你列出了2个procs的优点:

性能——不完全是。在Sql 2000或更高版本中，查询计划优化非常好，并被缓存。我相信甲骨文等公司也在做类似的事情。我不认为有什么理由再用scprocs来衡量业绩了。

安全?为什么scprocs会更安全?除非您有一个非常不安全的数据库，否则所有的访问都将来自dba或通过应用程序。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。

无论如何，这是性能的最佳实践。

Linq绝对是我现在进行一个新项目的方式。请看这篇类似的文章。

你的编程语言和应用程序框架可能是:

高级的，特别是与SQL相比 易于通过自动化流程进行版本和部署，特别是与SQL相比

如果这两个条件是两个，则跳过存储过程。

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.

Something that I haven't seen mentioned thus far: the people who know the database best aren't always the people that write the application code. Stored procedures give the database folks a way to interface with programmers that don't really want to learn that much about SQL. Large--and especially legacy--databases aren't the easiest things to completely understand, so programmers might just prefer a simple interface that gives them what they need: let the DBAs figure out how to join the 17 tables to make that happen.

话虽如此，用于编写存储过程的语言(PL/SQL就是一个臭名昭著的例子)是相当残酷的。它们通常不提供您在当今流行的命令式语言、OOP或函数式语言中看到的任何细节。认为COBOL。

因此，请坚持使用仅抽象了关系细节的存储过程，而不是那些包含业务逻辑的存储过程。

@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。)

I'm firmly on the side of stored procs assuming you don't cheat and use dynamic SQL in the stored proc. First, using stored procs allows the dba to set permissions at the stored proc level and not the table level. This is critical not only to combating SQL injection attacts but towards preventing insiders from directly accessing the database and changing things. This is a way to help prevent fraud. No database that contains personal information (SSNs, Credit card numbers, etc) or that in anyway creates financial transactions should ever be accessed except through strored procedures. If you use any other method you are leaving your database wide open for individuals in the company to create fake financial transactions or steal data that can be used for identity theft.

存储的proc也比从应用程序发送的SQL更容易维护和性能调优。它们还允许dba查看数据库结构更改对数据访问方式的影响。我从未遇到过允许动态访问数据库的优秀dba。