Re: Pass-thru SQL performance vs Stored Proc
From: Max (maxl_at_msn.com)
Date: 01/13/05
- Next message: Reik: "Re: Fastest way to run DELETE on a large table"
- Previous message: Adam Machanic: "Re: Time Calculation Query"
- In reply to: Tim Mavers: "Pass-thru SQL performance vs Stored Proc"
- Next in thread: Tim Mavers: "Re: Pass-thru SQL performance vs Stored Proc"
- Reply: Tim Mavers: "Re: Pass-thru SQL performance vs Stored Proc"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 13 Jan 2005 07:04:14 -0800
You have your code right where it belongs.
Worse case is the stored procedures you write to do Dynamic SQL will
perform equally to building SQL dynamically in your application and
then executing it. Best case is you are able to maximize the benefits
of sp_executesql, thus every execution subsequent to the first
execution uses a cached plan that is optimal for the execution.
If you haven't, read up on sp_executesql; especially by searching this
group for advice freely given in previous posts.
With SQL 2005, this gets even more interesting because your stored
procedure could be a hook to a .NET assembly...
- Next message: Reik: "Re: Fastest way to run DELETE on a large table"
- Previous message: Adam Machanic: "Re: Time Calculation Query"
- In reply to: Tim Mavers: "Pass-thru SQL performance vs Stored Proc"
- Next in thread: Tim Mavers: "Re: Pass-thru SQL performance vs Stored Proc"
- Reply: Tim Mavers: "Re: Pass-thru SQL performance vs Stored Proc"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|