Mark Lewis wrote: >> I generally find ORMs rather disappointing. They are either featureful and >> slow (hibernate, sqlalchemy) or they just get in the way of making full use >> of the sql engine (SQLObject). I find that it's usually efficacious to just >> do a straight sql call for reports (like a big master list) and instantiate >> objects as needed (e.g. for a detail form.) > > Actually, we recently completed a project using Hibernate, and for our > particular use case it worked out quite well. > > We have a long-running server process, so initial startup time isn't a > problem (although Hibernate allows you to serialize a running > configuration which makes startup pretty quick). > > We also have a very complex object model; a naive approach such as > having simple load(object) and store(object) calls would have worked, > but given the large number of relationships between object Hibernate's > ability to implement selective lazy loading, automatic batching and > instance caching actually improved performance significantly over a > naive straight SQL approach. I'm sure it would have been slightly > faster to use an adaptive, lazy loading straight SQL solution, but the > complexity would have gone way up. > > Anyway, just thought I'd throw a little testimonial in because Hibernate > saved our butts bigtime by allowing us to implement a high performance > solution in a short development cycle.
Sounds intriguing -- is there a /case study/ in there, waiting to be published? ..jim -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
