On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Pradeep Gowda wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Anand Chitipothu wrote:
>>> Aaargh, few hours after I decide that I run into this. From an intent
>>> perspective it is much more consistent with what I was looking for -
>>> http://www.pauldeden.com/2009/01/ed
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Anand Chitipothu wrote:
>> Aaargh, few hours after I decide that I run into this. From an intent
>> perspective it is much more consistent with what I was looking for -
>> http://www.pauldeden.com/2009/01/edendb-thin-flexible-and-fast-python.html
>>
>> The sample us
> Aaargh, few hours after I decide that I run into this. From an intent
> perspective it is much more consistent with what I was looking for -
> http://www.pauldeden.com/2009/01/edendb-thin-flexible-and-fast-python.html
>
> The sample usage is listed here
> http://code.google.com/p/edendb/
web.db
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> I've decided to go ahead with SQLAlchemy even though that was not my
> favourite. FWIW I'm just documenting my thoughts :
>
> Cons : Why I would've not preferred SQL Alchemy
> a. Dependency into a large full function package like sqlalchemy
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 3:59 PM, steve wrote:
>
>>
> I personally prefer SQLObject because it comes across as being more
> pythonic than SQLAlchemy, of course YMMV.
>
> Quite likely .. but it doesn't try to be pythonic, its focused more on
staying consistent with its relational underpinnings. A ^
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Noufal Ibrahim wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves
> wrote:
> > On Friday 05 Mar 2010 3:22:12 pm Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> >> > I might add that I've worked with ORMs almost regularly since 1996 in
> >> > C++,
> >>
> >> Java and Python. SQLAlc
On 03/05/2010 03:37 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Friday 05 Mar 2010 3:22:12 pm Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> I might add that I've worked with ORMs almost regularly since 1996 in
> C++,
Java and Python. SQLAlchemy has probably been the most successful ORM I
have seen which has managed to re
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
> On Friday 05 Mar 2010 3:22:12 pm Dhananjay Nene wrote:
>> > I might add that I've worked with ORMs almost regularly since 1996 in
>> > C++,
>>
>> Java and Python. SQLAlchemy has probably been the most successful ORM I
>> have seen which h
On Friday 05 Mar 2010 3:22:12 pm Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> > I might add that I've worked with ORMs almost regularly since 1996 in
> > C++,
>
> Java and Python. SQLAlchemy has probably been the most successful ORM I
> have seen which has managed to retain the balance between relational and
> objec
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Noufal Ibrahim wrote:
>
>
>
> Are there any real harcode SQLAlchemy people here on the group? A talk
> on the ORM would be much appreciated I'm sure.
>
>
> I might add that I've worked with ORMs almost regularly since 1996 in C++,
Java and Python. SQLAlchemy has pro
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Vivek Khurana wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Dhananjay Nene
> wrote:
>> I've decided to go ahead with SQLAlchemy even though that was not my
>> favourite. FWIW I'm just documenting my thoughts :
>>
>> Cons : Why I would've not preferred SQL Alchemy
>> a.
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Dhananjay Nene
wrote:
> I've decided to go ahead with SQLAlchemy even though that was not my
> favourite. FWIW I'm just documenting my thoughts :
>
> Cons : Why I would've not preferred SQL Alchemy
> a. Dependency into a large full function package like sqlalchemy
I've decided to go ahead with SQLAlchemy even though that was not my
favourite. FWIW I'm just documenting my thoughts :
Cons : Why I would've not preferred SQL Alchemy
a. Dependency into a large full function package like sqlalchemy which just
does a ton of stuff. I didn't need a ton of features .
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:51 PM, L.Guruprasad wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> > I need to build some simple relational database access over 2-3 tables in
> a
> > utility program. While it is quite solvable through ORM, the fairly
> limited
> > scope and nature of database access does not
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Noufal Ibrahim wrote:
> You could use the sql builder component of sql alchemy and skip the
> orm part. The web.db part of web.py might work as well.
+1 for web.py
Having used web.py for data munging tasks,
I think that web.db is a step up from writing raw sql wit
Hi,
L.Guruprasad wrote:
> Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> One more lightweight database library - Storm (storm.canonical.net) but
Oops, the correct URL for the project is storm.canonical.com
Regards,
Guruprasad
___
BangPypers mailing list
BangPypers@python.or
Hi,
Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> I need to build some simple relational database access over 2-3 tables in a
> utility program. While it is quite solvable through ORM, the fairly limited
> scope and nature of database access does not require the capabilities of a
> full blown ORM. I use SQLAlchemy in m
You could use the sql builder component of sql alchemy and skip the
orm part. The web.db part of web.py might work as well.
On 3/3/10, Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 6:51 PM, steve wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 03/03/2010 04:36 PM, Dhananjay Nene wrote:
>>
>>> Looking for a si
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 6:51 PM, steve wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 03/03/2010 04:36 PM, Dhananjay Nene wrote:
>
>> Looking for a simple opensource python database library
>>
>> Objectives :
>> - Should work at a level of abstraction above DB-Api. I should not have to
>> change code generally except f
Hi,
On 03/03/2010 04:36 PM, Dhananjay Nene wrote:
Looking for a simple opensource python database library
Objectives :
- Should work at a level of abstraction above DB-Api. I should not have to
change code generally except for changing database configuration
parameters.
- Should be able to write
>
> Am explicitly looking for lightweight libraries, not heavy weight ORM
> solutions.
>
> AntiORM: http://furius.ca/antiorm/ . Not sure if this an active project.
Ramaswamy
___
BangPypers mailing list
BangPypers@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman
>
> there is a light weight library called Autumn, but again its ORM, but
> atleast its much lighter than alchemy.
>
http://autumn-orm.org/
--
Kausikram Krishnasayee
Company: http://silverstripesoftware.com | Webpage: kausikram.net | Blog:
blog.kausikram.net | Twitter: http://twitter.com/kausikr
>
> > Look at sqlalchemy. It will satisfy all your requirements.
> >
>
> Am explicitly looking for lightweight libraries, not heavy weight ORM
> solutions.
there is a light weight library called Autumn, but again its ORM, but
atleast its much lighter than alchemy.
--
Kausikram Krishnasayee
Com
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Vivek Khurana wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Dhananjay Nene
> wrote:
> > Looking for a simple opensource python database library
> >
> > Objectives :
> > - Should work at a level of abstraction above DB-Api. I should not have
> to
> > change code generall
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> Looking for a simple opensource python database library
>
> Objectives :
> - Should work at a level of abstraction above DB-Api. I should not have to
> change code generally except for changing database configuration
> parameters.
> - Should
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday 03 Mar 2010 4:36:10 pm Dhananjay Nene wrote:
>> > Looking for a simple opensource python database library
>> >
>> I was under the impression that python does not recom
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 Mar 2010 4:36:10 pm Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> > Looking for a simple opensource python database library
> >
> I was under the impression that python does not recommend a db library for
> all
> databases and rests content wit
On Wednesday 03 Mar 2010 4:36:10 pm Dhananjay Nene wrote:
> Looking for a simple opensource python database library
>
I was under the impression that python does not recommend a db library for all
databases and rests content with giving a general spec which people can use
for implementing partic
28 matches
Mail list logo
