We've been using our own DAL for our projects in our company and for the passed 2 projects this has causing us problems. Because of this I want to study SubSonic and/or NHibernate. Is it better to study SubSonic first or NHibernate? What are the advantages/disadvantages? From what I have read from related questions here NHibernate is more complex compared to SubSonic so I want to start with the latter.
SubSonic is significantly easier than NHibernate, you can start working with it almost immediately (few screencasts and you're done). In NHibernate you need some more work to start up – XML config, Session handling and such stuff. So if you are new to ORM, learn SubSonic first, and then delve into NHibernate. Personally I think for small projects you can even happily end up with SubSonic :)
SubSonic is an Active Record ORM. If that is what you are looking for you should compare it with other active record ORM's such as Castle. Castle is built on top of nHibernate so your team can expand to full feature set if needed. AT this point your comparing apples to apples and it doesn't matter which one you start with.
If your not looking for an Active Record style ORM try starting with Fluid nHivernate to lower the learning curve a little.
I dont know a great deal about SubSonic but I recently took on the task of tooling up with NHibernate and found this book (probably the only one out there really) very useful
NHibernate is definately more complex, but with that complexity comes greater flexibility. Subsonic is great, but you should also be aware that it's very much an open source project and whilst it's currently stable, it doesn't have the active development community behind it that NHibernate does.
Another thing to be aware of is that subsonic is a sort of "code generator" where it will actually generate a bunch of stuff for you. NHibernate is an ORM in the very literal sense in that you map objects to your database. You can use code generators to generate the mappings for you, but it is a fundamentally different way of thinking about ORMs.
Personally, if you look at subsonic and find that it has everything you need, than I would look at that, or possibly even linq to sql, however if you find you're getting into more complex object problems, then maybe NHibernate is worth learning.
The answer depends on many different factors. If you learn nHibernate, you are opening yourself many doors of learning curves but they all pay off. Sub Sonic can get you up to speed but is based on code generation which means you have boundaries. With nHibernate, you define you own mapping. Infact with Fluent Interface nHibernate mapping, it's much more easier, simpler and faster to map the objects. There is a very active users group link text
Plus you have full flexibility of mapping. nHibernate could be a little hard to start with but it's totally worth learning. I myself have written 2 professional projects for my clients using nHibernate.
Related
I am in process of evaluating ORM first time. Please suggest which one i should choose for my next project.
I wrote couple of sample code with EF 4.1 code first. Before start same exercise with Nhibernate, I want to know if somebody have already experience with both in production application.
My evaluating criteria
Speed of database access
Learning curve (because I am new to ORM)
Community support
Tutorial/Books availability
Anything else which I should consider (Because I am noob to ORM)
I wish if people who have experience with both the ORM in production level app answer my question.
Thanks in advance!!!
I am aware that this question may be a little bit dangerous to ask ;)
Having used EF 4.1 and Castle ActiveRecord (based off NHibernate), I would rate them as follows:
Speed of DB access - NHibernate for anything remotely complex, otherwise about the same. The problem with EF is that it creates such convoluted SQL that it's difficult to know how to optimise it or if it's even possible to do so.
Learning curve - I personally found EF easier to get started with, but others may feel differently, and both certainly have a learning curve.
Community support - Depends on what you mean by 'support'. You'll find lots of info on the web (and this site) for both. NHibernate is open source, while EF is controlled by MS.
Tutorials/Books - I believe there are more 'official' resources available for EF at this time, but searching on forums will likely get you what you can't find in books.
Anthing else - Realize that the purpose of ORM's is to simplify the data access layer for the developer. However, both of these ORM's (and pretty much every other heavyweight ORM) expect you to use certain coding patterns for this simplification to be realized. While coding pattern enforcement isn't a Bad Thing (some would argue that it's a must), it's something you certainly need to prepare for before choosing one.
If you are a noob to ORM and only need the basic features you may find the Entity Framework and Nhibernate are over kill and should be looking at a light weight one like Massive:
https://github.com/robconery/massive
That said there are two main issues you face with EF vs NH
EF is all that microsoft support and so all their tooling by default uses EF. Making beginner code easier with EF.
NHibernate is more mature and has a greater feature set (if you need it) also has a good development community and lots of blog info about it.
I would choose Massive if you want simple / fast but unsupported, EF if you want easy and MS support but limited in some ways, or NHibernate if you have the time to learn a proper ORM.
Hope this helps.
Well im my personal experience Nhibernate have been the right choice, in complex situation have given me better time results, and it was a lot easier to learn.
I learned it first and then tried the Entity Framework and I found it easier to learn nhibernate Even though in that moment i didn't knew anything about ORM.
Community support and Tutorials and books I can say they are both good and have a lot of material to learn from.
Now I can use them both but still likes Nhibernate a lot more.
I hear from everywhere that NHibernate 3 learning curve is very huge. It is considered huge from which perspectives ? Do you think that the learning needed depend on the scenario it is used ?
Example: If i just want some application that act on 3 entities and only looking for basic crud. Is it necessary to understand the whole concept underlying NH ?
Would like to know users experiences with some explanation over your answer to this.
Edit: Do you recommend of using NH over Entity Framework 4 ? (if you tried both)
Thanks.
There is a learning curve for any ORM. Once you've learned one ORM, learning a second ORM goes much faster. In most cases, it doesn't matter (learning speed wise) which ORM you learn first.
Currently, I think you can probably get going faster initially with EF4 than NHibernate, but over the long term I think NHibernate is a superior choice. Those are the main two ORMs worth spending time on at the moment.
Once you understand ORMs, your development speed will be much faster in regards to database access. There are other benefits to ORMs as well, so it's definitely worth taking that learning curve on.
NHibernate indeed does have a leaening curve, but it all depends what your background is...
Is the concept of ORM's familiar to you at all ? Do you have experience working with Entity Framework 4 ?
In order to build a simple application with 3 entities/tables and simple CRUD operations, you don't need to understand the core of NH, but problems will start to come up when you think of expanding the program you are building or the moment you run into bugs or features that you will only find out along the way...
I really suggest using NH, and learning it is always easier on programs with a small db like the one you're probably going to be working on.
I would also suggest diving straight into Fluent NHibernate. It's a way of mapping the entities without using XML at all.
Start out by reading the introduction and the 'first project' page at the Fluent Nhibernate homepage.
You can read alot more about NHibernate and Fluent NHibernate at ayende's blog.
You can learn the NH basics in a single day. And believe me, it will pay off.
I learned EF after NH and can say that if you are going to use automappings, POCO objects etc then learning will be just the same.
NHibernate has NOT a "steep, large, horrendous learning curve".
I learnt NHibernate just reading the (excellent, BTW) manual. It was v1.2 and, believe me, it is much better now than then.
I am going to try using NHibernate, the reason I stayed away from NHibernate so far was the xml-mapping part. Now that (I found out) there is fluent nhibernate, looks like we don't need to do xml mapping.
But I am wondering if starting with some xml mapping, would be more helpful in learning and getting comfortable with NHibernate, or should I start using it with fluent for nhibernate?
cheers,
hazim
I had similar concerns when I started with nHibernate, but having taken the road of learning the mappings and then learning Fluent, I have to say I wish I had just started with Fluent.
My reasoning is that there was enough to digest just learning nHibernate and Fluent helps make nHibernate more simple. Having said that I agree with David M, you'll need to understand the mappings at some point.
This series was really useful when I was learning nHibernate.
HTH
I would actually recommend attacking NHib from a totally Fluent perspective right now - FNH has matured just enough to not drive you nuts with inconsistencies, there are a lot of decent learning aids out there (try and look at anything posted since Sep 2009 on at first), as well as a decently active user group.
I found this amazingly good and very recent video tutorial Vacation of Fluent NHibernate, conceptually based on the Summer of NHib series everyone else has here. Unfortunately the author just got a new job and hasn't yet completed the series, but I will be shocked if you don't find it incredibly approachable and useful as a learning tool all the same.
You also can fairly easily learn to generate the HBM maps, and reading them is way more useful IMO, and certainly less painful, than writing them at first.
Lastly, give yourself a break and don't expect to master any of this by the end of the week! If you spend some time with FNH first, you will know which areas of NHib you want to dig into eventually and feel less overwhelmed by it when you do.
Cheers,
Berryl
Suggest you get started with a simple database schema using Fluent's auto mapping, so you can get used to using NHibernate Sessions and SessionFactories properly. Then you can branch out. But at some point you will need to fall back on XML mapping, so it's worth looking at eventually.
For understanding what is going I'd recommend starting with XML Mapping files. When learning NHibernate I found hand building configuration files to be useful. That said after I was comfortable using fluent and the occasional mapping file builder has been great.
For learning NHibernate though it's targeted at a previous version the Summer of NHibernate is incredibly useful.
Start with the XML mappings. Fluent is getting closer to being feature complete, but the terminology it uses still diverges from the terminology within the XML mappings (which is what is used by most NHibernate tutorials / documentation). Once you've done a mapping or two, it really isn't that hard especially with intellisense support from the schema files.
Fluent NHibernate is great, but for a beginner I think it might lead to some confusion as you cross reference your mappings with online research.
This is probably a long shot.
In the .NET world, has anyone found an ORM (Commercial or Open) that has the flexibility of NHibernate to support domain driven design with good Linq support? Linq to sql is dead, Entity Framework doesnt yet support POCO's, lazy load or object first development very well, and none of the old stand bys such as LLBLGen seem to either.
Anyone find anything new and exciting in the ORM market?
Thanks!
See ORMBattle.NET - it won't exactly answer your question (btw, I hardly admit this is possible), but there is some info on quality of LINQ support.
Note (or disclaimer): I'm one of persons related to creation of ORMBattle.NET, as well as one of DataObjects.Net authors.
Which version of the .NET Framework are you talking about? 3.5? 4.0?
There are quite a few ORMs out there and some of the commercial ones may in fact meet your needs (or be working on new releases that meet your needs). Competing against both NHibernate and Entity Framework from a commercial perspective is pretty daunting. Microsoft made it much harder than necessary to write a Linq provider, which is why so few ORMs have one. Writing a domain driven design oriented ORM that supports multiple database vendors is also a pretty steep hill to climb.
NHibernate certainly has all the momentum right now, but that doesn't mean it's invincible. It's hard to compete with free & open source software that has a multi-year head start, even for a company with the financial resources of Microsoft.
I think you may just need to be patient. NHibernate's Linq provider is improving and the other ORM vendors are working hard on improving their offerings as well. Things could change significantly in the next two years or so.
No, I don't know of any. Because NHibernate is popular and very good at what it does, and EF is likely to pick up most of the remainder (particularly devs that don't want to stray from Microsoft-supplied frameworks), the barrier to entry for a new player is very high. Another ORM would need to add something significant over and above what NHibernate currently offers in order to get any reasonable level of interest.
If there was an open source project that wanted to deliver better Linq support in an ORM, in my opinion it would have greater success contributing to NHibernate Linq rather than attempting to build its own framework from scratch.
I wouldn't call it a "NHibernate killer", but SubSonic works well. It's simple to use, allows you to choose between using the Active Record pattern and the Repository pattern. It supports POCOs, lets you use object-first development and setting up lazy-loading is easy enough.
CQRS could be considered an NHibernate killer. The basic premise is that your domain objects are not used to support your read model and application queries. As such, you can start using something more like a document store to hold your aggregate or even use event sourcing. To update your read model, you have it listen to the events published by your aggregate so that it can update itself accordingly. Using this architectural style we have been able to eliminate the our reliance upon NHibernate. Now if we decide to use an RDBMS, it's because of the strengths of the database rather than as the default choice.
I am trying to work out with ORM tool to move over to and have narrowed it down to two candidates.
nHibernate or LLBLGen Pro
Please can you guys give me pros and cons in using both these tools especially if you have experience in both. I am not really interested in any other tools but am wanting some heads up so I can decide which tool to spend time learning....
I already know that one is free and one isn't, I also know that nHibernate might take some learning....
Many thanks, Richard
I have used both. At first I was sold on nHibernate and refused to try anything else even though I knew about other options.
With LLBLGen Pro, I was skeptical, but soon saw the advantages as well. I have not totaly abandoned nHibernate. I will continue to keep int in my "box of tools". I have found LLBLGen useful in some cases especially when interacting with a database that already exists and you have no choice of re-designing it. It takes less than an hour (depending on size of database of course) to generate my LLBLGen Entity Objects from the database, as opposed to having to code all of it manually with nHibernate, AND do the mappings. nHibernate is missing a nice graphical interface to create the mappings. This fact becomes even more important when the database is massive with thousands of tables that you need to potentially access in your application.
Although LLBLGen is more of a Data Access Layer generator (And I am not normally a fan of DAL generators), it has a lot of features a "true ORM" tool would have. In my opinion it has the best of both worlds. Once you start working with it you start to realize that it is very flexible and extendable. One part I like a lot is that it is possible for me to create partial classes for the generated entity objects, where I can code in my business logic, as well as validation.
The code generation is templated so you have full control over the code it generates. With nHibernate I find myself writing some of the same kind of code over and over again. With LLBLGen I can generate it and get to focus on business logic and issues quicker.
For someone who is just starting to use ORM type tools, I really recommend to start with LLBLGen, because nHibernate can be overwhelming. And in the end you will have achieved the same result (More or less).
Edit #1: LLBLGen now also has 100% support for LINQ. (So if you like LINQ to SQL for that reason) further LLBLGen can support many databases, where LINQ to SQL is only for Microsoft SQL Database.
Edit #2:
According to Graviton you can use CodeSmith to do some of the code generating for you for nHibernate. That is really cool, but for a newcomer to ORM I would still recommend LLBLGen. To me that is adding more dependencies where LLBLGen has it all in one package. Also like I said before the learning curve is so much less steep and you will get the same benefits, which will also help you ease in to nHibernate if you ever decide to go there.
The major difference is that LLBLGen is a code generator, while NHibernate is a "true" ORM library.
LLBLGen advantages:
Easy to use model designer. Can import your existing database schema
Fully typed object model and query language
LLBLGen disadvantages:
You need the designer application to change your model
Not free
Can bloat your code because a lot of code is generated
NHibernate advantages:
No designer application needed. Only code
Widely used (based on the most popular Java ORM, Hibernate)
Very powerful for mapping any data model you can imagine
Open source
NHibernate disadvantages:
Hard to learn
Not as strongly typed as one would like (especially queries)
Of course, this is just my personal point of view...
I typed up a fairly long answer before realizing this was a somewhat old question. Oh well. It's still very relevant.
You have narrowed your list to the two best candidates for an ORM in the .NET world. I have limited experience with either, but I've read extensively about the pros and cons of both. They really serve somewhat different needs in different ways.
In the upcoming LLBLGen Pro 3.0, Frans Bouma has talked about adding features to generate NHibernate mappings. So, it's not even necessarily an either/or decision.
If you want to do "class first" design (as opposed to "database first" design), NHibernate is pretty much your best and only option right now (neither LLBLGen Pro nor Entity Framework support this mode, although it sounds like Entity Framework is improving it's support in the next version).
NHibernate and LLBLGen Pro both work hard to work well with legacy databases which you can not change and have to live with. That is their common strength. They both also work with Linq. They both also support some amount of graphical modeling, although LLBLGen Pro is far superior in this regard (ActiveWriter for NHibernate feels like the LinqToSql designer in Visual Studio, but it's not really as feature rich).
LLBLGen Pro has much stronger code generation abilities, but too much code generation can lead to compromised testability and maintainability (one small tweak can cause massive amounts of code to need retesting).
While NHibernate wants to help you work through fairly complex object/relational mapping scenarios like class inheritance, LLBLGen Pro is really just exposing your database as a data layer and business objects in a very quick way.
If you can purchase LLBLGen Pro and have some time, I would try both and see which one better meets your needs. Learning both ORMs is good for your resume in any case.
So, in the end, I would say it's situational. The cost of NHibernate and its lack of serious flaws make a pretty compelling case in the majority of situations.
The new version of LLBLGen Pro (3.0) allows you to generate code for NHibernate, so don't have to choose :). It also allows you to split up your entities into different domains.
I still prefer the LLBLGen pro runtime though, the LINQ interpreter is more complete and it has better change tracking of fields.
Unfortunately there's not many new features in the new LLBLGen Pro 3.0 runtime, as the creator first wanted to focus more on tooling than improving the existing framework.
I've used nHibernate, LLBLGen Pro, a custom data layer from my consulting company, the Enterprise Library, and LINQ. LLBLGen is by far my favorite and it allows writing one business layer that can talk to different types of databases using the same code providing database independence! Another incredible feature is it allows multiple connections to different databases. This is very useful when at a large company and one system is written in Sql Server and the other you have to interface with is in Oracle.
LLBLGen Pro is an amazing product backed up by Frans who is very active and works hard to fix issues. LLBLGen is like PhotoShop, it is an incredible tool and that can do amazing effects in the hands of someone who knows how to use. And like any tool that saves lots of time, it takes a week or two to learn how to use it, but will save months later on your project.
Not only did it speed up the DAL generation side of my app, it is also easy to create queries in the Business layer and send to the presentation layer. It made it easy to create an enterprise class application.
If one really wants to use nHibernate, start with LLBLGen Pro and generate the nHibernate code. If later on your department decides to switch from nHibernate to LINQ, you are covered. Want to switch from Sql Server to Oracle? This is possible and relatively easy with LLBLGen whereas with manually coded nHibernate code, you have to rewrite everything which is almost impossible to cost justify.
Frans was also available and answered some of my questions.
Don't forget one of the greatest plus point of Hibernate: HQL. With HQL, your SQL skill is not wasted. And Hibernate provides very nice, seamless support for native query as well.
If you have some weird, out-of-standard database, it's almost certain that you need your SQL skill at some point, and good luck with LLBL!
For me it boils down to database centric (LLBLGen Pro) vs. domain model centric (NHibernate).
Since I'm a DDD/OO guy, the choice has always been very easy for me, but I do see why LLBLGen Pro is popular.
We use LLBLGen at work, and it's reviled -- namely because we have multiple similar schemas, but you need to have a different DLL/Class library for each schema, meaning that it becomes annoying to write code that can target any schema.
Of course, that's an unusual environment, so it may not apply to you.