Hi there,There was a question on IRC yesterday on how to map a graph (as in nodes and edges) with SA. I didn't have much time to dwell on this but this was a start: http://paste.ufsoft.org/90
I was curious if someone has done this successfully? The problem I have with the above is that the
Hello,
Well, thank you for that. It's exactly what I needed.
The funny thing here is that I've been working on developping
approximately the same code for the past two or three weeks, with
exactly the same syntax... And I was about to announce it in a few
days (after cleaning it up and
That's very good news, maybe we can pull together the
best pieces of both approaches? I'd really like to see
your solution.
Daniel
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sqlalchemy group.
To post to this
I'll send you a copy as soon as the basics work. For now, the system
is in place but only ManyToOne work. I wanted to also implement the 3
possible types of inheritance before publishing my code, but well, now
the circumstances are different... I'd be very glad if we could mix
both code bases.
Arnar Birgisson wrote:
Hi there,
There was a question on IRC yesterday on how to map a graph (as in nodes and
edges) with SA. I didn't have much time to dwell on this but this was a
start: http://paste.ufsoft.org/90
I was curious if someone has done this successfully? The problem I have
percious wrote:
So, 2 questions.
1) can we add a from clause to the active mapper?
2) are there plans to alleviate the need for '.' replacement in the
future?
Ooops, ignore part of my last reply, somehow my procmail filter dumped
your message into a different folder than my SQLAlchemy lists
if you use a table with mixed case identifiers, quotes are required.
additionally, SA's ORM queries use the use_label=True flag so that
joins among many tables can be constructed without the issue of column
names conflicting.
as for too much work on the MySQL side, i can assure you that you'd
(moving to google groups)
the idea of using an instrumented list subclass is that you *would*
use the association object, and just have the list subclass handle
the references to the association object for you, i.e.:
class MyList(list):
def append(self, item):
super(MyList,
On 11/1/06, Michael Bayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(moving to google groups)
Eh, sorry cached email address.
the idea of using an instrumented list subclass is that you *would*
use the association object, and just have the list subclass handle
the references to the association object for
OK, i was oversimplifying. if you really want a total bi-directional
many-to-many relationship where the association object is essentially
invisible, you have to set up proxies in both directions. The
attached script illustrates an almost generic way of doing this
which, after a few more
hi there,
I am new to SA.
For a tool I am creating I am also writing unittests.
In these I recreate the same table object repeatedly.
Up to now (with 0.28) this worked fine when I added
redefine=True.
In 0.3 this does not work anymore.
How would I remove/update a table from from a MetaData
11 matches
Mail list logo
