Just to jump in, firstly, for most cases, who cares? It'll work well enough and pay for itself in saved dev time (i.e. "what Jared said").
But guess what. Like anything else, your mileage may vary. If you use SP's or have unique edge case requirements, Transfer might end up being dog slow compared to hand optimized prepared statements. Probably quick and easy enough just to build it in transfer and then add custom sql if you profile the running app and find specific queries are causing you problems. Best Wishes, Peter On Oct 27, 2008, at 11:49 PM, Jared Rypka-Hauer wrote: > > Unless you're going to roll your own in-memory caching system, > Transfer's going to bean a roll-your-own persistence tier any day. > > To be honest, I haven't really looked at it just because the caching > layer and the time saved in development beat the crap out of anything > I could do anyway. > > J > > On Oct 27, 2008, at 11:47 AM, Jorge Loyo wrote: > >> >> What is the difference in performance between having my own DAOs, >> Gateways (with joins) and Beans and having transfer handle that part >> of my application?? >> >> Has anyone done any performance test that I could look into?? >> >> Thank you! > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Before posting questions to the group please read: http://groups.google.com/group/transfer-dev/web/how-to-ask-support-questions-on-transfer You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transfer-dev" 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/transfer-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
