Going back to JDBC means using Xregistry (Registry which was part of donation). 
There is nothing bad in that but lets find what are the bottlenecks in current 
JPA. I am sure we will be able to fix any performance problem by optimizing 
relationships and configurations.

Thanks
Raminder
 
On Sep 15, 2012, at 9:41 AM, Chathuri Wimalasena wrote:

> Hi Lahiru,
> 
> Since we have a middle resource layer underneath JPA model layer, it will
> not be hard thing to move from JPA to pure JDBC. IMO what we should do is,
> try to identify which queries give us performance bottleneck and try to
> replace them with pure JDBC.
> 
> But at this point, I do not think it is a good idea to replace everything
> from JDBC since we have a complete model implemented. Instead of replacing
> everything, we can go for composite model which will have JDBC queries as
> well as openJPA queries.
> 
> Regards,
> Chathuri
> 
> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Amila Jayasekara
> <[email protected]>wrote:
> 
>> Hi Lahiru,
>> 
>> [3] suggests some performance improvements on JPA. I am not sure
>> whether all those suggestions are applicable to our scenario. It might
>> be worth to try them and see the performance improvement, before
>> completely giving up on JPA.
>> 
>> [3]
>> http://java-persistence-performance.blogspot.com/2011/06/how-to-improve-jpa-performance-by-1825.html
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Amila
>> 
>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Amila Jayasekara
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> You can also find an another thread related to this in [2].
>>> 
>>> [2]
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/260618/orm-solutions-jpa-hibernate-vs-jdbc
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Lahiru Gunathilake <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>> Hi Devs,
>>>> 
>>>> I have been testing the new registry implementation and I have a feeling
>>>> this is getting slow which is the issue that we are trying to address
>> for
>>>> jackrabbit implementation. This JPA implementation will add an extra
>>>> complexity with a big performance overhead.
>>>> 
>>>> I don't think we need to use a framework for this simple repository
>> which
>>>> has 11 tables with each having less than 6 columns in each table. My
>> point
>>>> is for a simple database like this, we really don't have to use a
>>>> framework[1]. If our system it so damn complex we can live with the
>>>> complexities and the performance bottleneck of JPA.
>>>> 
>>>> WDYT ?
>>>> 
>>>> [1]https://forums.oracle.com/forums/thread.jspa?messageID=10567940
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> System Analyst Programmer
>>>> PTI Lab
>>>> Indiana University
>> 

Reply via email to