Hibernate and JDBC performance? [closed]

Answer 1

JDBC will always give better performance as compared to Hibernate for most of the database vendors. You can check the comparison made as given in the link below. He concludes that Hibernate is fast when querying tables with less rows else JDBC is way better:
http://phpdao.com/hibernate_vs_jdbc/

Another good performance stats can be found in Hibernate forum discussion at https://forum.hibernate.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=931708

It states the following order of performance hit taken due to use of Hibernate (please note that this can be improved by tuning Hibernate to one's needs:

Objects: 8 - Hibernate: 10ms / Direct JDBC: 10ms = Ratio: 1.0 
Objects: 16 - Hibernate: 10ms / Direct JDBC: 0ms = Ratio: Infinity 
Objects: 64 - Hibernate: 20ms / Direct JDBC: 10ms = Ratio: 2.0 
Objects: 256 - Hibernate: 150ms / Direct JDBC: 30ms = Ratio: 5.0 
Objects: 512 - Hibernate: 210ms / Direct JDBC: 40ms = Ratio: 5.25 
Objects: 1024 - Hibernate: 410ms / Direct JDBC: 70ms = Ratio: 5.857143 
Objects: 2048 - Hibernate: 681ms / Direct JDBC: 180ms = Ratio: 3.7833333

The choice of Hibernate over JDBC and SQL queries is not because of the performance, but because of reasons mainly object persistence and database independence in terms of not writing database specific queries. You can read the following PDF guide to get a better view:

• http://www.mindfiresolutions.com/mindfire/Java_Hibernate_JDBC.pdf

Answer 2

For your particular situation I would recommend creating your own object that would keep needed static value(s). You can populate it during initialization of your application or when that data is requested for the first time.

As for the comparative perfromance, your best case is that your Hibernate-based data access layer would perfrom as good as JDBC, or the perfromance degradation would not affect overall user expereince. Hibernate is used to speed up development and enhance maintainability, not to get a perfromance edge over JDBC.