Hi,
I am using sqlalchemy with pylons and I am trying to extract some
metadata about the set of relationships between the objects I have
defined.
Specifically, I am trying to work out how to tell what kind of objects
are held in a one to many relationship.
e.g.
Two classes - person and phone
Ok, I'd rather handle it on the database level. Is that just a matter
of creating a function and calling it on insert?
Koen
On Apr 13, 4:47 am, Ants Aasma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 13, 2:47 am, Jorge Godoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IF you insist on doing that at your code, make the
Michael Bayer wrote:
please file a ticket for this.
done, #535
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sqlalchemy group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this
request_table = Table('request', metadata,
Column('id', Integer, primary_key=True),
Column('number', Integer, unique=True, nullable=True,
default=text('(SELECT coalesce(max(number), 0) + 1 FROM
request)')))
This seems to work well. But is this a good way to do
I have a Parent - Child (1:N) relationship between Class and Exam
table.
Class - Exam
1 :N
Now since a Class could have millions of Exam I don't want have
an attribute on Class called exams. Instead I only want an
attribute on Exam to the parent Class.
Can we do this in SA
cool thx.
On 4/13/07, svilen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a Parent - Child (1:N) relationship between Class and Exam
table.
Class - Exam
1 :N
Now since a Class could have millions of Exam I don't want have
an attribute on Class called exams. Instead I only want
On Apr 13, 1:47 pm, Koen Bok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
request_table = Table('request', metadata,
Column('id', Integer, primary_key=True),
Column('number', Integer, unique=True, nullable=True,
default=text('(SELECT coalesce(max(number), 0) + 1 FROM
Disrupt07 wrote:
I have a table storing users' info.
table: userinfo
columns: name, surname, age, location, ...
I need to query this table using SQLAlchemy's ORM methods (e.g.
select(), select_by(), get_by()). The query should be like
SELECT * FROM userinfo WHERE name LIKE 'Ben%'
Wouldn't the semantics of IN seem to imply that the expression foo IN
empty set, should always evaluate to false? Clearly, foo is not
in the empty set. I can't think of a use case where I'd use IN and
want the expression anything IN empty set to evaluate to True.
I'm another user who would use
Disrupt07 wrote
@Simon
Thanks. But what is your_query? Is it SQLAlchemy or pure SQL?
It is a Query object, as described here:
http://www.sqlalchemy.org/docs/datamapping.html
If you haven't read them yet, I'd recommend working through a tutorial -
I found this one really helpful:
On Apr 12, 2007, at 11:38 PM, Kaali wrote:
I actually tried to use query.instances, but it behaved quite oddly. I
didn't debug or even echo the SQL calls yet, but it made accessing
those instances very slow. The actual instances call was quick, but
when accessing the objects from the
On Apr 13, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Arun Kumar PG wrote:
Hi All,
I have a web application where I have multiple DAOs that may be
called during phases within a request. Since I want to make sure
that I get the same session with every DAO I was wondering if I can
add a runtime session
On Apr 13, 2007, at 11:40 AM, Rick wrote:
Sorry, it looks like is already being discussed. (Serve me right for
reading in threaded mode.) From my SA-newbie POV, I'd love it if
col.in_() compiled down to false or 0 (whatever works).
sure...but I was just saying, i get much more antsy if
Hi,
I found that if I do
select([func.count(table.c.column)],distinct=True).execute()
the resulting query is
select distinct count(column) from table
but it's not what I wanted. If my column has duplicates you got
counting them, rather then count unique names. The proper SQL query
would be
On Apr 13, 2007, at 12:51 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
haven't thought yet of where/how to hack this...
i may have to abandon *-to-many-relations() alltogether, as i don't
want/need them loaded - only filtered at view-time.
or can i make some super- (or sub-) relation thing (propertyLoader?)
On Apr 13, 6:40 pm, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, it looks like is already being discussed. (Serve me right for
reading in threaded mode.) From my SA-newbie POV, I'd love it if
col.in_() compiled down to false or 0 (whatever works).
col.in_() is easy to get working correctly, the
On Apr 13, 2007, at 2:37 PM, Ants Aasma wrote:
On Apr 13, 6:40 pm, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, it looks like is already being discussed. (Serve me right for
reading in threaded mode.) From my SA-newbie POV, I'd love it if
col.in_() compiled down to false or 0 (whatever works).
Hi,
I added to my query the limit and offset (using ORACLE). To my
surprise results ARE varying if I'll print my select or not before
executing query. What I mean is the following
sel = select ()
#print sel
sel.execute()
so, if I will not print my select, I'll get *smaller* number of
On Apr 13, 10:16 pm, Michael Bayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, first thing i wasnt sure about, is CASE supported on every DB
that we support. I took a look at our CASE unit test and it appears
it applies to all DBs...(although i cant verify it passes on
firebird).
Works on Firebird 1.5.3.
#476 - forget the visitor stuff; i use the simpler code that is in the
text of 02/15/07 09:59:22 changed by svil comment, for some 2
months now, and all is ok.
i've added the patch/code to that ticket as well as to #474/475.
On Friday 13 April 2007 23:17:37 Ants Aasma wrote:
On Apr 13, 10:16
On Apr 13, 2007, at 4:17 PM, Ants Aasma wrote:
really, the work to do here is 5% the patch to the in_() method, and
95% making me a really nice unit test suite that will generatively
test IN for every contingencyincluding the bind param stuff in
#476 (but simpler code than whats patched
21 matches
Mail list logo
