Dynamic SQL - EXEC(@SQL) versus EXEC SP_EXECUTESQL(@SQL)

What are the real world pros and cons of executing a dynamic SQL command in a stored procedure in SQL Server using

EXEC (@SQL)

versus

EXEC SP_EXECUTESQL @SQL

?

sp_executesql is more likely to promote query plan reuse. When using sp_executesql, parameters are explicitly identified in the calling signature. This excellent article descibes this process.

The oft cited reference for many aspects of dynamic sql is Erland Sommarskog's must read: "The Curse and Blessings of Dynamic SQL".

The big thing about SP_EXECUTESQL is that it allows you to create parameterized queries which is very good if you care about SQL injection.

Microsoft's Using sp_executesql article recommends using sp_executesql instead of execute statement.

Because this stored procedure supports parameter substitution, sp_executesql is more versatile than EXECUTE; and because sp_executesql generates execution plans that are more likely to be reused by SQL Server, sp_executesql is more efficient than EXECUTE.

So, the take away: Do not use execute statement. Use sp_executesql.

I would always use sp_executesql these days, all it really is is a wrapper for EXEC which handles parameters & variables.

However do not forget about OPTION RECOMPILE when tuning queries on very large databases, especially where you have data spanned over more than one database and are using a CONSTRAINT to limit index scans.

Unless you use OPTION RECOMPILE, SQL server will attempt to create a "one size fits all" execution plan for your query, and will run a full index scan each time it is run.

This is much less efficient than a seek, and means it is potentially scanning entire indexes which are constrained to ranges which you are not even querying :@