which one is faster execute reader, scalar, execute non query ?

Categories >> Software >> Microsoft Related >> ASP.NET
Suggest New Category

which one is faster execute reader, scalar, execute non
query ?

Question Posted / manoj dagar

18 Answers
34674 Views
Intiger, Minecode, I also Faced
E-Mail Answers

Answers were Sorted based on User's Feedback

which one is faster execute reader, scalar, execute non query ?..

Answer / satish v itagi

ExecuteNonQuery is used to inserts, updates, deletes.
ExecuteScaler is used to return values at a stretch; and
can do data modifications too.
ExecuteReader is forward only reading of row by row.

The number of readers that can be open at a time has
limitation (255)

Execute Scaler has no such restriction. You can use
sqlparameters (output) to get more than one field value,
you can use multiple queries to get more than one result.

Because of less overheads, ExecuteReader has a slight
performance advantage but has limitations.

Do not forget to close Readers!

Is This Answer Correct ?

4 Yes

1 No

which one is faster execute reader, scalar, execute non query ?..

Answer / kriss

Execue reader

Is This Answer Correct ?

2 Yes

0 No

which one is faster execute reader, scalar, execute non query ?..

Answer / anirudh g

Scalar will be faster that the execute reader and execute
non query. As scalar only fetch one column single row.
Whereas execute reader may return numbers of record and
though non-query will not return any records it will take
time to identify the data types to validate be4 inserting
the data

Is This Answer Correct ?

2 Yes

0 No

which one is faster execute reader, scalar, execute non query ?..

Answer / kamlesh sharma

most of the above answers are wrong

write answer is execute reader

Is This Answer Correct ?

5 Yes

4 No

which one is faster execute reader, scalar, execute non query ?..

Answer / xc v

execute reader

Is This Answer Correct ?

1 Yes

0 No

which one is faster execute reader, scalar, execute non query ?..

Answer / peter

What is faster:

ExecuteNonQuery("INSERT INTO...; INSERT INTO...; INSERT
INTO");

or

ExecuteNonQuery("INSERT INTO...")
ExecuteNonQuery("INSERT INTO...")
ExecuteNonQuery("INSERT INTO...")

I hope you see my point. Of course it is not a matter of
only three inserts, but maybe 200 - and then I would like
to know if I can save time by adding the INSERT-strings to
one big string and only fire off one ExecuteNonQuery.

I was thinking of coding a test to check, but if some of
you have already done this or just know which is faster,
please let me know.

Thanks