I have been working with NH for a while now, and the experience has been anything but pleasant.
ED for NH made it more bearable, but I am still having a number of problems, both with NH as such, and with the ED for NH tool, as you can see from my littering the forum with lengthy posts.
Of the three supported database abstractions (Entity Framework, LINQ to SQL, NH) - which would you personally prefer or recommend?
I have no attachment to my existing schema - matching a particular schema or mapping is not a concern, as the application I'm building has not yet been deployed. So backwards compatibility with an existing database is not important.
How does ED for LINQ to SQL compare to ED for NH in terms of features?
ED - recommended or preferred DB abstraction?
-
StanislavK
- Devart Team
- Posts: 1710
- Joined: Thu 03 Dec 2009 10:48
Sorry for the delay. Both Entity Framework and LINQ to SQL are simpler and support less features than NHibernate. Provided that you are interested in fine tuning of your models, NHibernate should be the better choice.
Of course, we personally prefer LinqConnect, an ORM solution developed by Devart. It is simpler to understand, simpler to use and, in general cases, faster than Entity Framework and NHibernate. However, we are performing a major refactoring of the LinqConnect change tracking and persisting functionality at the moment. If you are interested in LinqConnect, we would recommend you to try it after this refactoring process is finished (we will inform you when it is).
Of course, we personally prefer LinqConnect, an ORM solution developed by Devart. It is simpler to understand, simpler to use and, in general cases, faster than Entity Framework and NHibernate. However, we are performing a major refactoring of the LinqConnect change tracking and persisting functionality at the moment. If you are interested in LinqConnect, we would recommend you to try it after this refactoring process is finished (we will inform you when it is).