Yep, Steve, I'm sorry if I was short and I didn't look closely -
Intention is not to start an argument, just to focus on the JPA solution
for Prasenjit.
Thanks,
Andy.
On 02/11/17 16:16, Steve Goldsmith wrote:
The issues is performance and if this is a one off batch insert then I'm
offering a solution. Alternatives are good and yes as I described before I
survived fine without all the JPA "features" with a production application
handling millions of transactions a day. This isn't theoretical and it
works in the real world.
I'm not sure why you think there's no transactions. Caching is simple using
JCache (my app did this as well) which is agnostic to the persistence
layer. If you think DbUtils adds 256% over pure JDBC then you really have
not used it before or done any testing with it. Most JDBC wrappers add very
little latency as most of that is happening in the database. In essence you
are writing about the same lines of code as well.
Maybe you didn't take a close look at the tests, but it throws out the
first run to account for any initialization/lazy optimizations in JPA.
Again, you may not find it useful, but DbUtils been proven to be much
faster in production systems than JPA and that's what really matters to me
at least. If you can provision 3x more VMs for the same task then knock
yourself out.
Sorry to annoy you and hopefully you will find a JPA solution for Prasenjit.
--
Andy Gumbrecht
https://twitter.com/AndyGeeDe
http://www.tomitribe.com
https://www.tomitribe.io
