Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 778233
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 14, 20262026-05-14T19:43:55+00:00 2026-05-14T19:43:55+00:00

In .NET 4 and multicore environment, does the linq to sql datacontext object take

  • 0

In .NET 4 and multicore environment, does the linq to sql datacontext object take advantage of the new parallels if we use DataLoadOptions.LoadWith?

EDIT

I know linq to sql does not parallelize ordinary queries. What I want to know is when we specify DataLoadOption.LoadWith, does it use parallelization to perform the match between each entity and its sub entities?

Example:

using(MyDataContext context = new MyDataContext())
{
     DataLaodOptions options =new DataLoadOptions();
     options.LoadWith<Product>(p=>p.Category);
     return this.DataContext.Products.Where(p=>p.SomeCondition);
}

generates the following sql:

Select Id,Name from Categories
Select Id,Name, CategoryId from Products where p.SomeCondition

when all the products are created, will we have a

categories.ToArray();
Parallel.Foreach(products, p =>
{
    p.Category == categories.FirstOrDefault(c => c.Id == p.CategoryId);
});

or

categories.ToArray();
foreach(Product product in products)
{
    product.Category = categories.FirstOrDefault(c => c.Id == product.CategoryId);
}

?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-14T19:43:56+00:00Added an answer on May 14, 2026 at 7:43 pm

    No, LINQ to SQL does not. There is little to parallelize on the .NET side. All LINQ to SQL does is translating expression trees to SQL queries. SQL Server will execute those SQL statements, and is able to do this in parallel.

    Don’t forget that while you can do something like this with your LINQ to SQL LINQ query, it isn’t a good idea:

    // BAD CODE!!! Don't parallelize a LINQ to SQL query
    var q =
        from customer in db.Customers.AsParallel()
        where customer.Id == 5
        select customer;
    

    While this yields the correct results, you won’t get the performance improvement you are hoping for. PLINQ isn’t able to handle IQueryable objects. Therefore, it will just handle an IQueryable as an IEnumerable (thus iterating it). It will process the db.Customers collection in parallel and use multiple threads to filter the customers. While this sounds okay, this means it will retrieve the complete collection of customers from the database! Without the AsParallel construct, LINQ to SQL would be able to optimize this query by adding the WHERE id = @ID to the SQL. SQL Server would than be able to use indexes (and possibly multiple-threads) to fetch the values.

    While there is some room for optimization inside the LINQ to SQL engine when it comes to matching entities to its sub entities, there doesn’t seem such optimization in the framework currently (or at least, I wasn’t able to find any using Reflector).

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 448k
  • Answers 448k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer You can create a commands file and use that as… May 15, 2026 at 7:45 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer I figured it out and will share what I learned.… May 15, 2026 at 7:45 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer Actually, here's my best advice: Recruit among your students. Since… May 15, 2026 at 7:45 pm

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.