|Re: [eclipselink-users] Performance questions EclipseLink vs. Hibernate|
This is very very odd, in our extensive performance testing we have done comparing with Hibernate we have greatly exceed their performance is almost every possible usecase we have tested. Could you please include more details on exactly what your test is doing and exactly what your environment is (db, os, jvm, server, jdbc). My guess is you issue is related one of the following, 1 - You do not have weaving enabled in EclipseLink. EclipseLink requires this to do lazy loading and change tracking. You must enable weaving either through the agent, or static weaver. 2 - If using Oracle Hibernate enabled batch writing by default, where as you must turn in on in EclipseLink through a persistence property. 3 - Do you have a security manager set in your jvm? There is a setting you need to set currently for this in EclipseLink. Leon Derks-2 wrote: > > Hello, > > Today we noticed differences in performance between EclipseLink and > Hibernate. > > We had made up a test case with a big list of objects(Entities). Each > Enitity has references to other Entities / list of Entities. > Some of these Entities are shared and others are new. > > To save one Entity from the main list took about 780 milliseconds to > persist the whole Object graph into the db. > There was not much difference between EclipseLink and Hibernate in this > case. > > But when we iterated through the big list of entities and persisted them > one by one, there was a big difference between EclipseLink and Hibernate. > We tried one transaction for the whole list and also a single > transaction per Entity in the list. > > Hibernate succeeded in every case and was much faster then EclipseLink > (sometimes 50% faster). > EclipseLink only succeeded when saving one Entity per transaction, > during the other cases (saving the whole list of objects in one > transaction) we did get "java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space". > EclipseLink used almost 15 minutes to complete and Hibernate did the > same in 9 minutes. > > Based on our results we would go for Hibernate at the moment. But are > there ways to speed up performance in EclipseLink? > Why is there so much difference in performance between Hibernate and > EclipseLink. > > Leon > ----- --- http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:James.sutherland.oracle.com James Sutherland http://www.eclipse.org/eclipselink/ EclipseLink , http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/ias/toplink/ TopLink Wiki: http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink EclipseLink , http://wiki.oracle.com/page/TopLink TopLink Forums: http://forums.oracle.com/forums/forum.jspa?forumID=48 TopLink , http://www.nabble.com/EclipseLink-f26430.html EclipseLink Book: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Java_Persistence Java Persistence -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Performance-questions-EclipseLink-vs.-Hibernate-tp16768260p16807905.html Sent from the EclipseLink - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Back to the top