Database Administrators Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for database professionals who wish to improve their database skills and learn from others in the community. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Is there any kind of performance hit when querying by placing tables in different schemas in SQL Server.

For instance if I had 2 tables, Table1 and Table2, and put Table1 into the test schema and Table2 into the history schema, and then I tried to link the tables in a query, is this implicity slower than having the 2 tables in the same schema?

share|improve this question

migrated from Mar 6 '12 at 15:47

This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.

There should be no performance hit at all. The microsoft oslo project is using schemas extensively, and if there were performance problems, I am sure this would not have been the case. – Oded Apr 21 '10 at 14:56
Oslo? Was that the project moving active directory into SQL Sever? – Andomar Apr 21 '10 at 14:59
It was the modeling project that ended up as SQL Server Modeling. – Oded Apr 21 '10 at 15:02
There is no difference between querying tables from one schema or multiple schemas in the same database. I use Schemas more for grouping objects together than for anything else. To gain performance by separation, I would go towards filegroups on separate physical drives. – Raj More Apr 21 '10 at 15:14
The only place you might hit a penalty is if you don't schema qualify your queries and force the system to figure out where you're pulling from. It's an extremely minor hit, but it's there. Just write the queries correctly and you won't even have that issue. – ScaryDBA Apr 21 '10 at 18:52

No there is no performance hit if the tables are in two different schemas.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.