一時興起,測了一下LINQ To SQL的效能,
以100000筆資料的讀入來測試,為求平衡,特別以5次讀取之總值測試.
讀取方式 | 結果 |
With Un-Typed DataTable Load (use DataAdapter without Delete/Insert/Update assocation) | 5188 ms |
With LINQ To SQL | 4203 ms |
我很訝異LINQ To SQL的效能,居然呈現出比Un-Typed DataTable更快,雖然就理論上而言,
LINQ To SQL所產生的類別於成本上應比DataRow來得低,但這樣的差距能引起我的懷疑,
或許我尚有遺漏之處也說不定,待較有空時,審視一下LINQ To SQL的Fill機制,應能找到其
效能提升的證據.
列出部份測試的程式碼.
With UnTyped DataTable
static void TestUnTypedLoad()
{
SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection(DSPerformanceTest.Properties.Settings.Default.Northwind2ConnectionString);
DataTable table = new DataTable();
using (conn)
{
using(SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("SELECT * FROM TEST_TABLE",conn))
{
using (SqlDataAdapter adapter = new SqlDataAdapter(cmd))
{
adapter.Fill(table);
}
}
}
}
With LINQ to SQL
static void TestLoadWithLinq()
{
NorthwindDataContext context = new NorthwindDataContext();
var s = (from s1 in context.TEST_TABLEs select s1).ToList();
}