04:02 -0800, "David"
<Da***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote: >Can anyone advise me the performance advantages of using Stored Procedures As a coding thing, it separates the SQL from the caller's source,>vs. a normal SQL statement. let's a DBA make changes if some part of the schema changes without affecting the source, provides a single point of change, etc. Sure, you can also do that in the source C# or Java or whatnot, but it's still a handy feature sometimes. It allows the SQL to be developed, tested, and encapsulated separately. Since compilation plans are cached whether you us dynamic SQL or an SP, the difference between the two is not black and white, but again, as the code gets large, there are increasing benefits to invoking it via SP. Even the parse, much less the compilation/optimization, is very slow (does it have to be, not necessarily, but it is). In fact, there are sometimes advantages to using dynamic SQL, in that there is always an issue with SPs about what plan to use depending on the parameters for a specific call. These are better analyzed by a complete parse with constants, I think (does anyone know?) than with the "parameter sniffing" that SQLServer does with an SP. But since SQLServer will try to use a cached plan, well, the SQL may not be all that dynamic after all, may be internally equivalent to an SP. And then there are prepared statements, an old-style middle ground. I recommend using SPs pretty much wherever possible, in general it avoids trouble, it seems to me. HTH, J. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||