Roy
Sun May 04 16:19:00 CDT 2008
I don't think it is the List.Add(...). I have tested by replacing the list
with an array and it does not affect. I think the bottleneck is the copy of
the bytes from data reader to a local. I don't know which is the way for best
performance for a data reader column with underlining varbinary(max) type.
"Mary Chipman [MSFT]" wrote:
> I don't know where the bottleneck is -- possibly the list? This topic
> describes different coding techniques for retrieving varbinary(max)
> data:
>
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/a1904w6t(VS.80).aspx
>
> --Mary
>
> On Sat, 3 May 2008 19:45:00 -0700, Roy <Roy@discussions.microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I have a SqlDataReader dr returned from a SqlCommand. dr contains only one
> >column of 2000 varbinary(max) records (contains 24 bytes in my testing
> >case). The following code takes 1 second to
> >run. I would like to improve the performance. Any suggestions
> >
> >while (dr.Read())
> >{
> > list.Add(dr[0] as byte[]);
> >}
> >
> >where list is of List<byte[]>.
>