ORM for Qt
-
I tested QxOrm it works fine and easy to use so I consider it the perfect ORM framework for Qt the only problem with it is the license.
LiteSQL seems promising but it has major weak point which is XML database defining beside that it's not dealing with Qt library directly such as QxOrm.
QDjango is most candidate as a replacement to QxOrm because it built over Qt, supports LGPL and doesn't XML database definition, so this is the one I've to dig into it specially for performance tests... does any one share these tests with me?
-
-
maybe my orm desision will be helpfull ;) https://github.com/victorzhuk/eorm
-
[quote author="victorzhuk" date="1368309226"]maybe my orm desision will be healfull ;) https://github.com/victorzhuk/eorm[/quote]
- Is there any example or demo using it?
- Does the performance is quick as Qt's model or it's a slower a little bit (I'm not sure what if I used the loops instead of Qt's model the performance will be same as Qt)?
-
- examples are placed in documentation, use Doxygen to compose html docs. I can help if you don`t know how
- I think yes, but I don`t have chance to check this - I create this lib for personal use, and if you have any test results and ideas I can impove it :)
ps: sory for my english :)
-
[quote author="victorzhuk" date="1368310323"]examples are placed in documentation, use Doxygen to compose html docs. I can help if you don`t know how[/quote]
Oops I don't want to build the project manually... I just ask you for tiny example :)
[quote]I think yes, but I don`t have chance to check this - I create this lib for personal use, and if you have any test results and ideas I can impove it :)[/quote]
Do you mean it's slower? or it has same Qt performance?
-
if you need litle demo I can quick create it for you ;)
bq. Do you mean it’s slower? or it has same Qt performance?
library use only qt`s mechanisms, no boost or custom macros...and when I use it performance was the same
it`s will be great if my lib help anybody. wait for a sec, I post demo
-
-
[quote author="victorzhuk" date="1368314480"]http://rapidshare.com/files/549905365/EOrmDemo.tar.gz please[/quote]
It's not working!!! use another sharing website please (try one.ubuntu.com)
[quote]
The download for this file has not been enabled. Only the user who uploaded it, can enable the download option.
[/quote] -
here it is http://ubuntuone.com/5wimYZQnJJlcQCBo5pDpS6
-
For demo success working you should compile EOrm and add .so(.dll) and *.h files to EOrmDemo project (just replace paths in *.pro file)
-
[quote author="victorzhuk" date="1368314994"]here it is http://ubuntuone.com/5wimYZQnJJlcQCBo5pDpS6[/quote]
Thanks, I successfully run the example :) it's quite easy to understand... I think eorm's performance should be as Qt's model.
Any way, I've to test it in heavy and excessive usage then compare it with the above libraries in addition to Qt standard model, this may take some time because I'm busy these days.
Do you want to share with me these tests?
I want to test:
- eorm
- QDjango
- Standard Qt model
-
sure :) how can I help you? what tests?
-
let
s try :) about examples - I find a time and upload some in git, with find,model,create,delete etc.. hope its help somebody -
Guys, I found this library which may works too. I'll add it for performance comparison.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/qtpersistence/?source=directory -
Until now I'm planning to test:
- eorm: https://github.com/victorzhuk/eorm
- QDjango: https://code.google.com/p/qdjango/
- QsT SQL Tools: https://sourceforge.net/projects/qstsqltools/?source=directory
- QtPersistence: https://sourceforge.net/projects/qtpersistence/?source=directory
- Standard Qt model
I'm still looking for others...