存储过程。

如果出现错误或者逻辑稍有变化，您不必重新编译项目。此外，它允许从不同的来源访问，而不仅仅是在项目中编写查询的一个地方。

我不认为维护存储过程更难，你不应该直接在数据库中编写它们，而应该先在单独的文件中编写，然后你可以在任何你需要设置的DB上运行它们。

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.

我非常支持代码而不是SPROC。第一个原因是保持代码紧密耦合，第二个原因是源代码控制的便利性，而不需要大量自定义实用程序。

在我们的DAL中，如果我们有非常复杂的SQL语句，我们通常将它们作为资源文件，并在需要时更新它们(这也可以是一个单独的程序集，并在每个db中交换，等等……)

这使得我们的代码和sql调用存储在同一个版本控制中，而不会“忘记”运行一些外部应用程序进行更新。

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。

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。

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。