You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@turbine.apache.org by Kelvin Tan <ke...@relevanz.com> on 2001/11/17 05:09:15 UTC
Torque Performance
Hi,
Does anyone have any experience to share with regards to the performance of
Torque, compared to other OR frameworks (Castor, Osage, Toplink, Cocobase
come to mind), as well as with native SQL code?
Though Torque has only recently been decoupled (and not even formally so)
from Turbine, I understand there's a reasonably healthy group of developers
who use it stand-alone...so any experience would be appreciated.
If any benchmarks have been done, that'd be great too...
Thanks
Regards,
Kelvin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [torque] Bug in OM Generation
Posted by Kelvin Tan <ke...@relevanz.com>.
Forgot to add that this was found using the current CVS build of Torque.
----- Original Message -----
From: Kelvin Tan <ke...@relevanz.com>
To: Turbine Users List <tu...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 8:33 PM
Subject: [torque] Bug in OM Generation
> Think I've found one...
>
> In the schema file, I'm mapping one local reference key as a foreign key
> twice (I don't even know if I'm supposed to. I'm just trying it out)
>
> <column name="foo" ...>
>
> <foreign-key foreignTable="barTable">
> <reference local="foo" foreign="bar">
> </foreign-key>
> <foreign-key foreignTable="barTable">
> <reference local="foo" foreign="bar2">
> </foreign-key>
>
> Running ant builds fine. SQL is generated and OM is generated. However
when
> I attempt to compile, the compiler complains. Specifically, with only
> foreign-key of bar, and only foreign-key of bar2, everything is ok. But
when
> I add both bar and bar2 as foreign keys, the BaseBar2 object doesn't
> compile.
>
> Examining the code, the problem <b>seems</b> to be in the setId(StringKey
v)
> method, a snippet from the actual code:
>
> // update associated AclEntry
> if (collAclEntrys != null )
> {
> for (int i=0; i<collAclEntrys.size(); i++)
> {
> ((AclEntry)collAclEntrys.get(i))
> .set${colFK.JavaName}(v);
> }
> }
>
> The offender is where Velocity was supposed to fill in the value for
> $colFK.JavaName but didn't.
>
> I'd write a test-case, but the darned test-cases don't even pass when
> everything is working (Win9x)...Will help with anything else though.
>
> Regards,
> Kelvin
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
[torque] Bug in OM Generation
Posted by Kelvin Tan <ke...@relevanz.com>.
Think I've found one...
In the schema file, I'm mapping one local reference key as a foreign key
twice (I don't even know if I'm supposed to. I'm just trying it out)
<column name="foo" ...>
<foreign-key foreignTable="barTable">
<reference local="foo" foreign="bar">
</foreign-key>
<foreign-key foreignTable="barTable">
<reference local="foo" foreign="bar2">
</foreign-key>
Running ant builds fine. SQL is generated and OM is generated. However when
I attempt to compile, the compiler complains. Specifically, with only
foreign-key of bar, and only foreign-key of bar2, everything is ok. But when
I add both bar and bar2 as foreign keys, the BaseBar2 object doesn't
compile.
Examining the code, the problem <b>seems</b> to be in the setId(StringKey v)
method, a snippet from the actual code:
// update associated AclEntry
if (collAclEntrys != null )
{
for (int i=0; i<collAclEntrys.size(); i++)
{
((AclEntry)collAclEntrys.get(i))
.set${colFK.JavaName}(v);
}
}
The offender is where Velocity was supposed to fill in the value for
$colFK.JavaName but didn't.
I'd write a test-case, but the darned test-cases don't even pass when
everything is working (Win9x)...Will help with anything else though.
Regards,
Kelvin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Torque Performance
Posted by Jason van Zyl <jv...@zenplex.com>.
On 11/16/01 11:09 PM, "Kelvin Tan" <ke...@relevanz.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone have any experience to share with regards to the performance of
> Torque, compared to other OR frameworks (Castor, Osage, Toplink, Cocobase
> come to mind), as well as with native SQL code?
Don't know yet. We are working on a testbed at the moment and as part of the
testbed some simple benchmarks will be added.
> Though Torque has only recently been decoupled (and not even formally so)
There is no release, no. Not until the testbed is finished (I feel like I'm
repeating myself).
> from Turbine, I understand there's a reasonably healthy group of developers
> who use it stand-alone...so any experience would be appreciated.
>
> If any benchmarks have been done, that'd be great too...
>
> Thanks
>
> Regards,
> Kelvin
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>