[sqlalchemy] How to filter relations?
On most of my tables I have the concept of an owner, a reference to the user who created the row. On most of my other relations, I need to filter by owner==current_user. All the classes that have an owner are marked (separate parent class, I'm using elixir) so I could probably come up with a general solution. An idea of how to do this might be to define: def __getattr__(self, attr): rel_attr = attr + '_id' field = getattr(self.table.c, rel_attr, None) if field and field.foreign_keys: rel_table = field.foreign_keys[0].constraint.table objs = meta.Session.query(rel_table).filter (owner_id==current_user.id).all() setattr(self, attr, objs) # XXX not sure that this is a good idea return objs # XXX quite sure this won't work, maybe need to call super(Me, self).__getattr__(attr) ? raise AttributeError(attr) If you have some advice on the XXX comments above or an idea to improve the solution / better solution, please give me a hand. Thanks, -Dan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] Cascade option, what does all mean?
Hi, I see cascade='all, delete, delete-orphan' in the tutorial, but I thought I read in the docs elsewhere (can't seem to find the place atm) that all includes merge, delete, and others so that cascade='all, delete-orphan' should be equivalent? Is this correct? Thanks, -Dan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] Re: How to bypass scoped_session?
On Sep 8, 3:47 am, King Simon-NFHD78 simon.k...@motorola.com wrote: Automatically adding objects to a session when they are created is a feature of Session.mapper (rather than the plain orm.mapper function), and is deprecated. If you use the plain mapper function, all root objects that you create will have to be explicitly added to a session. (related objects will normally be added by default) That makes sense to me. Session.mapper also included a couple of extra features (the 'query' property and a default __init__) which you can recreate yourself using the examples at http://www.sqlalchemy.org/trac/wiki/UsageRecipes/SessionAwareMapper Trouble is I am using elixir, so I'm not sure I can change this behavior. Thanks Simon, -Dan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] How to avoid attribute refresh?
Hi All, Have a look at this traceback, entry.value is a Site object returned from a query, accessing id (5 lines from the bottom) seems to trigger an attribute refresh. Obviously this defeats the point of the caching I'm doing. If I avoid any of the relations on the Site object, for read-only access, can I also avoid attribute refresh? (maybe I erred by not expunging the Site object from the session before placing it in the cache?) http://pylonshq.com/tracebacks/1f0d4adf753700839add5bba408dde9f -Dan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] Re: How to avoid attribute refresh?
On Sep 7, 3:11 pm, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote: you want to make sure things are cached (which means they've been pickled and therefore not related to the Session anymore) before the Session is expired, which happens when you call rollback() or commit() (or expunged, sure, though that's usually too much trouble - just the pickling part of the story takes care of that usually). alternatively you can disable expire_on_commit if that's what's getting in the way. Thanks, that did the trick. For the one cache I added the one line of code to expunge the objects first. For the other I copied the important data out into a namedtuple and saved myself some memory too. Cheers, -Dan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] How to bypass scoped_session?
Hi, I'm using scoped_session in my pylons app, but sometimes I have a need to create a local session, do a little work, and commit it without worrying about the current state of the scoped_session (i.e. without committing it) I'm having some issues with that because the minute I create a new object, it gets associated (as transient I guess?) with the scoped_session and barfs when I add it to the local session (object is already in a session.) The best I've found is expunge() from the scoped_session after init, then the add will work without issues. Is there any way to create objects without them being added to scoped_session? I don't see that there is any way with a regular session that they'd be added on init, so it can't be required functionality. Maybe there's an option to disable it? I can't imagine what it is good for, but that's probably just failure of imagination on my part. Thanks, -Dan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] Re: any effort getting sqlalchemy to work on ironpython is going on ?
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:01 PM, sakesun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Traceback (most recent call last): File stdin, line 1, in module IndexError: Index was outside the bounds of the array. I've had that before on complex python packages (e.g. Jinja2), I'm pretty sure it's an internal error in IronPython, but beats me as to where it's happening. You should try running it under the debugger. -Dan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] ConcurrentModificationError without concurrent modification?
ConcurrentModificationError: Deleted rowcount 3 does not match number of objects deleted 1 raised by this code: with Session() as session: dl = session.merge(dl) session.delete(dl) There are no other sessions alive, so how can that possibly be a concurrent modification? Using sqlalchemy 0.4 beta 5, python 2.5, sqllite. dl has a many-to-many relationship associated with it. Any ideas why this is happening? Thanks, -Dan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] Re: ConcurrentModificationError without concurrent modification?
On 10/1/07, Michael Bayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: most likely too many association rows are present in the m2m table. Do you mean there were redundant associations? How can I check if that's the cause of the problem? Thanks, -Dan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] Re: backref relation is None instead of list?
On 9/9/07, Michael Bayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I cant reproduce this, although the error to me seems like you are actually saying c._parent = [] (some list object). If thats not it, send along a reproducing test script. I tried to recreate it in the shell and failed. I then loaded my application, changed _parents to parent and it just worked. I don't think the change did it, I think it just disappeared (maybe the reboot?) If it happens again I'll post it on this mailing list. Thanks for the tip about one-to-many relations, I was hoping they worked like that, but when I got the errors I assumed it must not. Sorry for the false alarm, -Dan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
