the original post showed some real ignorance of hibernate (which relies upon its own SQL-like language HQL, has a way more verbose config than SA, and yes is totally designed around a session just like SA), and also misses the point of SA which is that SQL *is* the best way to query your database, if you can just iron out the usual issues with database quirks and object-relational mismatch. disproving the myth of "the best database layer is the one that makes the database invisible" is a primary philosophy of SA. if you dont want to deal with SQL, then theres little point to using a database in the first place.
Hibernate is pretty SQL oriented as well, and as I use it every day for my job I can say it has little to nothing over SA...harder to configure, more complex and less consistent behavior with regards to relationships, poorer database support (like forget about quoting and stuff), its "create schema" support sucks, no reflection, only one "eager loading" relation at a time, no union-based polymorphic loading, self-referential relationships are barely supported, and of course its very hard to integrate plain SQL/result set logic with it since its only an ORM. the only compelling features it has over SA are "extra lazy loading" and a second-level cache, which while ive used neither, could be implemented for SA someday. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
