主题比较中心

JDBC 对比 Hibernate

通过结构化对比表查看 JDBC 与 Hibernate 的差异，然后继续浏览相关面试题、测验以及类似主题比较。

7 比较要点

4 相关比较

主题对比

JDBC 与 Hibernate 的对比有助于你理解哪一种更适合自己的使用场景。这里也整理了 Hibernate 和 JDBC 的常见对比内容，适用于面试准备。

比较概览

JDBC 与 Hibernate 的区别

JDBC 与 Hibernate 的对比有助于你理解哪一种更适合自己的使用场景。这里也整理了 Hibernate 和 JDBC 的常见对比内容，适用于面试准备。

JDBC 本次并排比较中的主题一。

7 当前页面可用的比较条目。

Hibernate 本次并排比较中的主题二。

JDBC Interview Online Test	Hibernate Interview Online Test
With JDBC, developer has to write code to map an object model's data representation to a relational data model and its corresponding database schema.	Hibernate is flexible and powerful ORM solution to map Java classes to database tables. Hibernate itself takes care of this mapping using XML files so developer does not need to write code for this.
With JDBC, the automatic mapping of Java objects with database tables and vice versa conversion is to be taken care of by the developer manually with lines of code.	Hibernate provides transparent persistence and developer does not need to write code explicitly to map database tables tuples to application objects during interaction with RDBMS.
JDBC supports only native Structured Query Language (SQL). Developer has to find out the efficient way to access database, i.e. to select effective query from a number of queries to perform same task.	Hibernate provides a powerful query language Hibernate Query Language (independent from type of database) that is expressed in a familiar SQL like syntax and includes full support for polymorphic queries. Hibernate also supports native SQL statements. It also selects an effective way to perform a database manipulation task for an application.
Application using JDBC to handle persistent data (database tables) having database specific code in large amount. The code written to map table data to application objects and vice versa is actually to map table fields to object properties. As table changed or database changed then it�s essential to change object structure as well as to change code written to map table-to-object/object-to-table.	Hibernate provides this mapping itself. The actual mapping between tables and application objects is done in XML files. If there is change in Database or in any table then the only need to change XML file properties.
With JDBC, it is developer�s responsibility to handle JDBC result set and convert it to Java objects through code to use this persistent data in application. So with JDBC, mapping between Java objects and database tables is done manually.	Hibernate reduces lines of code by maintaining object-table mapping itself and returns result to application in form of Java objects. It relieves programmer from manual handling of persistent data, hence reducing the development time and maintenance cost.
With JDBC, caching is maintained by hand-coding.	Hibernate, with Transparent Persistence, cache is set to application work space. Relational tuples are moved to this cache as a result of query. It improves performance if client application reads same data many times for same write. Automatic Transparent Persistence allows the developer to concentrate more on business logic rather than this application code.
In JDBC there is no check that always every user has updated data. This check has to be added by the developer.	Hibernate enables developer to define version type field to application, due to this defined field Hibernate updates version field of database table every time relational tuple is updated in form of Java class object to that table. So if two users retrieve same tuple and then modify it and one user save this modified tuple to database, version is automatically updated for this tuple by Hibernate. When other user tries to save updated tuple to database then it does not allow saving it because this user does not have updated data.

保存以便复习

收藏此条目、标记为困难题，或将其加入复习集合。

打开我的学习资料库

这有帮助吗？是否

更多类似内容

从下方查看差异对比

浏览下面所有可用的主题比较，或使用上方搜索框快速缩小范围。

通过聚焦学习路径、模拟测试和面试实战内容持续提升技能。

JDBC 对比 Hibernate

主题对比

JDBC 与 Hibernate 的区别

保存以便复习

相关差异对比

从下方查看差异对比

WithoutBook