On Jun 19, 2008, at 5:57 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hi there,
I just noticed on the trunk that on sessionmaker(), autocommit
defaults
to False, but autocommit defaults to True when you use create_session.
autoflush is also True for sessionmaker, but for create_session, it's
False.
On Friday 20 June 2008 17:38:25 Michael Bayer wrote:
On Jun 19, 2008, at 5:57 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hi there,
I just noticed on the trunk that on sessionmaker(), autocommit
defaults
to False, but autocommit defaults to True when you use
create_session. autoflush is also True for
Attached is one I made using what it looks like the relationships are
based on your test code. It inserts 3502 rows into a SQLite database
without issue.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Hi there,
Michael Bayer wrote:
[snip]
I think the solution here at the least would be to remove prominent
advertisement
of create_session(). I'm not sure yet about
deprecation/non-publicizing it. I still think its a useful function
for ad-hoc creation of sessions with no extra
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 20 June 2008 17:38:25 Michael Bayer wrote:
[snip]
move it in some convenience.py?
together with other such non-mandatory but convenient shortcuts that
most people would make in one form or another
In my mind, create_session is actually not the shortcut or
yes it does (sa4) but needs something like:
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(200)
it gets slower and slower while running until it breaks.
On Friday 20 June 2008 21:41:18 Marin wrote:
[sqlalchemy] Re: Problem:maximum recursion depth exceeded
From:
Marin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
sqlalchemy
Should I report this as a ticket on the SA trac site?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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,
On Jun 20, 2:41 pm, Marin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hope I'll hear from you if you replicate the error.
its a bug with strong heisenbug tendencies which ultimately involves a
very deep dependency graph being generated, which is what it looked
like all along. The depth is a result of every
when a PG database is hosed for me like that I log in and drop the key
tables using dropcascade. Then a SQLA script can drop the rest
assuming theres no more cycles.
On Jun 19, 3:16 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi
i just run into a bad loop of
- creating some schema in postgres
-
Hey guys,
I have a postgres database which requires me to set search_path to
'my_db' before I can get a proper table listing.
I have written a schema for this database, but what I would like to do
is compare my schema against the existing database, and make sure that
all my tables and columns
its likely a connection specific thing. do it on a Connection, then
send that as bind to metadata.reflect().
On Jun 20, 2008, at 4:45 PM, percious wrote:
Hey guys,
I have a postgres database which requires me to set search_path to
'my_db' before I can get a proper table listing.
I
2.3 is definitely not supported in 0.5 unless you can make the case
for it ASAP. nobody has made any case for 2.3 as of yet.
On Jun 19, 1:51 pm, jason kirtland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christoph Zwerschke wrote:
Will Python 2.3 still be supported by SA 0.5? I noticed that
like this?
from sqlalchemy import MetaData, create_engine
metadata = MetaData()
engine = create_engine('postgres://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/Target')
connect = engine.connect()
connect.execute(set search_path to 'my_db')
metadata.reflect(bind=connect)
(does not work)
On Jun 20,
Nevermind, that got it. Thanks mike for your ordinarily punctual
responses.
BTW, anyone have a need for a db schema comparison tool? I thought
there was one out there, but I was dubious about the source.
cheers.
-chris
On Jun 20, 3:06 pm, percious [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
like this?
On Jun 20, 2008, at 5:06 PM, percious wrote:
like this?
from sqlalchemy import MetaData, create_engine
metadata = MetaData()
engine = create_engine('postgres://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/Target')
connect = engine.connect()
connect.execute(set search_path to 'my_db')
that also works. Thanks mike.
On Jun 20, 3:13 pm, Michael Bayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 20, 2008, at 5:06 PM, percious wrote:
like this?
from sqlalchemy import MetaData, create_engine
metadata = MetaData()
engine = create_engine('postgres://[EMAIL
On Saturday 21 June 2008 00:11:53 percious wrote:
Nevermind, that got it. Thanks mike for your ordinarily punctual
responses.
BTW, anyone have a need for a db schema comparison tool? I thought
there was one out there, but I was dubious about the source.
u have some?
check a thread named
I see that someone just copy/paste that code I wrote in the ticket
1081. I'll try to take a look and fix it myself this weekend if I
could spare the time.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sqlalchemy
On Jun 20, 2008, at 7:19 PM, mdmarek wrote:
Hello group,
The query below ran in 0.3.x, but no longer works in 0.4.x. I have
checked the documentation but did not find an easy way of getting
the code to work again.
role = self.sasn.query(Role).get_by(nick=sgn_nick)
Even though the
fixing this issue is non-trivial; the tree formation code is very
intricate, which is why I'd like to dump it altogether; its already
been removed from parts of the UOW's process. But dumping it requires
that the UOW's execute plan at the inter-row-dependency level work in
a different
20 matches
Mail list logo
