比较和对比的Telerik NHibernate和的OpenAccess [英] Compare and Contrast NHibernate and OpenAccess from Telerik

问题描述

你有没有使用的OpenAccess ORM从的Telerik？它是如何比较NHibernate的？什么时候应该考虑使用它了NHibernate的？

Have you used the OpenAccess ORM from Telerik? How does it compare to NHibernate? When should I consider using it over NHibernate?

推荐答案

我想知道同样的事情自己。一方面，有NH其免费，开源的自我，但有限的支持选项。另一方面，一个相当新的除了知名工具制造商的盒子，OA。

I'm wondering the same thing myself. On one hand, there's NH with its free, open-source self, but with limited support options. On the other, a fairly new addition to a well-known tool provider's box, OA.

OA的成本钱，但你得到的支持。 NH是免费的，但支持已经知道，至少在我简短的经验是有限的，姗姗来迟。

OA costs money, but you get support. NH is free, but support has been known at least in my brief experience to be limited and slow in coming.

我觉得它们可能会选择优良的产品。我决定给OA一试，因为我已经是Telerik的工具的用户。 OA和支持正在支付的反正。

I think both are likely fine products. I've decided to give OA a try since I am already a user of Telerik's tools. OA and its support are being paid for anyway.

NH使用普通类和对象的类属性没有任何装饰。 OA需要装饰（由OA Visual Studio的图形用户界面很好地生成）。

NH uses plain classes and object with no decorations on the class properties whatsoever. OA requires decorations (nicely generated by the OA Visual Studio GUI).

NH需要一个会话尽在其中，与数据库的工作单位; OA将其称为范围。两者都使用交易。

NH requires a "session" in which to do a unit of work with the database; OA calls it "scope". Both use "transaction".

OA中具有与Visual Studio集成和既可以正向和反向映射，并从一个数据库。正向映射是这样你就可以设计自己的类，然后推到这些数据库的持久性。 反向是给你的领域模型开发商这是我preFER。

OA has integration with Visual Studio and can both forward- and reverse-map to and from a database. Forward mapping is so you can design your classes and then "push" those into the database for persistence. The "reverse" is for you "domain model" developers which is what I prefer.

OA肯定是发生了一些重大的更新，播放的Telerik赶上每最近收购和的OpenAccess的版本中，由Vanatec以前拥有的（从德国）。

OA is definitely undergoing some major updates as Telerik plays "catch up" per its recent acquisition and release of OpenAccess, formerly owned by Vanatec (out of Germany).

据的易用性和性能/可扩展性的角度来看，我希望我知道，每个站。我敢肯定有人在那里可以把一个诚实的检验两者之间做出这些决定。

As far as an "ease of use" and "performance / scalability" standpoint, I wish I knew where each stood. I'm sure someone out there could put together an honest test between the two and make those determinations.

有一件事我喜欢NH是可用的模板来生成所需的code不只是为哑巴业务对象（这是所有OA现在生成），但对于一个BLL和DLL。很多的谈话后的Telerik，我有IM pression他们计划更多的code生成选项，因此OA是比较有用的开箱即用。

One thing I like about NH is the available templates to generate the needed code not just for the "dumb" business objects (which is all OA generates now), but for a BLL and DLL. After much conversation with Telerik, I have the impression they plan for more code-generating options so OA is more useful out of the box.

希望这有助于！有人请尽量得到一些统计上的性能问题。

Hope this helps! Someone please try to get some stats on the performance issues.

这篇关于比较和对比的Telerik NHibernate和的OpenAccess的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！