Comparison of EclipseLink with Derby embedded vs OpenJPA with H2 server

Each of the following tables focuses on a specific database operation, where the last table presents average results comparison.

Speed comparison of JPA database persistence operations (normalized score, higher is better)

Transaction Size =>	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server
Basic Person Test	5.5	3.7	3.7	2.2	4.6	2.9
Element Collection Test	3.0	2.6	1.7	1.5	2.4	2.1
Inheritance Test	5.3	4.5	3.5	2.0	4.4	3.2
Indexing Test	6.9	7.3	4.6	3.6	5.8	5.4
Graph (Binary Tree) Test	2.0	1.1	1.9	0.84	1.9	0.97
Multithreading Test	9.3	7.7	4.1	4.2	6.7	5.9
All Tests	5.3	4.5	3.2	2.4	4.3	3.4

The results above show that in general EclipseLink with Derby embedded is slightly more efficient than OpenJPA with H2 server in persisting JPA entity objects to the database.

A large performance gap has been detected when using graphs of objects with large transaction size. Comparing the normalized speed of OpenJPA with H2 database server (0.84) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (1.9) reveals that in that case, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 2.3 times faster than OpenJPA with H2 server.

Speed comparison of JPA database retrieval operations (normalized score, higher is better)

Retrieval Size =>	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server
Basic Person Test	16.4	2.9	58.7	7.6	37.5	5.2
Element Collection Test	7.5	0.0022	13.3	1.9	10.4	0.93
Inheritance Test	17.1	0.013	58.9	4.0	38.0	2.0
Indexing Test	14.2	4.1	67.4	8.8	40.8	6.5
Graph (Binary Tree) Test	2.8	0.38	5.7	0.49	4.2	0.44
Multithreading Test	28.0	5.9	48.7	14.0	38.4	10.0
All Tests	14.3	2.2	42.1	6.1	28.2	4.2

The results above show that in general EclipseLink with Derby embedded is much more efficient than OpenJPA with H2 server in retrieving JPA entity objects from the database. Comparing the normalized speed of OpenJPA with H2 database server (4.2) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (28.2) reveals that in these tests, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 6.7 times faster than OpenJPA with H2 server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using JPA element collections with small retrieval size. Comparing the normalized speed of OpenJPA with H2 database server (0.0022) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (7.5) reveals that in that case, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 3,409 times faster than OpenJPA with H2 server.

Speed comparison of JPA database query operations (normalized score, higher is better)

Retrieval Size =>	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server
Basic Person Test	53.4	3.7	13.8	1.0	33.6	2.4
Element Collection Test	37.9	2.0	4.4	1.2	21.2	1.6
Inheritance Test	37.4	2.8	15.0	1.1	26.2	2.0
Indexing Test	7.6	3.8	49.3	7.5	28.4	5.7
Multithreading Test	41.2	0.98	6.1	1.0	23.6	1.0
All Tests	35.5	2.7	17.7	2.4	26.6	2.5

The results above show that in general EclipseLink with Derby embedded is much more efficient than OpenJPA with H2 server in executing the tested JPA queries. Comparing the normalized speed of OpenJPA with H2 database server (2.5) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (26.6) reveals that in these tests, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 10.6 times faster than OpenJPA with H2 server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using multithreading with small retrieval size. Comparing the normalized speed of OpenJPA with H2 database server (0.98) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (41.2) reveals that in that case, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 42.0 times faster than OpenJPA with H2 server.

Speed comparison of JPA database update operations (normalized score, higher is better)

Transaction Size =>	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server
Basic Person Test	6.4	3.0	6.7	2.0	6.5	2.5
Element Collection Test	5.4	0.0078	6.2	1.9	5.8	0.94
Inheritance Test	6.5	0.034	9.2	2.8	7.8	1.4
Indexing Test	7.3	2.8	11.1	3.2	9.2	3.0
Graph (Binary Tree) Test	2.8	0.79	1.7	0.43	2.2	0.61
Multithreading Test	21.3	7.0	5.0	2.5	13.1	4.8
All Tests	8.3	2.3	6.6	2.1	7.5	2.2

The results above show that in general EclipseLink with Derby embedded is much more efficient than OpenJPA with H2 server in updating JPA entity objects in the database. Comparing the normalized speed of OpenJPA with H2 database server (2.2) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (7.5) reveals that in these tests, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 3.4 times faster than OpenJPA with H2 server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using JPA element collections with small transaction size. Comparing the normalized speed of OpenJPA with H2 database server (0.0078) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (5.4) reveals that in that case, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 692 times faster than OpenJPA with H2 server.

Speed comparison of JPA database removal operations (normalized score, higher is better)

Transaction Size =>	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server
Basic Person Test	4.6	3.2	4.7	2.2	4.6	2.7
Element Collection Test	2.5	0.0060	1.4	0.88	1.9	0.44
Inheritance Test	3.9	0.030	4.5	3.1	4.2	1.6
Indexing Test	6.2	6.5	3.8	3.6	5.0	5.1
Graph (Binary Tree) Test	1.1	0.73	1.0	0.75	1.1	0.74
Multithreading Test	6.2	7.6	5.8	5.2	6.0	6.4
All Tests	4.1	3.0	3.5	2.6	3.8	2.8

The results above show that in general EclipseLink with Derby embedded is more efficient than OpenJPA with H2 server in deleting JPA entity objects from the database.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using JPA element collections with small transaction size. Comparing the normalized speed of OpenJPA with H2 database server (0.0060) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (2.5) reveals that in that case, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 417 times faster than OpenJPA with H2 server.

Comparison of JPA/Database speed - the averages (normalized score, higher is better)

Transaction/Retrieval Size	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	OpenJPA H2 server
Basic Person Test	17.3	3.3	17.5	3.0	17.4	3.1
Element Collection Test	11.3	0.93	5.4	1.5	8.3	1.2
Inheritance Test	14.0	1.5	18.2	2.6	16.1	2.0
Indexing Test	8.4	4.9	27.2	5.4	17.8	5.1
Graph (Binary Tree) Test	2.2	0.75	2.6	0.63	2.4	0.69
Multithreading Test	21.2	5.9	13.9	5.4	17.6	5.6
All Tests	12.7	2.9	14.5	3.2	13.6	3.0

The results above show that in general EclipseLink with Derby embedded is much more efficient than OpenJPA with H2 server in performing JPA database operations. Comparing the normalized speed of OpenJPA with H2 database server (3.0) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (13.6) reveals that in these tests, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 4.5 times faster than OpenJPA with H2 server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using JPA element collections with small transaction/retrieval size. Comparing the normalized speed of OpenJPA with H2 database server (0.93) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (11.3) reveals that in that case, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 12.2 times faster than OpenJPA with H2 server.

JPA Performance Benchmark (JPAB)