被CLR存储过程preferred了在SQL 2005+ TSQL存储过程？ [英] Are CLR stored procedures preferred over TSQL stored procedures in SQL 2005+?

问题描述

我目前的看法是没有，preFER的Transact SQL存储过程，因为他们是一个更轻的重量和（可能）更高性能的选择，而CLR过程允许开发人员起床各种恶作剧。

My current view is no, prefer Transact SQL stored procedures because they are a lighter weight and (possibly) higher performing option, while CLR procedures allow developers to get up to all sorts of mischief.

不过最近，我需要调试一些很写得不好TSQL存储的特效。像往常一样，我发现了很多的问题，是由于不具有真正的TSQL体验原开发商的开发者，他们是ASP.NET / C＃的重点。

However recently I have needed to debug some very poorly written TSQL stored procs. As usual I found many of the problems due to the original developer developer having no real TSQL experience, they were ASP.NET / C# focused.

因此​​，使用CLR过程将首先提供一个更熟悉的工具集，这种类型的开发者，其次，调试和测试设备更强大（如Visual Studio中，而不是SQL Management Studio中）。

So, using CLR procedures would firstly provide a much more familiar toolset to this type of developer, and secondly, the debugging and testing facilities are more powerful (ie Visual Studio instead of SQL Management Studio).

我会听取你的经验，因为它是看起来它不是一个简单的选择很感兴趣。

I'd be very interested in hearing your experience as it's seems it is not a simple choice.

推荐答案

有两个写得很好，深思熟虑出来的T-SQL和CLR的地方。如果某些功能不频繁调用，如果它需要在SQL Server 2000扩展程序，CLR可能是一种选择。还运行像计算旁边的数据可能是有吸引力的。但是，扔在新的技术解决不好的程序员听起来像一个坏主意。

There are places for both well-written, well-thought-out T-SQL and CLR. If some function is not called frequently and if it required extended procedures in SQL Server 2000, CLR may be an option. Also running things like calculation right next to the data may be appealing. But solving bad programmers by throwing in new technology sounds like a bad idea.

这篇关于被CLR存储过程preferred了在SQL 2005+ TSQL存储过程？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！