My point is that for hundreds of thousands rows i won't use an ORM at least not using the defaults. In NH you should use Statelessession, to avoid having hundreds of thousands of rows in memory (a little problematic right?) You are testing two ORM's for Bulk load, when ORM's where not set up with Bulk load as the goal... As i said you can still use NH and maybe already or in some other version EF will give some Bul options...but basing the decision of NH or EF on this use case, i don't think it is the right think to do.
I will go for NH, and will check if doing the Bulk load using maybe plain ADO.Net + SPs, or IStatelessSession...but i will decide for NH because i feel comfortable with it not because in a bulk load it overwhelmed EF...none of them are oriented to this in the normal usage. Gustavo. On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Chucara <[email protected]> wrote: > > Gustavo: > > I never claimed that it was realistic for everyone, but it is > realistic in our case, and we need to be able to load hundreds of > thousands of rows in less than an hour. NHibernate (in more common > scenarios) perform roughly the same as EF in our experience, but as > nHibernate uses POCO, it is a much better candidate for us at the > moment. Maybe EF v2 will change that, but for now, I think nHibernate > is our choice. > > EF has a huge problem in that it takes ages to manage relationships > when you're serializing and deserializing (huge performance problem > when using WCF).
