NHibernate vs. EF 4.1+ [closed]

Question

I am trying to decide the pros and cons of the 2 ORM primarily in this area.

1. Compatibility with Sql Server 2008 R2 & 2012.
   • This is very important as we simply don't have the resources to debug poor support of existing MS technology stack.
   • Also planning ahead since 2012 is pretty much out and plans to migrate to it are in place.
2. Support for .NET 4.0 and 4.5 (upcoming)
   • Again very important for pretty much the same reason above.
3. Transaction handling and table hints eg. forcescan forceseek, read uncomitted.
   • A lot of times the query optimizer does its job well, other times I want the flexibility to tell it what to do.
4. Support for conversation, self tracking attach & detach
   • This is somewhat fundamental. I hate to keep the session open for prolonged period. Especially in distributed computing/web farm environment.
5. Ability to handle code first development, create and update schema without destroying data.
   • EF 4.1 seems to be wanting in this regard, although 4.3 is leap and bound better. Also liking the data annotation better than seperate mapping classes in NH. Reason being I want to be able to send in the class and from there be able to create persistence model without widening the method for the mapping classes.
6. Support for IRepository pattern
7. Support for LINQ
   • Somewhat tied to (6) above I want really good support for linq. I don't want developers to muck around with lower level implementation and getting ourselves stuck to one particular ORM
8. Performance
9. Support for bulk CRUD operations, without having to load the data into the application layer. Eg. I want to increment all rows in a column of a particular table by 1. I don't want to load this up to memory, and increment the rows one by one. This would be crazy for such a simple operation. Linq2Sql used to have Magiq to handle this sort of thing, what does NH and EF have?
10. Caching, eager loading, lazy loading, navigation properties.
    • Let me be frank I hate these things when done implicitly. Reason being it's hard to distinguish what is cached, stale from what is new. In EF I usually drop all navigation properties, because I don't want these properties loaded with top 5, because that's what the current operation needs, but further down the stream another developer attempts to do a count which will be inaccurate.
    • So my personal policy - all SOA shall be stateless unless there is a good reason otherwise. If you need referencing data, get it from persistence. It will be slower but the code will be more readable and flexible.
    • Similarly for caching. It is complex enough as it is in distributed environment, I want all caching to be very very explicit. If a developer wants to code against the cache, it should do so, not code against the ORM, and make it appear as if he is pulling fresh data from persistence when in fact he is getting stale data.
    • Now question is, does NHibernate have any concept/abstraction that would make caching, eager/lazy loading so much more explicit than the one currently available in EF. In this case I don't care much about ease of development, I care more about clarity and explicitness.

Also I don't care much for OSS vs. propietary argument. The team cannot afford the time to peek under the hood and start messing around with other people's code. I care more about the "it just works" angle than anything else.

Answer 1

While I wrote about some of these issues in another question, I think it's worth answering this one point by point.

1. Both are compatible with all SQL Server versions
2. Both are compatible with .NET 4.x. NH is still targeting 3.5, which is not an issue.
3. Both have transaction handling. Neither supports query hints in the native query languages, but both allow you to use SQL.
4. Both allow you to reattach disconnected entities. I personally do not think this is a good practice (I prefer passing DTOs around)
5. Schema migration is more mature and flexible in EF. Mapping is way, way better in NH. It does have support for mapping with attributes, which is a lot more powerful than EF's equivalent, which you'll quickly find does not support even basic stuff (like specifying a decimal field's precision)
6. You can implement your Repository on top of either one.
7. Both support LINQ. EF supports a wider range of queries, at the cost of generating extremely inefficient ones sometimes. You shouldn't dumb down your development practices; each query method has its advantages and a good developer should know the options.
8. Performance is usually better with NH because of its mapping flexibility and support for batching, caching, and DML statements
9. EF does not support bulk (DML) operations. NH does, using INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE statements that are very similar to the SQL ones, but over the object model (for example, you can specify conditions using dot syntax instead of explicit joins)
10. • EF does not support caching, period. There are some unsupported samples that are not ready for production. All caching in NHibernate is explicit (you specify which entities, collections and queries you want to cache, for how long, etc). It supports distributed caches like memcached, so it can take care of stale cache data too.
    • Both allow you to explicitly eager load references and collections. NH has, in my opinion, a better proxy design, which doesn't pollute your model with FKs (this is a long topic, you can post a followup question if you want). And as usual, you DO have more flexibility when specifying how each relationship must be loaded.

In a nutshell: NH is more flexible and better performing, hands down. EF has better migration support, a slightly easier learning curve and a more complete LINQ provider.

Answer 2

First of all, I prefer NHibernate under various aspects. Entity Framework misses something also in the version 5.0.

1. Is very easy to add a new type in NHibernate, so if SQL Server 2012 has new types you can implement the relative dialect/provider, but the community is always working
2. I know that the NH team is working on the support of FW 4.5, EF supports it from the 5.0
3. Using NH you can do all what you want
4. NH supports the Merge method to re-attach an entity, EF also
5. EF does not support naming conventions, NH does, I'm also writing an auto mapper based on DataAnnotations, here the link to the old version, wait 2 weeks for the new one
6. Using NH or EF you can implement the Data Layer with the Repository and Unit Of Work patterns, I've to release also this package on NuGet
7. EF fully supports LINQ, NH not but you can patch using an extension point
8. I think that performances are on the same level, NH better supports the secondary level cache so is easy to prevent hits to the database
9. NH has an improved batching support, I don't know about EF (specially the 5.0)
10. NH has a better implementation of the extension points, so proxy/caching/logging are powerfull than EF, but in EF you can write a wrapper to get what you need

At the end, with NH is easier to implement DDD pattern, because the mapping is more flexible.