On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 06:31:38PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > It is possible - every SQLObject method accept a connection parameter.
> > Open two different connections and pass them as needed.
>
> Ah, I'll try that.
I did it in a program that converts between MySQL, PostgreSQL and
SQLite.
> > > - Inserts into a DB are painfully slow when there are many rows.
> >
> > Then do not use SQLObject for bulk insertion. Use sqlbuilder.Insert().
> > Search for examples in the archive of the mailing list.
>
> Yes, that's just a bit awkward and you kind of loose sqlobject's
> abstraction.
But the abstraction is exactly what slows things down. It is hard to
have both cakes - speed and abstraction. (-:
> > Patches will be gladly accepted.
>
> I'll take a look. The problem is, we're currently on 0.7 and I wouldn't
> think adding something to this version is likely to run on svn HEAD, right?
> Maybe we could switch to HEAD. How stable is HEAD then?
HEAD is not very stable but 0.8 branch is.
> What I would like to do is pass an sresult directly:
> sqlobject.Delete(Klass.selectBy(otherKlassID = 10))
SQLObject doesn't do that. But that's an interesting idea. I will think
of it.
> or even
> Klass.selectBy(otherKlassID = 10).destroy()
for row in Klass.selectBy(otherKlassID = 10):
row.destroySelf()
But than... speed!
Oleg.
--
Oleg Broytmann http://phd.pp.ru/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
sqlobject-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sqlobject-discuss
