On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:45:40PM +0200, Petr Jakeš wrote:
> Did not think about this (I do not know the ViewSQLObject class). My
> feeling is I do not need more CPU load on the client side (which IMHO
> ViewSQLObject is).
I am not sure that makes a difference. There is no reason why
ViewSQLObject should cause more client-side processing. The
only difference would be that ViewSQLObject would construct a
much more complex SELECT query, where your approach takes advantage
of the server-side view. All the heavy work would be done processing
the query on the server either way, and the response would be the
same. That said, I don't know what ViewSQLObject actually does,
but I think that's what it should do :-)
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 12:56:05AM +0400, Oleg Broytman wrote:
> I think there have to be a way to generate id's for a complex VIEW
> by, e.g., combining id's into a string with a delimiter; SQLObject
> supports string id. Or calculating a hash value of that combined id and
> using the hash as the id.
I remember to have seen an example on how to do that, but I could not
find it when I tried. There are some caveats to using string ID's,
according to the doc's, are they only relevant when creating records
and not when reading them?
When using ViewSQLObject, is something like this supposed to work?
class sqlmeta:
idName = str(table1.q.id) + ":" + str(table2.q.id)
Or am I totally off track?
--
:-- Hans Georg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
sqlobject-discuss mailing list
sqlobject-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sqlobject-discuss
