Hi,
You are missing a compile call before you can iterate properties.
try adding:
Ah, that is indeed the problem. With that in place, iterate_properties does
very nearly what I need.
The only problem is that I need to get the name of the relation as well. For
now, the following works:
[(a,b)
The keyword for floating point columns is REAL according to the SQLite
documentation (http://www.sqlite.org/datatype3.html), but only FLOAT
is recognized by SQLAlchemy.
This patch corrects the problem.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you
why is this so?
i have bunch of objects, and i make them all persistent.
then i have another bunch, some of them are noe, other are from above
and i want this bunch to also became persistent. (If something there
IS already persistent - so what, do nothing)
how do i do it now?
Hi,
Ah sure, so it's to be a namespace for namespaces, a shared dict() parking
lot. Got it.
How about having two dicts? One is purely for user data, libraries and such
never touch it. I suggest userdata.
The other is for use in extensions and stuff, say extdata.
Paul
session.save_or_update(obj)
On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:29 AM, svilen wrote:
why is this so?
i have bunch of objects, and i make them all persistent.
then i have another bunch, some of them are noe, other are from above
and i want this bunch to also became persistent. (If something there
IS
also am considering taking save()/update()/save_or_update(), which
are hibernate terms, into just add(). maybe ill put that in 0.4.1.
On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:29 AM, svilen wrote:
why is this so?
i have bunch of objects, and i make them all persistent.
then i have another bunch, some of
On Wednesday 31 October 2007 17:51:09 Michael Bayer wrote:
also am considering taking save()/update()/save_or_update(), which
are hibernate terms, into just add(). maybe ill put that in
0.4.1.
why not save() - having the 'save_or_update' meaning?
would anyone need the new explicit save() -
r3692.
On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:24 AM, luper rouch wrote:
sqlite-real.diff
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
I have a table with a deferred column. I want to fetch an object from
the database and update this column, but have no use for the actual
value of it. However, it seems when I change the value of the column
it first fetches the value for it and then sets it before doing the
update. Is there any
When trying to cache the contents of some small tables, I followed a
recipe given by Michael Bayer on this list (at least how I understood
it): create a dead session without database connection and move all
these objects into it.
However, every outside object that references one of these objects
On Oct 31, 2007, at 12:43 PM, klaus wrote:
When trying to cache the contents of some small tables, I followed a
recipe given by Michael Bayer on this list (at least how I understood
it): create a dead session without database connection and move all
these objects into it.
However, every
the reason it fetches the existing value is to do a comparison, so it
knows whether or not to flush that attribute (or for collections, to
determine specifically whats changed). if youre dealing with a
relation(), you can use a dynamic relation which will eliminate any
loading when
actually, let me think some more about this, i might be able to
adjust this behavior for column-based attributes.
On Oct 31, 2007, at 2:28 PM, Michael Bayer wrote:
the reason it fetches the existing value is to do a comparison, so it
knows whether or not to flush that attribute (or for
Hi all,
I have a table (Content) which relates to itself via a many-to-many
relationship through a link table (ContentCollection). I'm trying to
setup parent/child relationships for the Content table using the
association_proxy since there are some fields I'll need to modify in
14 matches
Mail list logo
