Why do people use linq to sql?

后端 未结 11 1141
轮回少年
轮回少年 2021-02-04 01:51

Given the premise:

  • There are competent sql programmers (correlary - writing sql queries are not an issue)
  • There are competent application developers (corr
相关标签:
11条回答
  • 2021-02-04 02:49

    It may be a case of convenience triumphing over performance. If you're programming at Facebook levels of uber-performance then you might think about every clock cycle but the simple truth is that the majority of applications don't need this attention and benefit from efficiencies in code maintenance and dev time (100k contractor vs. another $erver).

    That said, there's a case for outsourcing as much of the query processing from the DB box in very high scale systems, else the DB is the bottle neck and you need to shard or re-architect down the line. Costly.

    I think its fair to say that LINQ will scale better/easier both in terms of servers and from many core in that your LINQ codebase will get m-core for 'free' as soon as MS release C# 4.0.

    I do see your point in asking and as a non-ASP.NET dev just beginning a www project for the first time, I can't see the point of 80% of ASP.NET (themes, controls etc.) - it seems I need to learn more and code more than the HTML itself! -- again, I'm sure there's an good reason for it all.

    --- I haven't got the 50 pts to comment on the post I want to so I'm doing it here ---

    David B suggests that writing some SQL is all there is to getting the most out of SQL Server and that using query hints is the steering mechanism. The same task can be achieved in many different ways in SQL and many with 1000s of times the performance gain. I suggest reading Inside T-SQL Querying (Itzik Ben Gan). Over and over, Itzik shows how to rethink the query and use new commands to shrink the logical reads sometimes from thousands into less than ten.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-02-04 02:54

    Existing question/answers in the same vein/spirit:

    • Doesn't Linq to SQL miss the point? Aren't ORM-mappers (SubSonic, etc.) sub-optimal solutions?
    • LINQ-to-SQL vs stored procedures?
    • What's wrong with Linq to SQL?
    • Why do I need Stored Procedures when I have LINQ to SQL
    • If using LINQ to SQL is there any good reason to learn SQL queries/syntax anymore?
    • https://stackoverflow.com/questions/216569/are-the-days-of-the-stored-procedure-numbered

    I personally believe there's no right or wrong answer. It depends on what you're developing and how you're developing it. If you need razor-sharp performance, have an overly-complex data model, etc... skip the abstraction. If you feel the abstraction speeds up your development time, like the idea of capturing all application logic in a single codebase, etc... use it.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-02-04 02:54

    simple answer, there are two approaches: create exquisite Rube Goldberg contraptions, or just get the job done in a simple way. Many devs lean towards the former.

    Developers get bored easily, and would often personally enjoy doing things a harder way that seems to provide a certain intellectual beauty. Are you developing an app or writing a PhD? As my msft director used to yell in the hallways, "I don't want another research project!"

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-02-04 02:57

    The problem is that it is very rare for somewhere to have a competent SQL developer who likes writing SQL and wouldn't rather be doing something else. I would consider myself competent in SQL, I used to do all my data access layers with stored procs or parametrized queries. Trouble is that it takes ages and is dull. I'd rather be writing great applications than messing around with data access layers that essentially have a select, insert, update and delete SQL statement(or proc) repeated dozens of times for each data object.

    Linq-to-SQL takes away some of the repetitive nature. It has a tool to auto generate you business objects from your database schema, and it gives you a nice integrated query language that is compile time type verified and is in your code (Stored procs are a pain to source control neatly)

    I can write a DAL in Linq-to-sql several times faster than I can using plain SQL, stored procs or parametrized queries.

    If you want to maintain the use of stored procs both linq-to-sql and the EF both support the use of stored procs for all their data access, you just have to set up the appropriate mappings. So, you can still use your stored procs to log details and implement security if you want. We tend to opt for using windows auth, and use that to restrict access to each table for the various users, then we have a bunch of triggers on the tables that track details for audit purposes.

    Two things I will quickly note is that firstly, the entity framework seems to be getting more support from MS at the moment, and I suspect that will be considered the kind of default standard for the future in preference to linq-to-sql. Secondly, in .Net 3.5 the EF and linq-to-sql do not have very good support for n-tier disconnected apps. In both of them you kind of have to muck around with either serializing data contexts across your disconnected tiers, or manually detach and re-attach your data objects. This is much improved in the .net 4.0 though. Just something to consider depending on which version you have available to you.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-02-04 02:58

    For me, it takes a lot less time to write linq to sql code than it does to write a bunch of stored procedures. That's especially true when the design isn't finished, in that case I don't yet know how much of the work I want to do on C# objects, and how much I want to do in SQL.

    So, I can skip building datasets, I don't have to click click click to add queries, basically, linq to sql means I can change my code in less time.

    Also, as a big fan of Haskell, I can write lots of functional-style code with linq to sql and it just works.

    0 讨论(0)
提交回复
热议问题