很明显，使用存储过程比在代码中构造SQL有几个优点。

代码实现和SQL变得彼此独立。 代码更容易阅读。 写一次用多次。 修改一次 不需要向程序员提供关于数据库的内部细节。等等，等等。

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.

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。

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。

我在其他答案中没有发现的一点是:

如果在您的环境中，数据库及其模式是体系结构的核心，应用程序的作用更小，那么更多地使用存储过程可能是有意义的，这可能有助于为所有需要访问DB的应用程序提供一个级别基础，从而减少代码重复(例如，您确定所有访问DB的应用程序都是用c#或其他。net语言编写的吗?)

另一方面，如果应用程序具有更核心的角色，而DB更多地充当应用程序的备份存储，那么减少存储过程的使用并通过提供一个公共持久性层(可能基于ORM工具/框架)来减少代码重复可能是明智的。

在这两种情况下，重要的是不要将DB视为存储过程的方便存储库。将它们保存在版本控制系统的源文件中，并尽可能地尝试自动化它们的部署(这实际上对所有与模式相关的构件都有效)。