Re: Tagging an Alembic revision

On 06/08/2016 09:21 AM, Søren Løvborg wrote: Hi, What's the best practice for "tagging" an Alembic revision, that is to denote e.g. that 1ffbeb5179a5 is the database revision matching version 1.4.0 of the software? I can do it in documentation, of course, but would prefer a method allowing

Re: Autogenerate does not detect Complex/Composite Custom Types

the "existing type" comes from what is reflected from the database and your custom type is not automatically reflectable. The "existing type" for a PG alter_column is not important here because Postgresql's "ALTER COLUMN" doesn't require it. It's mostly for MySQL and SQL Server that

Tagging an Alembic revision

Hi, What's the best practice for "tagging" an Alembic revision, that is to denote e.g. that 1ffbeb5179a5 is the database revision matching version 1.4.0 of the software? I can do it in documentation, of course, but would prefer a method allowing e.g. "alembic downgrade v1.2.1". I guess I could