Re: Feedback regarding Cayenne vs Hibernate

From: Cris Daniluk (cris.danilu..mail.com)
Date: Thu Sep 15 2005 - 15:00:58 EDT

  • Next message: Gili: "Re: Feedback regarding Cayenne vs Hibernate"

    Obviously, this is my own opinion, but I think that you have used some
    of the most innane features Cayenne has to offer. I have used Cayenne
    on several very applications that take quite a bit of traffic and
    never had to deal with the crap you have. I don't know how much of it
    is that your application has special needs, and how much of it is that
    you are special, but I don't think it really matters.

    I would propose that the API stays the way it is - hiding the stuff
    that most people just don't need to care about. I can tell you that I
    got a team of developers up and running with Cayenne expertise far
    faster than I have ever been able to with Hibernate, if that's any
    consolation...

    On 9/15/05, Gili <cowwo..bs.darktech.org> wrote:
    >
    > Ok, I've finally ported enough of my application that I can begin to
    > give you some feedback.
    >
    > Cayenne seems to be faster than Hibernate in some areas, slower in
    > others. I don't have very reliable figures as of yet but I'd guestimate
    > that Cayenne yields equivilent performance to Hibernate.
    >
    > Ease of use... Hibernate is easier to get up and running with; it
    > definately requires less work up-front. On the other hand, if something
    > breaks while you're developing in Cayenne it seems to be easier to
    > figure out what is wrong and how to fix it than Hibernate. With
    > Hibernate this takes days, whereas in Cayenne this takes hours.
    >
    > If there is one feedback I would send to the Cayenne authors it's that
    > ease-of-use needs to be improved. It is true that Cayenne is
    > functionally similar to Hibernate, but the Cayenne API makes you jump
    > through too many hoops to get anything done. You end up having to learn
    > way too much about Cayenne's internals to get anything done. A simple
    > example is flushing the context cache:
    >
    > context.invalidateObjects(context.getObjectStore().getObjects());
    >
    > The API needs to be more user-oriented; less technical, more human.
    > "Context.flush()" is far more readable and easier to learn than the
    > current API. This is just one example; there are a handful of others. I
    > understand a lot of you are coming from a EOF background, but coming at
    > this with a blank slate it isn't the cleanest API in the world.
    >
    > I'd like to propose a few API changes but I'm not sure if it all right
    > to discuss this on the mailing list...?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Gili
    > --
    > http://www.desktopbeautifier.com/
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Sep 15 2005 - 15:01:02 EDT