* jOOQ is less configuration, less overhead and less learning curve. * Your get new getters and setters in your beans simply by changing the schema. * If you MUST pull composite objects in one query, that's a bit harder in jOOQ. But in the end, I prefer jOOQ because it doesn't try to do all that and allows me to make my factories return what I want when I want it. * Schema changes are more reliably reported at compilation times. * Integration tests are easier to write. * Quicker turnaround from concept to implementation due to reduced configuration and errors that come from it.
That's what my team saw. J On Wed Feb 18 2015 at 3:44:51 PM Robert Liguori <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, we've been doing just basic SQL with JDBC... but our next project is > much more complex so we are looking at Hibernate for an ORM solution... but > the Hibernate community appears to be dead. > > Note that I just stumbled upon jOOQ. Are there any shortfalls with jOOQ? > Does it rival Hibernate? > > If I was going to try to sell this API to my management over Hibernate, > what would I tell them? > > Thank you so much, > Robert > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "jOOQ User Group" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
