Comparison of Hibernate with H2 server vs EclipseLink with Derby embedded

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
	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded
Basic Person Test	4.6	5.5	3.0	3.7	3.8	4.6
Element Collection Test	3.7	3.0	1.1	1.7	2.4	2.4
Inheritance Test	6.7	5.3	3.1	3.5	4.9	4.4
Indexing Test	8.2	6.9	4.2	4.6	6.2	5.8
Graph (Binary Tree) Test	3.4	2.0	3.9	1.9	3.7	1.9
Multithreading Test	6.8	9.3	5.0	4.1	5.9	6.7
All Tests	5.6	5.3	3.4	3.2	4.5	4.3

The results above show that in general Hibernate with H2 server is slightly more efficient than EclipseLink with Derby embedded 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 EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (1.9) to the normalized speed of Hibernate with H2 database server (3.9) reveals that in that case, Hibernate with H2 server is 2.1 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby embedded.

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

Retrieval Size =>	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded
Basic Person Test	3.1	16.4	6.0	58.7	4.6	37.5
Element Collection Test	1.0	7.5	1.1	13.3	1.0	10.4
Inheritance Test	2.9	17.1	7.6	58.9	5.2	38.0
Indexing Test	2.6	14.2	7.0	67.4	4.8	40.8
Graph (Binary Tree) Test	0.42	2.8	1.1	5.7	0.78	4.2
Multithreading Test	6.5	28.0	10.5	48.7	8.5	38.4
All Tests	2.8	14.3	5.6	42.1	4.2	28.2

The results above show that in general EclipseLink with Derby embedded is much more efficient than Hibernate with H2 server in retrieving JPA entity objects from the database. Comparing the normalized speed of Hibernate 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 Hibernate with H2 server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using JPA element collections with large retrieval size. Comparing the normalized speed of Hibernate with H2 database server (1.1) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (13.3) reveals that in that case, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 12.1 times faster than Hibernate with H2 server.

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

Retrieval Size =>	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded
Basic Person Test	3.7	53.4	1.0	13.8	2.3	33.6
Element Collection Test	3.7	37.9	0.63	4.4	2.2	21.2
Inheritance Test	3.2	37.4	1.4	15.0	2.3	26.2
Indexing Test	1.7	7.6	5.8	49.3	3.8	28.4
Multithreading Test	1.1	41.2	0.88	6.1	1.0	23.6
All Tests	2.7	35.5	1.9	17.7	2.3	26.6

The results above show that in general EclipseLink with Derby embedded is much more efficient than Hibernate with H2 server in executing the tested JPA queries. Comparing the normalized speed of Hibernate with H2 database server (2.3) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (26.6) reveals that in these tests, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 11.6 times faster than Hibernate with H2 server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using multithreading with small retrieval size. Comparing the normalized speed of Hibernate with H2 database server (1.1) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (41.2) reveals that in that case, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 37.5 times faster than Hibernate with H2 server.

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

Transaction Size =>	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded
Basic Person Test	2.9	6.4	1.8	6.7	2.4	6.5
Element Collection Test	2.6	5.4	1.1	6.2	1.9	5.8
Inheritance Test	3.2	6.5	2.5	9.2	2.9	7.8
Indexing Test	2.9	7.3	2.7	11.1	2.8	9.2
Graph (Binary Tree) Test	1.2	2.8	0.43	1.7	0.79	2.2
Multithreading Test	5.6	21.3	2.4	5.0	4.0	13.1
All Tests	3.1	8.3	1.8	6.6	2.5	7.5

The results above show that in general EclipseLink with Derby embedded is much more efficient than Hibernate with H2 server in updating JPA entity objects in the database. Comparing the normalized speed of Hibernate with H2 database server (2.5) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (7.5) reveals that in these tests, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 3.0 times faster than Hibernate with H2 server.

A large performance gap has been detected when using JPA element collections with large transaction size. Comparing the normalized speed of Hibernate with H2 database server (1.1) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (6.2) reveals that in that case, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 5.6 times faster than Hibernate with H2 server.

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

Transaction Size =>	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded
Basic Person Test	3.8	4.6	2.4	4.7	3.1	4.6
Element Collection Test	1.9	2.5	1.1	1.4	1.5	1.9
Inheritance Test	3.7	3.9	2.5	4.5	3.1	4.2
Indexing Test	7.6	6.2	3.1	3.8	5.3	5.0
Graph (Binary Tree) Test	0.99	1.1	0.91	1.0	0.95	1.1
Multithreading Test	6.1	6.2	7.3	5.8	6.7	6.0
All Tests	4.0	4.1	2.9	3.5	3.5	3.8

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

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

Transaction/Retrieval Size	Few Entities		Many Entities		Average Score
	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded	Hibernate H2 server	EclipseLink Derby embedded
Basic Person Test	3.6	17.3	2.8	17.5	3.2	17.4
Element Collection Test	2.6	11.3	1.0	5.4	1.8	8.3
Inheritance Test	4.0	14.0	3.4	18.2	3.7	16.1
Indexing Test	4.6	8.4	4.5	27.2	4.6	17.8
Graph (Binary Tree) Test	1.5	2.2	1.6	2.6	1.6	2.4
Multithreading Test	5.2	21.2	5.2	13.9	5.2	17.6
All Tests	3.7	12.7	3.2	14.5	3.4	13.6

The results above show that in general EclipseLink with Derby embedded is much more efficient than Hibernate with H2 server in performing JPA database operations. Comparing the normalized speed of Hibernate with H2 database server (3.4) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (13.6) reveals that in these tests, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 4.0 times faster than Hibernate with H2 server.

A large performance gap has been detected when using simple basic entities with large transaction/retrieval size. Comparing the normalized speed of Hibernate with H2 database server (2.8) to the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby embedded database (17.5) reveals that in that case, EclipseLink with Derby embedded is 6.2 times faster than Hibernate with H2 server.

JPA Performance Benchmark (JPAB)