> If your project is more than a simple app (as I'm certain it is), I
> would go with JPA. Record is not ready yet, and Mapper is pretty
> limited. For example, AFAIK Mapper doesn't do many-to-many  
> associations.
> I've had a lot of success with JPA/Hibernate, and it's getting pretty
> solid in Lift now -- there are even Maven archetypes for it.
>  I've yet to dig into Mapper/Record. What are the main benefits of  
> these (besides the obvious simplicity you get when not needing to  
> use JPA)?

Here's my experience: I started out with mapper for my current  
project, and ended up overriding/rewriting most of the functionality,  
to make it work for my (maybe unusual) requirements. I have pretty  
much duplicated the entire mapper class/trait hierarchy, bit by bit.  
For example, Mapper does not like dealing with null values for types  
that are not nullable in Scala. Mapper has, for example, 0 hard-coded  
as default value for int's for which no value is given. No  
insurmountable obstacles, but things might take more work than one  
thinks initially. There's just no free lunch.

Since mapper combines so many aspects, it might take a considerable  
amount of effort to isolate concerns when switching from mapper to JPA  
or similar.

I will be switching to JPA in the next two weeks.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to