This issue has been controversial for a long time. We can still see that it is well-known because it does not use stored procedures, and sometimes even reaches the level of personal belief. Technical Community Let's take a look at the previous heated discussions. By the way, let's talk about related things. 1," Benefits of using Stored Procedures "-- http://topic.csdn.net/u/20110218/15/4c5f0fe6-ce49-4c39-9e1b-0df378618d7a.html I am an avid storage process school. I have posted more than 300 replies. I have heard a lot of voices about study, approval, questioning, and opposition, and many of my replies have been deleted by the Administrator; 2, "storage process ORM competition", the original address: http://archive.cnblogs.com/a/2010672/ The author concluded that the stored procedure is the most efficient, but there were a lot of questions and objections in less than a day, which made the topic different from the original topic and did not know what was going on,
The author deleted the original text.But in the whiteness snapshot can also find: http://cache.baidu.com/C? M = listen & P = 8b2a9559c8981ef234bd9b7f1b & User = Baidu & fm = SC & query = % B4 % E6 % B4 % A2 % B9 % fd % B3 % CC + ORM + % D0 % a7 % C2 % Ca + % B1 % C8 % C6 % B4 & qid = b36ff23904930b5b & p1 = 3 3, "ORM hard injury" -- http://www.cnblogs.com/Barton131420/archive/2007/01/07/613955.html Author'sArticleConclusion (not all conclusions ): After Orm, the original superb SQL skills became useless, making people very lost, but this is not the fault of ORM. It is easy to mislead people to look at the title. It is recommended that you take a closer look at the text and the following replies, which is quite in-depth.
Conclusion I believe that after reading the above three representative discussion articles, you will be aware of the storage process, database migration, Orm, and "efficiency ", I have my own opinions on cost and other issues. If you want to tell me, please reply below. Thank you!
