Hi,
I've noticed that setuptools supports optional dependencies
http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/setuptools#declaring-extras-optional-features-with-their-own-dependencies
Would it be worth adding one of these for each database SA supports?
You could then do easy_install sqlalchemy mssql
On Feb 15, 2008, at 11:14 AM, Michael Schlenker wrote:
Michael Bayer schrieb:
no idea. below is a revised version, where the main revision is that
theres no SQLAlchemy ;). So I think you should submit this to the
bug
tracker on www.sqlite.org.
Actually this is sorta interesting
I'm trying to track down whose code is responsible for this problem.
Your example (and I suppose sqlalchemy) use an sqlite3 module, which
seems to only exist within the python source tree. upgrading pysqlite
from initd.org gives me a pysqlite2 module. (Using the
pysqlite2.dbapi2 module does not
I think I understand the relationship between pysqlite2 and sqlite3
(the second being a stdlib snapshot of the first) and have found the
code in sqlalchemy that will use pysqlite2, if present, over sqlite3,
so having installed the latest version of pysqlite2, I should be fine.
Any idea why the
h im not sure every DBAPI can get installed through easy_install
tho. pyscopg2 comes to mind.
On Feb 15, 2008, at 6:32 AM, Paul Johnston wrote:
Hi,
I've noticed that setuptools supports optional dependencies
On Feb 15, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Jonathon Anderson wrote:
I think I understand the relationship between pysqlite2 and sqlite3
(the second being a stdlib snapshot of the first) and have found the
code in sqlalchemy that will use pysqlite2, if present, over sqlite3,
so having installed the
On Feb 15, 2008, at 5:53 PM, Brett wrote:
serial column instead. On sqlite the id column seems to always
generate
a unique number. I'm not sure what other databases do. What's the
best
way to address this? Here's an example of whats happening:
why not rely upon the sequence
Hello all,
On a Postgres database when I explicitly insert a value into a column
with a sequence on it the sequence doesn't get updated and can return
ids that aren't unique. This can be be fixed with SQLAlchemy equivalent of:
maxid = select max(id) on family;
select setval(family_id_seq,
Great Job !!!
How can I upgrade from 0.4.2p3 ? (Or I have to uninstall all previous
version?)
Regards.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sqlalchemy group.
To post to this group, send email to
try:
easy_install --upgrade SQLAlchemy
No need to uninstall.
http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/EasyInstall#upgrading-a-package
On Feb 15, 7:39 pm, maxi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great Job !!!
How can I upgrade from 0.4.2p3 ? (Or I have to uninstall all previous
version?)
Regards.
In case I didn't make it clear enough -- I've already done the
following:
'children': relation(Bar,
collection_class=attribute_mapped_collection('foo'),
backref=backref('parent', remote_side=[bars.c.id])) } )
And that worked great -- if I only needed to have up to a SINGLE child
per bar per
If anyone out there has already implemented a custom DictOfLists
collection class to map scalar keys to lists of values, I would be
grateful for the opportunity to avoid reinventing the wheel. If not,
I guess I'll start working on it.
I've experimented successfully with
Ok, I tried subclassing MappedCollection and it seems like I did all
right with my made-up appender, remover, and iterator functions. At
least I fixed various errors and got this to at least function as the
collection_class for the mapper shown above.
But I can't figure out how to tell my
Incidentally, I tried mocking this all up entirely outside of SA by
creating a DictOfLists class that subclasses the basic 'dict'. That
worked fine, returns lists, adds and removes as desired, handles
everything as one would expect. So I don't think I'm fumbling with
the basic mechanics of it.
14 matches
Mail list logo
