首先，先看看我之前是如何写这个提示状态字段的，实体中加入ContentStatus，然后直接在Linq语句中Select 实体对象中加入ContentStatus=Product_Maintain.Count(C => C.CompanyID == company.ID && C.IsDeleted == 0 && (C.AuditStatus == 0 || C.AuditStatus == 4))>0？"产品有更新":""。这时我想应该是加入三元运算，linq在转Sql时，产生过多的，Case，when ，then语句，三元运算增加了判断会影响查询性能，于是我去掉后，再运行查看页面，仍然很慢，感觉不出快了多少。
这时，我想起了LinqPad，看看到底转换生成了怎样的Sql语句。运用Count（条件）生成Sql代码如下：
代码如下:
SELECT COUNT(*) AS [value]
FROM (
SELECT
(CASE
WHEN ([t1].[CompanyID] = ([t0].[ID])) AND ([t1].[IsDeleted] = @p0) AND (([t1].[AuditStatus] = @p1) OR ([t1].[AuditStatus] = @p2)) THEN 1
WHEN NOT (([t1].[CompanyID] = ([t0].[ID])) AND ([t1].[IsDeleted] = @p0) AND (([t1].[AuditStatus] = @p1) OR ([t1].[AuditStatus] = @p2))) THEN 0
ELSE NULL
END) AS [value]
FROM [Company_Product_Maintain] AS [t1]
) AS [t2]
WHERE [t2].[value] = 1
这时我发现一个很简单的Count的Sql 语句，linq转换后变得如此复杂，我直接在sql server中运行此代码，发现查询还是很慢，于是我直接把ContentStatus=Product_Maintain.Where(C => C.CompanyID == company.ID && C.IsDeleted == 0 && (C.AuditStatus == 0 || C.AuditStatus == 4)).Count()生成Sql语句为：
代码
代码如下:
SELECT COUNT(*) AS [value]
FROM [GasSNS_Company_Equipment_Maintain] AS [t1]
WHERE ([t1].[CompanyID] = ([t0].[ID])) AND ([t1].[IsDeleted] = @p0) AND (([t1].[AuditStatus] = @p1) OR ([t1].[AuditStatus] = @p2))
发现运行速度那是快了一个数量级啊！
后台列表查询结果速度大大提升有图为证(声明：以下图都为项目中截图，不是简单的单表查询，还连了用户表，详细表等数量也都挺大的)：
图1为Count结果，用了35秒，哇塞！
图2为Where(条件).Count()结果，同样的数据只用了4秒钟，差了10倍！
然后为了取值方面我还是加入三元运算，ContentStatus=Product_Maintain.Where(C => C.CompanyID == company.ID && C.IsDeleted == 0 && (C.AuditStatus == 0 || C.AuditStatus == 4)).Count()>0？"产品有更新":""。结果如下：
真的是Count()与 Where()区别，不可能这么大差距吧？于是我单写
Product_Maintain.Where(C => C.IsDeleted == 0 && (C.AuditStatus == 0 || C.AuditStatus == 4)).Count() 与
Product_Maintain.Count(C => C.IsDeleted == 0 && (C.AuditStatus == 0 || C.AuditStatus == 4))
发现速度差不多，生成的代码是一样的。
SELECT COUNT(*) AS [value]
FROM [GasSNS_Company_Equipment_Maintain] AS [t0]
WHERE ([t0].[IsDeleted] = @p0) AND (([t0].[AuditStatus] = @p1) OR ([t0].[AuditStatus] = @p2))
原来是我如果在Select中取某表的数量并且条件中使用了之前from后的某个变量时，这时用Count(条件)和Where(条件).Count()产生代码才会不同，查询速度才会出现数量级的差别。
代码
//效率低版本：
from company in Company
select new
{
contacter = v.ContacterID,
count = Product_Maintain.Count(C => C.CompanyID == company.ID &&C.IsDeleted == 0 && (C.AuditStatus == 0 || C.AuditStatus == 4))
}
与
//效率高版本：
from company in Company
select new
{
contacter = v.ContacterID,
count = Product_Maintain.Where(C =>C.CompanyID == company.ID && C.IsDeleted == 0 && (C.AuditStatus == 0 || C.AuditStatus == 4)).Count()
}
否则，Count()与Where().Count()生成的SQL语句是相同的，效率也一样。
代码如下:
SELECT COUNT(*) AS [value]
FROM [GasSNS_Company_Equipment_Maintain] AS [t0]
WHERE ([t0].[IsDeleted] = @p0) AND (([t0].[AuditStatus] = @p1) OR ([t0].[AuditStatus] = @p2))
原来是我如果在Select中取某表的数量并且条件中使用了之前from后的某个变量时，这时用Count(条件)和Where(条件).Count()产生代码才会不同，查询速度才会出现数量级的差别。
代码
代码如下:
//效率低版本：
from company in Company
select new
{
contacter = v.ContacterID,
count = Product_Maintain.Count(C => C.CompanyID == company.ID &&C.IsDeleted == 0 && (C.AuditStatus == 0 || C.AuditStatus == 4))
}
与
代码如下:
//效率高版本：
from company in Company
select new
{
contacter = v.ContacterID,
count = Product_Maintain.Where(C =>C.CompanyID == company.ID && C.IsDeleted == 0 && (C.AuditStatus == 0 || C.AuditStatus == 4)).Count()
}
否则，Count()与Where().Count()生成的SQL语句是相同的，效率也一样。
总结到此，望各位看官以后要注意！本人入园两年来，第一发在首页，请各位看官不吝赐教！
谢谢各位看官的指点，声明下以上查询图都LinqPad查询结果截图。至于为啥4秒左右为LinqPad查询时间，Linq生成Sql语句在Sql Server中执行不到1秒，以下截图作解释：