You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@turbine.apache.org by Matthew Pomar <ma...@hotmail.com> on 2003/09/09 17:08:33 UTC
Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
A proposal is included in Turbine version 2.3 to integrate Hibernate.
It is my impression Hibernate is widely used and has fantastic
documentation. There are a number of code generation utilities for it, and
it appears to be well tested and high performance.
I would like to make sure that I'm not wasting my time builing my project on
Torque if it will be replaced by Hibernate in the near future.
Does anyone know the status of the Hibernate integration?
Thanks,
- Matt
Re: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
Posted by Akmal Sarhan <as...@byteaction.de>.
I think Eric that it would be interesting for us to know your experience
with both of the tools, and why you switched to Hibernate.
and how about the learning curve..etc.
regards
Akmal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Pugh" <ep...@upstate.com>
To: "'Turbine Users List'" <tu...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 5:51 PM
Subject: RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
> I for one am hell for leather headed towards using Hibernate. I used
torque
> before, but for various reasons decided to go for Hibernate. You aren't
> wasting your time building your project in torque however IF, and big IF,
> you use a good seperation between objects and data objects. If you have
> business logic spewed all over your various Torque objects, then you will
> hate life when it comes time to port. But, if you have data objects
> (torque) and then either wrappers or business objects that pull from data
> objects, then porting is not too bad.
>
> What I learned was the ORM tools may come and go. Torque, then Hibernate,
> but I bet is in time it'll be something else. Hence the reason to
seperate
> it out.
>
> Basically, if you can write your app with NO persistence, and then later
add
> your persistence in, then you wrote it correctly, and plugging in
> Torque/Hibernate/JDO will be okay...
>
> I use hibernate extensively and successfully with Turbine. There is a
> howto:
> http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/turbine-2.3/howto/hibernate-howto.html
> available. Getting started with Hibernate via Avalon also get's you ready
> for T2.4 and lots of Avalonized components!
>
> Also,
>
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/fulcrum/multiproject/fulcrum-security/inde
> x.html there is a hibernate based security system. And in the unit tests
is
> an example of using it in t2.3 with the turbine user/groups/roles etc...
>
> Eric
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Matthew Pomar [mailto:matthewpomar@hotmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:09 PM
> > To: turbine-user@jakarta.apache.org
> > Subject: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
> >
> >
> > A proposal is included in Turbine version 2.3 to integrate Hibernate.
> >
> > It is my impression Hibernate is widely used and has fantastic
> > documentation. There are a number of code generation
> > utilities for it, and
> > it appears to be well tested and high performance.
> >
> > I would like to make sure that I'm not wasting my time
> > builing my project on
> > Torque if it will be replaced by Hibernate in the near future.
> >
> > Does anyone know the status of the Hibernate integration?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > - Matt
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
Re: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
Posted by "Jeffrey D. Brekke" <jb...@wi.rr.com>.
>>>>> On Mon, 09 Sep 2002 17:51:34 +0200, Eric Pugh <ep...@upstate.com> said:
[SNIP]
> Basically, if you can write your app with NO persistence, and then
> later add your persistence in, then you wrote it correctly, and
> plugging in Torque/Hibernate/JDO will be okay...
[SNIP]
This is very good advice. My experience also revealed to me that
adding persistance early in the project was a misstep. Putting it in
when its needed and not before seems to lead us to simpler designs.
--
=====================================================================
Jeffrey D. Brekke jbrekke@wi.rr.com
Wisconsin, USA brekke@apache.org
ekkerbj@yahoo.com
Re: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
Posted by Matthew Pomar <ma...@hotmail.com>.
Eric,
Thanks for the advice.
Would you mind sharing your environment with me? What I mean is what IDE are
you using to develop with? What code generation tool(s) are you using to
create hibernate classes, deployment descriptors, DTO's, DAO's, etc...
Thanks again.
- Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Pugh" <ep...@upstate.com>
To: "'Turbine Users List'" <tu...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 10:51 AM
Subject: RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
> I for one am hell for leather headed towards using Hibernate. I used
torque
> before, but for various reasons decided to go for Hibernate. You aren't
> wasting your time building your project in torque however IF, and big IF,
> you use a good seperation between objects and data objects. If you have
> business logic spewed all over your various Torque objects, then you will
> hate life when it comes time to port. But, if you have data objects
> (torque) and then either wrappers or business objects that pull from data
> objects, then porting is not too bad.
>
> What I learned was the ORM tools may come and go. Torque, then Hibernate,
> but I bet is in time it'll be something else. Hence the reason to
seperate
> it out.
>
> Basically, if you can write your app with NO persistence, and then later
add
> your persistence in, then you wrote it correctly, and plugging in
> Torque/Hibernate/JDO will be okay...
>
> I use hibernate extensively and successfully with Turbine. There is a
> howto:
> http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/turbine-2.3/howto/hibernate-howto.html
> available. Getting started with Hibernate via Avalon also get's you ready
> for T2.4 and lots of Avalonized components!
>
> Also,
>
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/fulcrum/multiproject/fulcrum-security/inde
> x.html there is a hibernate based security system. And in the unit tests
is
> an example of using it in t2.3 with the turbine user/groups/roles etc...
>
> Eric
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Matthew Pomar [mailto:matthewpomar@hotmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:09 PM
> > To: turbine-user@jakarta.apache.org
> > Subject: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
> >
> >
> > A proposal is included in Turbine version 2.3 to integrate Hibernate.
> >
> > It is my impression Hibernate is widely used and has fantastic
> > documentation. There are a number of code generation
> > utilities for it, and
> > it appears to be well tested and high performance.
> >
> > I would like to make sure that I'm not wasting my time
> > builing my project on
> > Torque if it will be replaced by Hibernate in the near future.
> >
> > Does anyone know the status of the Hibernate integration?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > - Matt
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
Posted by Eric Pugh <ep...@upstate.com>.
I think the key thing to keep in mind is that it isn't "Hibernate or
Torque".. It's Hibernate/Torque/OJB and friends.. Half of the work in T2.3
was to make is easier to swap in various components. We shouldn't be tied
down to implementation details like torque or hibernate, instead the turbine
(or your app) should work via good clean interfaces and not care what the
ORM tool is.
I'm expecting that people at some point are going to be asking why we can
leverage commons-validator in our Intake code, a similar type situation.
Admittedly, you have your own problems when you try and abstract totally
away from your implementation. You can end up with a worst of all breeds
solution.
Something to look at is the xingu project. In it we have both OJB and
Hibernate providers for some common objects like users, business objects,
etc.. Proof that you can coexist with multiple providers.
the Fulcrum security project that I worked on was another effort to
faciliate multiple underlying persistence layers. For example, there are
Memory persistence, Hibernate, and Torque. It would be simple to add in the
OJB version as well.
Note, the torque is pretty raw as I don't use it:
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/fulcrum/multiproject/fulcrum-security/inde
x.html
Eric
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Poeschl [mailto:mpoeschl@marmot.at]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 7:47 AM
> To: Turbine Users List
> Subject: Re: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
>
>
> David Wynter wrote:
>
> >Hi Eric,
> >
> >In the second URL below you ask the question why have Group
> in Security as
> >it complicates things. Well my experience with this is that
> it is useful.
> >For example you can have users who have the role of
> Accountant. One group
> >might be the NW office and another Head Office. The 1st
> group will have a
> >restriction on accounts viewable based on the NW office cost
> centre and the
> >Head Office lot have no such restriction. You need the extra
> dimension to
> >manage this, unless you want to start muddying the
> permissions with this.
> >Groups in my experience are usually geographically distinct groups of
> >people.
> >
> >By the way, the reason for my earlier problem with
> TorqueComponent not
> >running was that in the torque.properties distributed with torque 3.1
> >release as required by T2.3 release the use of
> JDBC2PoolFactory in the
> >commented out is no longer valid. I whad been using this
> rather than the
> >Torque Pool. I did not realise they had removed this between
> torque 3.1 beta
> >and release. Combined with the fragile exception handling in
> T2.3 I took
> >ages to find it.
> >
> >
> read the changelog!!
> the jdbc2 pool was just renamed as it was no good idea to
> call it jdbc2
> .. now it's called SharedPool and the default properties file should
> reflect this (i'll check this)
>
> what's about ojb??
> torque and ojb developers will join forces to make the torque
> generator
> work for ojb (it already has support for it) and i'll work on
> migration
> tools to make it easy to switch from torque to ojb ... as ojb is an
> apache project (and i'm an ojb commiter ;-) i prefere to add
> support for
> ojb first
>
> martin
>
> >David
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Eric Pugh [mailto:epugh@upstate.com]
> >>Sent: 09 September 2002 16:52
> >>To: 'Turbine Users List'
> >>Subject: RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
> >>
> >>
> >>I for one am hell for leather headed towards using Hibernate. I
> >>used torque
> >>before, but for various reasons decided to go for
> Hibernate. You aren't
> >>wasting your time building your project in torque however
> IF, and big IF,
> >>you use a good seperation between objects and data objects.
> If you have
> >>business logic spewed all over your various Torque objects,
> then you will
> >>hate life when it comes time to port. But, if you have data objects
> >>(torque) and then either wrappers or business objects that
> pull from data
> >>objects, then porting is not too bad.
> >>
> >>What I learned was the ORM tools may come and go. Torque,
> then Hibernate,
> >>but I bet is in time it'll be something else. Hence the reason
> >>to seperate
> >>it out.
> >>
> >>Basically, if you can write your app with NO persistence, and
> >>then later add
> >>your persistence in, then you wrote it correctly, and plugging in
> >>Torque/Hibernate/JDO will be okay...
> >>
> >>I use hibernate extensively and successfully with Turbine.
> There is a
> >>howto:
> >>http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/turbine-2.3/howto/hibernat
> e-howto.html
> >>available. Getting started with Hibernate via Avalon also
> get's you ready
> >>for T2.4 and lots of Avalonized components!
> >>
> >>Also,
> >>http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/fulcrum/multiproject/fulcrum-sec
> >>urity/inde
> >>x.html there is a hibernate based security system. And in the
> >>unit tests is
> >>an example of using it in t2.3 with the turbine
> user/groups/roles etc...
> >>
> >>Eric
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: Matthew Pomar [mailto:matthewpomar@hotmail.com]
> >>>Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:09 PM
> >>>To: turbine-user@jakarta.apache.org
> >>>Subject: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>A proposal is included in Turbine version 2.3 to integrate
> Hibernate.
> >>>
> >>>It is my impression Hibernate is widely used and has fantastic
> >>>documentation. There are a number of code generation
> >>>utilities for it, and
> >>>it appears to be well tested and high performance.
> >>>
> >>>I would like to make sure that I'm not wasting my time
> >>>builing my project on
> >>>Torque if it will be replaced by Hibernate in the near future.
> >>>
> >>>Does anyone know the status of the Hibernate integration?
> >>>
> >>>Thanks,
> >>> - Matt
> >>>
> >>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
Posted by Eric Pugh <ep...@upstate.com>.
I think the key thing to keep in mind is that it isn't "Hibernate or
Torque".. It's Hibernate/Torque/OJB and friends.. Half of the work in T2.3
was to make is easier to swap in various components. We shouldn't be tied
down to implementation details like torque or hibernate, instead the turbine
(or your app) should work via good clean interfaces and not care what the
ORM tool is.
I'm expecting that people at some point are going to be asking why we can
leverage commons-validator in our Intake code, a similar type situation.
Admittedly, you have your own problems when you try and abstract totally
away from your implementation. You can end up with a worst of all breeds
solution.
Something to look at is the xingu project. In it we have both OJB and
Hibernate providers for some common objects like users, business objects,
etc.. Proof that you can coexist with multiple providers.
the Fulcrum security project that I worked on was another effort to
faciliate multiple underlying persistence layers. For example, there are
Memory persistence, Hibernate, and Torque. It would be simple to add in the
OJB version as well.
Note, the torque is pretty raw as I don't use it:
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/fulcrum/multiproject/fulcrum-security/inde
x.html
Eric
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Poeschl [mailto:mpoeschl@marmot.at]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 7:47 AM
> To: Turbine Users List
> Subject: Re: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
>
>
> David Wynter wrote:
>
> >Hi Eric,
> >
> >In the second URL below you ask the question why have Group
> in Security as
> >it complicates things. Well my experience with this is that
> it is useful.
> >For example you can have users who have the role of
> Accountant. One group
> >might be the NW office and another Head Office. The 1st
> group will have a
> >restriction on accounts viewable based on the NW office cost
> centre and the
> >Head Office lot have no such restriction. You need the extra
> dimension to
> >manage this, unless you want to start muddying the
> permissions with this.
> >Groups in my experience are usually geographically distinct groups of
> >people.
> >
> >By the way, the reason for my earlier problem with
> TorqueComponent not
> >running was that in the torque.properties distributed with torque 3.1
> >release as required by T2.3 release the use of
> JDBC2PoolFactory in the
> >commented out is no longer valid. I whad been using this
> rather than the
> >Torque Pool. I did not realise they had removed this between
> torque 3.1 beta
> >and release. Combined with the fragile exception handling in
> T2.3 I took
> >ages to find it.
> >
> >
> read the changelog!!
> the jdbc2 pool was just renamed as it was no good idea to
> call it jdbc2
> .. now it's called SharedPool and the default properties file should
> reflect this (i'll check this)
>
> what's about ojb??
> torque and ojb developers will join forces to make the torque
> generator
> work for ojb (it already has support for it) and i'll work on
> migration
> tools to make it easy to switch from torque to ojb ... as ojb is an
> apache project (and i'm an ojb commiter ;-) i prefere to add
> support for
> ojb first
>
> martin
>
> >David
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Eric Pugh [mailto:epugh@upstate.com]
> >>Sent: 09 September 2002 16:52
> >>To: 'Turbine Users List'
> >>Subject: RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
> >>
> >>
> >>I for one am hell for leather headed towards using Hibernate. I
> >>used torque
> >>before, but for various reasons decided to go for
> Hibernate. You aren't
> >>wasting your time building your project in torque however
> IF, and big IF,
> >>you use a good seperation between objects and data objects.
> If you have
> >>business logic spewed all over your various Torque objects,
> then you will
> >>hate life when it comes time to port. But, if you have data objects
> >>(torque) and then either wrappers or business objects that
> pull from data
> >>objects, then porting is not too bad.
> >>
> >>What I learned was the ORM tools may come and go. Torque,
> then Hibernate,
> >>but I bet is in time it'll be something else. Hence the reason
> >>to seperate
> >>it out.
> >>
> >>Basically, if you can write your app with NO persistence, and
> >>then later add
> >>your persistence in, then you wrote it correctly, and plugging in
> >>Torque/Hibernate/JDO will be okay...
> >>
> >>I use hibernate extensively and successfully with Turbine.
> There is a
> >>howto:
> >>http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/turbine-2.3/howto/hibernat
> e-howto.html
> >>available. Getting started with Hibernate via Avalon also
> get's you ready
> >>for T2.4 and lots of Avalonized components!
> >>
> >>Also,
> >>http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/fulcrum/multiproject/fulcrum-sec
> >>urity/inde
> >>x.html there is a hibernate based security system. And in the
> >>unit tests is
> >>an example of using it in t2.3 with the turbine
> user/groups/roles etc...
> >>
> >>Eric
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: Matthew Pomar [mailto:matthewpomar@hotmail.com]
> >>>Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:09 PM
> >>>To: turbine-user@jakarta.apache.org
> >>>Subject: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>A proposal is included in Turbine version 2.3 to integrate
> Hibernate.
> >>>
> >>>It is my impression Hibernate is widely used and has fantastic
> >>>documentation. There are a number of code generation
> >>>utilities for it, and
> >>>it appears to be well tested and high performance.
> >>>
> >>>I would like to make sure that I'm not wasting my time
> >>>builing my project on
> >>>Torque if it will be replaced by Hibernate in the near future.
> >>>
> >>>Does anyone know the status of the Hibernate integration?
> >>>
> >>>Thanks,
> >>> - Matt
> >>>
> >>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
Posted by Martin Poeschl <mp...@marmot.at>.
David Wynter wrote:
>Hi Eric,
>
>In the second URL below you ask the question why have Group in Security as
>it complicates things. Well my experience with this is that it is useful.
>For example you can have users who have the role of Accountant. One group
>might be the NW office and another Head Office. The 1st group will have a
>restriction on accounts viewable based on the NW office cost centre and the
>Head Office lot have no such restriction. You need the extra dimension to
>manage this, unless you want to start muddying the permissions with this.
>Groups in my experience are usually geographically distinct groups of
>people.
>
>By the way, the reason for my earlier problem with TorqueComponent not
>running was that in the torque.properties distributed with torque 3.1
>release as required by T2.3 release the use of JDBC2PoolFactory in the
>commented out is no longer valid. I whad been using this rather than the
>Torque Pool. I did not realise they had removed this between torque 3.1 beta
>and release. Combined with the fragile exception handling in T2.3 I took
>ages to find it.
>
>
read the changelog!!
the jdbc2 pool was just renamed as it was no good idea to call it jdbc2
.. now it's called SharedPool and the default properties file should
reflect this (i'll check this)
what's about ojb??
torque and ojb developers will join forces to make the torque generator
work for ojb (it already has support for it) and i'll work on migration
tools to make it easy to switch from torque to ojb ... as ojb is an
apache project (and i'm an ojb commiter ;-) i prefere to add support for
ojb first
martin
>David
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Eric Pugh [mailto:epugh@upstate.com]
>>Sent: 09 September 2002 16:52
>>To: 'Turbine Users List'
>>Subject: RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
>>
>>
>>I for one am hell for leather headed towards using Hibernate. I
>>used torque
>>before, but for various reasons decided to go for Hibernate. You aren't
>>wasting your time building your project in torque however IF, and big IF,
>>you use a good seperation between objects and data objects. If you have
>>business logic spewed all over your various Torque objects, then you will
>>hate life when it comes time to port. But, if you have data objects
>>(torque) and then either wrappers or business objects that pull from data
>>objects, then porting is not too bad.
>>
>>What I learned was the ORM tools may come and go. Torque, then Hibernate,
>>but I bet is in time it'll be something else. Hence the reason
>>to seperate
>>it out.
>>
>>Basically, if you can write your app with NO persistence, and
>>then later add
>>your persistence in, then you wrote it correctly, and plugging in
>>Torque/Hibernate/JDO will be okay...
>>
>>I use hibernate extensively and successfully with Turbine. There is a
>>howto:
>>http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/turbine-2.3/howto/hibernate-howto.html
>>available. Getting started with Hibernate via Avalon also get's you ready
>>for T2.4 and lots of Avalonized components!
>>
>>Also,
>>http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/fulcrum/multiproject/fulcrum-sec
>>urity/inde
>>x.html there is a hibernate based security system. And in the
>>unit tests is
>>an example of using it in t2.3 with the turbine user/groups/roles etc...
>>
>>Eric
>>
>>
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Matthew Pomar [mailto:matthewpomar@hotmail.com]
>>>Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:09 PM
>>>To: turbine-user@jakarta.apache.org
>>>Subject: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
>>>
>>>
>>>A proposal is included in Turbine version 2.3 to integrate Hibernate.
>>>
>>>It is my impression Hibernate is widely used and has fantastic
>>>documentation. There are a number of code generation
>>>utilities for it, and
>>>it appears to be well tested and high performance.
>>>
>>>I would like to make sure that I'm not wasting my time
>>>builing my project on
>>>Torque if it will be replaced by Hibernate in the near future.
>>>
>>>Does anyone know the status of the Hibernate integration?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>> - Matt
>>>
>>>
RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
Posted by David Wynter <da...@roamware.co.uk>.
Hi Eric,
In the second URL below you ask the question why have Group in Security as
it complicates things. Well my experience with this is that it is useful.
For example you can have users who have the role of Accountant. One group
might be the NW office and another Head Office. The 1st group will have a
restriction on accounts viewable based on the NW office cost centre and the
Head Office lot have no such restriction. You need the extra dimension to
manage this, unless you want to start muddying the permissions with this.
Groups in my experience are usually geographically distinct groups of
people.
By the way, the reason for my earlier problem with TorqueComponent not
running was that in the torque.properties distributed with torque 3.1
release as required by T2.3 release the use of JDBC2PoolFactory in the
commented out is no longer valid. I whad been using this rather than the
Torque Pool. I did not realise they had removed this between torque 3.1 beta
and release. Combined with the fragile exception handling in T2.3 I took
ages to find it.
David
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Pugh [mailto:epugh@upstate.com]
> Sent: 09 September 2002 16:52
> To: 'Turbine Users List'
> Subject: RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
>
>
> I for one am hell for leather headed towards using Hibernate. I
> used torque
> before, but for various reasons decided to go for Hibernate. You aren't
> wasting your time building your project in torque however IF, and big IF,
> you use a good seperation between objects and data objects. If you have
> business logic spewed all over your various Torque objects, then you will
> hate life when it comes time to port. But, if you have data objects
> (torque) and then either wrappers or business objects that pull from data
> objects, then porting is not too bad.
>
> What I learned was the ORM tools may come and go. Torque, then Hibernate,
> but I bet is in time it'll be something else. Hence the reason
> to seperate
> it out.
>
> Basically, if you can write your app with NO persistence, and
> then later add
> your persistence in, then you wrote it correctly, and plugging in
> Torque/Hibernate/JDO will be okay...
>
> I use hibernate extensively and successfully with Turbine. There is a
> howto:
> http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/turbine-2.3/howto/hibernate-howto.html
> available. Getting started with Hibernate via Avalon also get's you ready
> for T2.4 and lots of Avalonized components!
>
> Also,
> http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/fulcrum/multiproject/fulcrum-sec
> urity/inde
> x.html there is a hibernate based security system. And in the
> unit tests is
> an example of using it in t2.3 with the turbine user/groups/roles etc...
>
> Eric
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Matthew Pomar [mailto:matthewpomar@hotmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:09 PM
> > To: turbine-user@jakarta.apache.org
> > Subject: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
> >
> >
> > A proposal is included in Turbine version 2.3 to integrate Hibernate.
> >
> > It is my impression Hibernate is widely used and has fantastic
> > documentation. There are a number of code generation
> > utilities for it, and
> > it appears to be well tested and high performance.
> >
> > I would like to make sure that I'm not wasting my time
> > builing my project on
> > Torque if it will be replaced by Hibernate in the near future.
> >
> > Does anyone know the status of the Hibernate integration?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > - Matt
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
Posted by Eric Pugh <ep...@upstate.com>.
I for one am hell for leather headed towards using Hibernate. I used torque
before, but for various reasons decided to go for Hibernate. You aren't
wasting your time building your project in torque however IF, and big IF,
you use a good seperation between objects and data objects. If you have
business logic spewed all over your various Torque objects, then you will
hate life when it comes time to port. But, if you have data objects
(torque) and then either wrappers or business objects that pull from data
objects, then porting is not too bad.
What I learned was the ORM tools may come and go. Torque, then Hibernate,
but I bet is in time it'll be something else. Hence the reason to seperate
it out.
Basically, if you can write your app with NO persistence, and then later add
your persistence in, then you wrote it correctly, and plugging in
Torque/Hibernate/JDO will be okay...
I use hibernate extensively and successfully with Turbine. There is a
howto:
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/turbine-2.3/howto/hibernate-howto.html
available. Getting started with Hibernate via Avalon also get's you ready
for T2.4 and lots of Avalonized components!
Also,
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/fulcrum/multiproject/fulcrum-security/inde
x.html there is a hibernate based security system. And in the unit tests is
an example of using it in t2.3 with the turbine user/groups/roles etc...
Eric
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Pomar [mailto:matthewpomar@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:09 PM
> To: turbine-user@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?
>
>
> A proposal is included in Turbine version 2.3 to integrate Hibernate.
>
> It is my impression Hibernate is widely used and has fantastic
> documentation. There are a number of code generation
> utilities for it, and
> it appears to be well tested and high performance.
>
> I would like to make sure that I'm not wasting my time
> builing my project on
> Torque if it will be replaced by Hibernate in the near future.
>
> Does anyone know the status of the Hibernate integration?
>
> Thanks,
> - Matt
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-user-help@jakarta.apache.org