hi andy, see inline.
Andy Jefferson (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:
4. You've never been seen or heard from on the JPOX forum so perhaps if you
have issues about a piece of software you could actually consult the people who
support its use rather than coming out with this rather uneducated viewpoint in
a blog that the developers of that software are hardly likely to see unless
they just happen to come across it in a web trawl.
--
actually i have about 30 posts there, and have been involved with many
other issues indirectly through my colleagues posts. yes, i use a
pseudonym on the jpox forum: farble1670. my real name is on my profile.
why is this "sad"?
as for nothing about perf,
1. http://www.jpox.org/servlet/forum/viewthread?thread=2435#13175
i quote eric: "This is a known issue with low priority now"
2. http://www.jpox.org/servlet/forum/viewthread?thread=2435#13175
no final reply from jpox developers on this one.
3. http://www.jpox.org/servlet/forum/viewthread?thread=2436#13144
here, eric admits to the problem. no mention of it being fixed, or when
it will be fixed, or workaround.
1. "atrocious performance problems".
Not really quite sure what you're referring to there. You can always consult
the independent benchmark PolePosition (available in the JPOX docs) that
clearly shows JPOX **outperforming** Hibernate on virtually all tests. JPOX
completes the test suite in a *sixth* of the time that Hibernate needs. I'm
sorry if that's considered atrocious to you. Just wait til we get the time to
really optimise its performance.
i did not comment on jpox vs. hibernate. i don't know about that. my
comment referred to the fact that jpox is unoptimized in several areas
that prevent it from being used in applications with truly high
scalability requirements. maybe roller doesn't fit into that category, i
am not sure.
2. "JDO is dead". Heard it all before. There are many people wanting JDO since it gives things that "Java Persistence 1.0" doesnt. Datastore agnostic. Provides more complete O/R mapping.
i agree with you. nobody could have been more upset than i was after i
spent so much time building a system based on JDO. however, it doesn't
change things from the directions of the specifications. my comments
reflect the sentiment of the jdo spec lead.
3. Yes, JPOX does have "Java Persistence 1.0" on the roadmap. That means what
it says it means. The plan is to provide that interface for people who want to use it.
JDO2 is a superset of Java Persistence 1.0 after all.
is it a superset at the functionality or api level? if it's the latter,
great. if it's the former, there's not a lot of point in coding to the
JDO2 API if it will have to be ported to JP 1.0 in the near future.
