I agree with -Carlos. It seems like we are trying to put the cart before the horse. If you look at it from a pure database point of view (regardless whether you are using NH or not):
- You are doing a full table scan each time. In a multi-user environment this will be brutal - You will possibly get into severe table/record locking when reading and some users are writing to this table concurrently (depending on which database you are using).. Greg On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Carlos cubas <[email protected]> wrote: > Let me understand this clearly.... > > (1) You Load All records > (2) You Search over loaded records > (3) Then Filter > > Sounds to me like a backwards approach.... > > I would do the opposite > > (1) Filter on DB > (2) Search on Filtered > (3) Load records > > -Carlos > > Practice makes perfect, but if no one is perfect, why practice? > > > > > ------------------------------ > Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 16:17:20 +0200 > Subject: [nhusers] Re: Faster loading of a lot of records to a collection > (100 000 records) > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Paco Wensveen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Why do you want to load so many records at once? > > > I load all records from my database for search and calculate relevance > according to some informations. > > > Why do you want to use NHibernate instead of plane old sql? > > > I'm trying to use plane old sql, but my objects don't be linked to my > Nhibernate session. > -- > Cordialement, > > Cyril GRAUFFEL > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
