On 6/28/07, Uwe C. Schroeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Tying myself to one database product gives me bad memories
> > of the "vendor lock-in" problems that used to be more prevelant in the
> > past, but are thankfully becoming rarer now that interoperability has
> > gotten better.
>
> Interoperability has gotten better? A bit probably, but not all that much :-(

Sorry, I meant that interoperability in the computer industry as a
whole has gotten better, not SQL databases in particular.  Though SQL
databases have made some minor strides.

> Actually I'd also argue the "convenient" point. How is a ORM convenient?

I meant the Python language itself is more convenient than the
database procedure languages I've seen.

> Having a query with say 20 joins leads to a "pythonic" but pretty much
> unreadable, much less comprehensible query definition.

Yes, I still have my doubts about building complex joins using
SQLAlchemy's various "join" objects, whether they're really any better
than a literal SQL fragment which I can write much more quickly.  Had
to make a left join recently and couldn't find the function, then
realized it's called outerjoin.  That one works slick but I see what
people do with multiple mappers or joins inside mappers and I think,
is this for real?

> Everyone dealing with
> SQL databases should be able to read SQL, but a query object definition that
> doesn't even fit on 2 pages anymore is far from readable.

And this.  If you have a 50-column table, by gosh SQLAlchemy is going
to select all 50 fields in full "`TableName`.columnName AS columnName
notation", which makes the query hard to read in the log.

-- 
Mike Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pylons-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to