On May 7, 2006, at 4:55 PM, Michael Bayer wrote:
regardless of if you have a DB with 250 or 1000 tables. is it then
appropriate to have 1000 separate classes ?
no way in hell. that would be a mindfuck.
in my case, I have 200+ tables and about 50 classes / objects that
are mapped against them
would I rather
a - write 50 class definitions for sqlalchemy
b - have a script autogenerate 200 table definitions in the
sqlalchemy syntax , delete 150 of them, and then just extend 50 with
the inter-table mappngs
i'm solidly in the b camp
I have only seen one database schema that had several hundred
tables before. the guy basically represented every single element
of a large and complicated DTD as a separate table, i.e. <taga> was
one table, <tagb> was another, etc. To him,
=snip
you cant tell me thats the proper way to do something. and even if
it was, you dont represent an XML document with a different class
for each XML tag, you use a DOM tree, which uses about half a dozen
classes.
sure i can. i might have to practice saying it with a straight face
for a while, but yeah, i could definitely say that.
-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Sqlalchemy-users mailing list
Sqlalchemy-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sqlalchemy-users
