Um; I'd rather an adapter method that's something more like: to_native_query(query) => SQL for RDBMS, but allows other query languages too.
Just my $0.02. --Ivan Ivan R. Judson (406) 285-1395 Voice (928) 569-3850 Fax On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Ted Han <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Kane, > > I've been chatting w/ dkubb a bit. Rather than a Query#to_sql method i'd > suggest having a #sql_from(query) method on adapters (or whatever we call > it). Do you have feelings on the subject? > > There's a bunch of stuff you can do with the Query API, but it's a bit of a > mess. I would be interested to know more about the details about what > you're trying to cleanup and the like, since that'd be useful to know what > improvements can be made to the SQL generator and to the API in general. > > -T > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Kane Baccigalupi > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> We have a very big app in Sinatra. I set up logging when we switched >> to Datamapper, which is how we are able to look at our development and >> tests logs to determine the final SQL. That isn't what I am looking >> for, because we already have that. I am looking for a way, preferably >> in tests to be able to inspect the SQL string generated by ?query? >> objects. Clearly the string is generated before it is sent to the >> database, so where is that string so that we can make assertions >> against it. >> >> Why would I want to do this? Did I mention that we have a very big >> application? Some or our joins combine many datamapper query objects >> with intersection, or, and ... Very ofter postgres is fussy about such >> things as the order of clauses, sub-selects, requirements in the where >> clause. We are having performance issues related to this fussiness, >> and because we do test driven development, we would like to match our >> queries to assure no regressions as our code changes or we update >> gems. >> >> So, Ted's solution is by far the best. Thanks Ted. >> >> I can build a method on our search object that does this kind of thing >> with less verbosity. But I would really like my query all put >> together, with the question marks dumped supplanted already with >> variables. This will be good enough, but I would love it all. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "DataMapper" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper?hl=en. >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "DataMapper" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DataMapper" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper?hl=en.
