Hej Brian,

MBJ> Armin,

MBJ> We actually were doing something wrong with Hibernate.  We found that we
MBJ> needed to use flush/evict because hibernate stores up the statements in
MBJ> java mem before running the statements, not sure why they chose to do it
MBJ> that way,

believe it or not - due to performance ;)
+ why hit the database before it is needed!

MBJ> but anyhow, after putting in flush/evict, we got the hibernate
MBJ> version down to something like 20 minutes, still slower than OJB :-).

...see my other answer to this thread ;)

/max

MBJ> I think the reason that it does take 12 minutes, is that there are 10000
MBJ> parent records that all have children records which must be stored.
 
MBJ> Thanks for the response.

MBJ> Brian


MBJ> Brian McGough
MBJ> IU - UITS - UIS - SIT
MBJ> (812) 856-4871
 
MBJ> -----Original Message-----
MBJ> From: Armin Waibel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
MBJ> Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 8:49 AM
MBJ> To: OJB Users List
MBJ> Subject: Re: OJB vs Hibernate

MBJ> Hi Brian,

 >> We started out using Hibernate for this, and we found that we had
MBJ> some
 >> real problems.  It just would not scale whether or not we were using
 >> transactions.  We found that it would take greater than 17 hours to
MBJ> load
 >> only 7500 of the records.  Obviously this is unacceptable
MBJ> performance,
 >> and so we thought to try the same thing using OJB.

MBJ> I don't want to defend Hibernate ;-), but I assume there must be 
MBJ> something "wrong" with your setting or the way you handle it. I can't
MBJ> believe that OJB is 85 time faster than HB.

 >> I am happy to report that using OJB we were able to load the whole
MBJ> file
 >> of 10,000 in under 12 minutes.

MBJ> 12 minutes is better, but sounds slow too. Must be a really complex
MBJ> operation. Storing of 10000 objects should be done in a "normal" 
MBJ> environment < 20 sec.
MBJ> Can you describe why it take so long in your case or describe a little
MBJ> bit more detailed what you are doing?

MBJ> regards,
MBJ> Armin


MBJ> Mcgough, Brian Joseph wrote:
>> All,
>>  
>> I just wanted to share some data points that were recently collected
>> that compare OJB and Hibernate and the ability to scale with both.
>>  
>> We had a data file with only 10,000 records in it that we needed to
MBJ> load
>> into our database.  Typically we use our batch environment, but given
>> that we are a java shop now, we wanted to see if we could use java and
>> our ORM tool to get the job done.
>>  
>> We started out using Hibernate for this, and we found that we had some
>> real problems.  It just would not scale whether or not we were using
>> transactions.  We found that it would take greater than 17 hours to
MBJ> load
>> only 7500 of the records.  Obviously this is unacceptable performance,
>> and so we thought to try the same thing using OJB.
>>  
>> I am happy to report that using OJB we were able to load the whole
MBJ> file
>> of 10,000 in under 12 minutes.
>>  
>> In addition to this, we just recently upgraded a project from OJB 1.0
>> rc2 to OJB 1.0 and I am happy to report that for that particular
MBJ> project
>> db performance was improve by a factor greater than 10.  This is
MBJ> mostly
>> due to the new implementation for FieldAccess.
>>  
>> I just wanted to thank the developers for their attention to detail in
>> regards to ensuring that the overhead above jdbc was minimal, and for
>> all of the tests that they have written to ensure that is the case.
MBJ> We
>> are very happy that we are still able to use ORM for this instead of
>> straight jdbc, because the rest of the application is written using
MBJ> the
>> ORM.
>>  
>> Anyway I just wanted to share these points with the group, for those
MBJ> of
>> you that are out there and are on the sidelines as far as which
>> framework will scale better.
>>  
>> Brian McGough
>> IU - UITS - UIS - SIT
>> (812) 856-4871
>>  
>> 

MBJ> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
MBJ> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MBJ> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



MBJ> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
MBJ> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MBJ> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-- 
Med venlig hilsen,
 Max Rydahl Andersen
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ACURE A/S
 Celluar: 51 56 10 14
 Office:  39 11 80 27


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to