Thanks Gustavo, you are right that i'm referring only to the mapping collections aspects of NH, i'm pretty much satisfied with everything else. when i think about it a bit more, the essence of the question is - if i don't use collection mapping at all and just work manually setting Ids - can you list the "good things" i lose?
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Gustavo Ringel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Hi > > Regarding > > 1) NH is a PI framework, it will achieve it goals letting you to do same > things as you will do in the language without persistence. > > There is no magic in C# or Java that will give you a way to set only one > side of the collection and the other one will magically appear. > > 2) I don't see what the worry about with the cascade action is you must > write it in the mapping if you need it and you may not write it if you > don't...the same applies for opening a FK in a DB > > 3) The problem is not extra SQL the problem is which side is in charge of > the persistence. > > 4) You are using an advanced ORM because you want things like lazy loading, > you don't need to worry about them you can set default = false and live in > the old days without lazy loading...you use it because you know you need it, > it's not NH which will force you to use it and it won't decide to you what's > lazy or what not like SQL does not decide if you bring a joing between two > databases with a join or a select and a after that running with a CURSOR... > > 5) many-to-many relations sometimes are really cruel...i try to avoid them > if i can. > > > Regarding the conclusion, you talked about thinks you consider problematic > mapping collections and then ask if NH only advantage is only on querying, i > don't think mapping a collection is even 0.01% of what the framework > brings... > > Gustavo. > > > On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 2:08 PM, ndotan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> Hey all, >> I have a theoretical question.i fail to see how nhibernate makes life >> easy for me by mapping relations. >> >> Every way i look at it, it seems that it poses more work to the >> programmer. >> for example taking directly from the documentation: >> >> http://www.hibernate.org/hib_docs/nhibernate/html/example-parentchild.html >> >> Parent p = (Parent) session.Load(typeof(Parent), pid); >> Child c = new Child(); >> c.Parent = p; >> p.Children.Add(c); >> session.Save(c); >> >> 1. I need to maintain both edges of the link myself, >> 2. i need to worry about cascade action >> 3. i need to worry about the extra sql that is generated if i do not >> use inverse=true >> 4. i need to worry about when to use lazy loading. >> 5. in many to many relations, i need to worry twice as much. >> >> so is the only advantage in the querying? and if so, i imagine that >> most of the queries would be done in HQL and i could just do a join >> for the relations by hand. >> >> >> i feel im missing a point. >> >> thanks. >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
