Would you allow this type of query?

I'm exploring using an ORM tool in our development shop, and in particular Entity Framework 4.0. Since we work with VERY large databases, I'm a bit concerned about the query's it generates.

Doing something simple like getting clients with an address in a state looks like below.

As a database developer or admin would you allow this? Is it as bad as it looks? Assume every join is on a clustered index.

    SELECT 
[Project2].[ClientKey] AS [ClientKey], 
[Project2].[FirstName] AS [FirstName], 
[Project2].[LastName] AS [LastName], 
[Project2].[IsEnabled] AS [IsEnabled], 
[Project2].[ChangeUser] AS [ChangeUser], 
[Project2].[ChangeDate] AS [ChangeDate], 
[Project2].[C1] AS [C1], 
[Project2].[AddressKey] AS [AddressKey], 
[Project2].[ClientKey1] AS [ClientKey1], 
[Project2].[AddressTypeCode] AS [AddressTypeCode], 
[Project2].[PrimaryAddress] AS [PrimaryAddress], 
[Project2].[AddressLine1] AS [AddressLine1], 
[Project2].[AddressLine2] AS [AddressLine2], 
[Project2].[City] AS [City], 
[Project2].[State] AS [State], 
[Project2].[ZIP] AS [ZIP]
FROM ( SELECT 
    [Distinct1].[ClientKey] AS [ClientKey], 
    [Distinct1].[FirstName] AS [FirstName], 
    [Distinct1].[LastName] AS [LastName], 
    [Distinct1].[IsEnabled] AS [IsEnabled], 
    [Distinct1].[ChangeUser] AS [ChangeUser], 
    [Distinct1].[ChangeDate] AS [ChangeDate], 
开发者_C百科    [Extent3].[AddressKey] AS [AddressKey], 
    [Extent3].[ClientKey] AS [ClientKey1], 
    [Extent3].[AddressTypeCode] AS [AddressTypeCode], 
    [Extent3].[PrimaryAddress] AS [PrimaryAddress], 
    [Extent3].[AddressLine1] AS [AddressLine1], 
    [Extent3].[AddressLine2] AS [AddressLine2], 
    [Extent3].[City] AS [City], 
    [Extent3].[State] AS [State], 
    [Extent3].[ZIP] AS [ZIP], 
    CASE WHEN ([Extent3].[AddressKey] IS NULL) THEN CAST(NULL AS int) ELSE 1 END AS [C1]
    FROM   (SELECT DISTINCT 
        [Extent1].[ClientKey] AS [ClientKey], 
        [Extent1].[FirstName] AS [FirstName], 
        [Extent1].[LastName] AS [LastName], 
        [Extent1].[IsEnabled] AS [IsEnabled], 
        [Extent1].[ChangeUser] AS [ChangeUser], 
        [Extent1].[ChangeDate] AS [ChangeDate]
        FROM  [Common].[Clients] AS [Extent1]
        INNER JOIN [Common].[ClientAddresses] AS [Extent2] ON [Extent1].[ClientKey] = [Extent2].[ClientKey]
        WHERE  (( CAST(CHARINDEX(UPPER('D'), UPPER([Extent1].[LastName])) AS int)) > 0) AND ([Extent1].[IsEnabled] = 1) AND ([Extent2].[City] IS NOT NULL) AND ((UPPER([Extent2].[City])) = (UPPER('Colorado Springs'))) ) AS [Distinct1]
    LEFT OUTER JOIN [Common].[ClientAddresses] AS [Extent3] ON [Distinct1].[ClientKey] = [Extent3].[ClientKey]
)  AS [Project2]
ORDER BY [Project2].[ClientKey] ASC, [Project2].[FirstName] ASC, [Project2].[LastName] ASC, [Project2].[IsEnabled] ASC, [Project2].[ChangeUser] ASC, [Project2].[ChangeDate] ASC, [Project2].[C1] ASC

inner join addresses to clients ...

INNER JOIN [Common].[ClientAddresses] AS [Extent2] 
   ON [Extent1].[ClientKey] = [Extent2].[ClientKey]

with condition on city ...

AND ((UPPER([Extent2].[City])) = (UPPER('Colorado Springs')))

now left join addresses again?

LEFT OUTER JOIN [Common].[ClientAddresses] AS [Extent3] 
  ON [Distinct1].[ClientKey] = [Extent3].[ClientKey]

The left join is redundant since a row must already exist to match the condition.

Also it is selecting distinct rows in the inner query which is probably unnecessary if the tables are normalized

I would not trust the ORM to generate optimal queries.

There appears to be an unnecessary derived table, which almost doubles the length of the query. It is unlikely to have a significant effect on the run time performance, so it's not worth worrying about.

More troubling from a performance perspective is the use of functions in the WHERE clause that will prevent the use of indexes.

WHERE ...
AND ((UPPER([Extent2].[City])) = (UPPER('Colorado Springs')))

It should just be this with an appropriate case-insensitive collation:

WHERE ...
AND [Extent2].[City] = 'Colorado Springs'

But it may not be a problem in practice.