I believe that I may have found an error in dynamic relation backrefences.
When the dynamic query is executed, it appears to fetch all of the rows in
the referenced table instead of only the ones linked to the object from which
the dynamic relation was obtained. The following test script
Hi, I was looking at this bug fix, and I couldn't figure out where
part 2 of the problem was actually fixed.
If you can ignore the absurdity of this example, it shows a situation
where the second problem still appears to
exist:
from sqlalchemy import *
from sqlalchemy.orm import *
metadata =
This example can't work in this sequence, or this query can't be run
and mapped?
If I wanted to execute this query:
SELECT inner_query.test_id AS inner_query_test_id,
inner_query.test_other_id AS inner_query_test_other_id,
inner_query.test_active AS inner_query_test_active,
inner_query.test2_id
Hi,
I was wondering why lazy=False on a polymorphic joined table relation
worked fine, until I pass an extra join() to filter with like(%foo%)
statments from my search() method.
I found an alternative where I just enable the relation's lazyness by
providing lazyload():
#OK
On Friday 14 December 2007 7:41 am, Michael Bayer wrote:
seems to work in SVN trunk, have you tried there ?
Sorry - I forgot to mention that I ran this test against 0.4.1. I have not
tried pulling from the trunk.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message
Chris M wrote:
Or you could use .limit(1). I've always found that more clear than the
Python indexing notation because I think of it slicing a list, not
applying a limit to a query.
Thank you very much for your help.
I already found limit before my posting but it did not work, because I used
Works for me on trunk.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
On Dec 12, 2007 6:20 AM, King Simon-NFHD78 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Schwarz wrote:
Hi,
after reading the docs [1] I thought that something like
session.query(User).filter(User.c.id 3)[0]
should work even if the filter clause does not return any rows.
But - compliant with
On Dec 14, 2007, at 1:34 PM, dykang wrote:
This example can't work in this sequence, or this query can't be run
and mapped?
If I wanted to execute this query:
SELECT inner_query.test_id AS inner_query_test_id,
inner_query.test_other_id AS inner_query_test_other_id,
Hello, first at all, sorry about my english... I'm from Mendoza,
Argentina, and I'm starting with this. Because I can't describe my
problem, I will show the next:
from sqlalchemy import *
from sqlalchemy.orm import *
class Producto(object):
pass
class Iva(object):
pass
metadata =
Mike Orr wrote:
Are
there that many of those, given that I don't think [N] is even
documented?
It is in the official documentation:
http://www.sqlalchemy.org/docs/04/ormtutorial.html#datamapping_querying
fs
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
On Dec 14, 2007 1:31 PM, Felix Schwarz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Orr wrote:
Are
there that many of those, given that I don't think [N] is even
documented?
It is in the official documentation:
http://www.sqlalchemy.org/docs/04/ormtutorial.html#datamapping_querying
OK. But the doc
your 'iva' table-column AND 'iva' attribute/relation/property have same
name, Thats what the error says. either rename one of them (e.g. the column
to become iva_id), or use that allow_column_override=True flag to the
producto mapper.
Marcos wrote:
Hello, first at all, sorry about my
On Dec 14, 2007, at 4:02 PM, dykang wrote:
Sorry, I didn't clarify, I was speaking about with 0.3, not with 0.4.
0.3 has a very limited add_entity() method, with no ability to set it
against an arbitrary alias, so its impossible in 0.3 for an ORM Query
to load parallel instances where
On Dec 14, 2007, at 5:22 PM, Mike Orr wrote:
On Dec 14, 2007 1:31 PM, Felix Schwarz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Orr wrote:
Are
there that many of those, given that I don't think [N] is even
documented?
It is in the official documentation:
your s.close() is not being reached
I've checked and found that every thread closes connection. And this
traceback :
QueuePool limit of size 5 overflow 10 reached, connection timed out
most probably caused by long running thread which walking over list of
filenames ~ 35 000 long. It renaming
On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:24 PM, imgrey wrote:
as far as I understand 'SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE' (
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/sql-lock.html ) lock is
necessary here, but I was unable to find how to set it up in
sqlalchemy.
connection.execute(LOCK TABLE IN SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE)
17 matches
Mail list logo
