我已经停止使用orm了。

原因并不是这个概念有什么大缺陷。Hibernate工作得很好。相反，我发现查询的开销很低，我可以将大量复杂的逻辑放入大型SQL查询中，并将大量处理转移到数据库中。

因此，请考虑只使用JDBC包。

冬眠，因为它:

是稳定的-存在了这么多年，它没有任何大的问题 规定了ORM领域的标准 实现标准(JPA)，并对其进行口述。 网上有很多关于它的信息。有许多教程，常见问题的解决方案等 功能强大—您可以将非常复杂的对象模型转换为关系模型。 它支持任何主要和中型RDBMS 一旦你学会了它，就很容易使用

关于为什么(以及何时)使用ORM的几点:

you work with objects in your system (if your system has been designed well). Even if using JDBC, you will end up making some translation layer, so that you transfer your data to your objects. But my bets are that hibernate is better at translation than any custom-made solution. it doesn't deprive you of control. You can control things in very small details, and if the API doesn't have some remote feature - execute a native query and you have it. any medium-sized or bigger system can't afford having one ton of queries (be it at one place or scattered across), if it aims to be maintainable if performance isn't critical. Hibernate adds performance overhead, which in some cases can't be ignored.

我建议使用MyBatis。它是JDBC之上的一个薄层，它很容易将对象映射到表，并且仍然使用纯SQL，一切都在您的控制之下。

Hibernate，因为它基本上是Java中事实上的标准，并且是创建JPA的驱动力之一。Spring对它有很好的支持，几乎每个Java框架都支持它。最后，GORM是一个非常酷的包装器，它使用Groovy做动态查找器等。

它甚至被移植到。net (NHibernate)，所以你也可以在那里使用它。

我已经停止使用orm了。

原因并不是这个概念有什么大缺陷。Hibernate工作得很好。相反，我发现查询的开销很低，我可以将大量复杂的逻辑放入大型SQL查询中，并将大量处理转移到数据库中。

因此，请考虑只使用JDBC包。

虽然我也担心Java会取代自由形式的SQL查询，但我确实认为人们批评ORM是因为它的应用程序设计总体上很糟糕。

True OOD is driven by classes and relationships, and ORM gives you consistent mapping of different relationship types and objects. If you use an ORM tool and end up coding query expressions in whatever query language the ORM framework supports (including, but not limited to Java expression trees, query methods, OQL etc.), you are definitely doing something wrong, i.e. your class model most likely doesn't support your requirements in the way it should. A clean application design doesn't really need queries on the application level. I've been refactoring many projects people started out using an ORM framework in the same way as they were used to embed SQL string constants in their code, and in the end everyone was suprised about how simple and maintainable the whole application gets once you match up your class model with the usage model. Granted, for things like search functionality etc. you need a query language, but even then queries are so much constrained that creating an even complex VIEW and mapping that to a read-only persistent class is much nicer to maintain and look at than building expressions in some query language in the code of your application. The VIEW approach also leverages database capabilities and, via materialization, can be much better performance-wise than any hand-written SQL in your Java source. So, I don't see any reason for a non-trivial application NOT to use ORM.