Oh yeah, and in Main Documentation (at least) you have some lists nested inside of elements, which is
resulting in some of your lists being much farther indented than
others, without a good visual reason why. Seems like the difference
could be eliminated.
I sent new association_proxy docs via
Forgot to add that I can't see much reason for links to be given a
line-height that would be any different from the text that surrounds
them -- at least not on the TOC page. That's why I felt free to scrap
the 'a' rule and put the 'li li' in the same spot. If the 'a' rule is
necessary for other
Mike,
Gaetan's right -- I just viewed the site a day after you (Mike) said
that the issue had been fixed, but they're still too widely
spaced for sure. There are several conflicting (well ok, inheriting/
overriding) settings of line-height across the various css files, and
it does not appear th
Thanks; the monkeypatch approach works nicely. Using the alias()
method will raise
AttributeError: 'Alias' object has no attribute '_order_by_clause'
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 7:25 PM, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> there's logic which is removing the order_by's from the selects
Oh, right. I don't know what type of brain fog obscured that basic
relational fact, except that I may have been burning my synapses a bit
too hot lately resulting in a deplorable deficit of
neurotransmitters. Thank you for helping me regain the sight of the
obvious.
On Dec 5, 1:16 am, [EMAIL PR
there's logic which is removing the order_by's from the selects, and
in that case this is what's blowing away the parenthesis as well.
Some databases don't even allow ORDER BY inside of the queries used in
a UNION since in the absense of LIMIT/OFFSET, which also is not
standard SQL, the
Oh, check this out:
(SA 0.4.7)
>>> from sqlalchemy import *
>>> s = select(["x", "y"]).select_from("table")
>>> qlist = [s.limit(10).order_by('x').self_group(),
>>> s.limit(10).order_by('x').self_group()]
>>> print union_all(*qlist).order_by("foo").limit(10)
SELECT x, y
FROM table
LIMIT 10 UN
I had to upgrade to 0.4.7 from 0.4.2, but your sample query works,
however, my application of it does not.
Sorry I'm being so light on details, I'll try to reproduce with a
complete sample versus using snippets of production code.
Each select statement is generated like so:
sel = select(pre
I'm not sure of the mechanics of what you're experiencing, but make
sure you use charset=utf8&use_unicode=0 with MySQL.
On Dec 5, 2008, at 4:17 PM, n00b wrote:
>
> greetings,
>
> SA (0.5.0rc1) keeps returning utf hex in stead of utf-8 and in the
> process driving me batty. all the mysql setup
>>> from sqlalchemy import *
>>> s = select(["x", "y"]).select_from("table")
>>> print union_all(s.self_group(), s.self_group()).order_by("foo")
(SELECT x, y
FROM table) UNION ALL (SELECT x, y
FROM table) ORDER BY foo
On Dec 5, 2008, at 4:17 PM, Bo Shi wrote:
>
> Thanks for the quick respon
greetings,
SA (0.5.0rc1) keeps returning utf hex in stead of utf-8 and in the
process driving me batty. all the mysql setup is fine, the chars look
good and are umlauting to goethe's delight. moreover, insert and
select are working perfectly with the MySQLdb api on three different
*nix systems,
that's correct. what does it render ?
On Dec 5, 2008, at 4:17 PM, Bo Shi wrote:
>
> Thanks for the quick response!
>
> The following does *not* work. Am I making the call incorrectly?
>
> sel = union_all(*[q.self_group() for q in querylist])
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Michael Bayer
Thanks for the quick response!
The following does *not* work. Am I making the call incorrectly?
sel = union_all(*[q.self_group() for q in querylist])
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> try calling self_group() on each select object.
>
> On Dec 5, 20
try calling self_group() on each select object.
On Dec 5, 2008, at 3:55 PM, Bo Shi wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> There appear to be some nuances to using order by statements with set
> operations like unions in MySQL but the following is allowed*:
>
> (SELECT a,b from DBA.tbl ORDER BY b LIMIT 5)
> UN
Hi all,
There appear to be some nuances to using order by statements with set
operations like unions in MySQL but the following is allowed*:
(SELECT a,b from DBA.tbl ORDER BY b LIMIT 5)
UNION ALL
(SELECT a,b from DBB.tbl ORDER BY b LIMIT 5)
ORDER BY b
When I attempt to generate such a s
On Dec 5, 2008, at 3:01 PM, Faheem Mitha wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm using sqla with the following schema (see below). I'm creating a
> cell
> object implicitly, using the function make_cell and the association
> proxy
> pattern.
>
> def make_cell(patient_obj, snp_obj, snpval):
> patient_ob
Hi,
I'm using sqla with the following schema (see below). I'm creating a cell
object implicitly, using the function make_cell and the association proxy
pattern.
def make_cell(patient_obj, snp_obj, snpval):
patient_obj.snps[snp_obj] = snpval
return patient_obj
My question is, is the
Ah! I see - I had the cascade and passive_delete arguments in the
wrong place.
This works as expected in 0.4.3 and 0.5 now.
Thanks for the help
James
On Dec 5, 12:47 pm, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Assuming "user_id" is a surrogate primary key, I dont see any need for
> onupdat
Yep, the same behaviour in 0.5rc4
On Dec 5, 12:44 pm, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ah, I should say I'm using SA 0.4.3 - I going to try the same test on
> 0.5
>
> On Dec 5, 11:36 am, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > actually, use passive_deletes=True, not 'all'. It will issu
Assuming "user_id" is a surrogate primary key, I dont see any need for
onupdate="CASCADE" to be used here. Additionally, ondelete="CASCADE"
on your hat.user_id column implies that "hat" will be deleted when a
"user" entry is deleted - however your relation has this set up on the
many-to-o
Ah, I should say I'm using SA 0.4.3 - I going to try the same test on
0.5
On Dec 5, 11:36 am, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> actually, use passive_deletes=True, not 'all'. It will issue DELETEs
> only for collections that are already loaded, this doesn't break
> anything and pre
Thanks for your quick response! Unfortunately I made the changes you
suggest and I still get the UPDATE commands being sent to the children
before the DELETE on the parent. My model is now:
users_table = Table('tg_user', metadata,
Column('user_id', Integer, primary_key=True),
Column('user
ah yes, i forgot that already have that in dbcook!
but i dont think it will avoid adding things to collections.
okay thanks i'll dig further.
On Friday 05 December 2008 19:39, Andreas Jung wrote:
> On 05.12.2008 17:10 Uhr, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > i'm asking about SA-related stuff, i know
On Friday 05 December 2008 19:22, Michael Bayer wrote:
> On Dec 5, 2008, at 11:10 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > i'm asking about SA-related stuff, i know how to handle the python
> > side. how to "lock" relations, collections etc - how to make an
> > instance readonly?
> >
> > and eventualy if
On 05.12.2008 17:10 Uhr, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> i'm asking about SA-related stuff, i know how to handle the python
> side. how to "lock" relations, collections etc - how to make an
> instance readonly?
>
> and eventualy if it is poosible after that to unlock that instance at
> some point - so l
actually, use passive_deletes=True, not 'all'. It will issue DELETEs
only for collections that are already loaded, this doesn't break
anything and prevents unnecessary SELECTs of unloaded collections.
The True setting is needed so that the session can update the state of
those collection
use the "passive_updates=True, passive_deletes='all'" flags. These
are described at
http://www.sqlalchemy.org/docs/05/sqlalchemy_orm.html#docstrings_sqlalchemy.orm_modfunc_relation
.
On Dec 5, 2008, at 11:42 AM, James Brady wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm trying to get deletes and updates cascade
well we have no control over any of thatI don't know that Sphinx
search uses case insensitivity for full text searches.
On Dec 5, 2008, at 11:53 AM, Jon Nelson wrote:
>
> The searching is a bit weird.
> If I search for Adjacency I get no results. If I search for adjacency
> (all lower cas
On Dec 5, 2008, at 11:10 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> i'm asking about SA-related stuff, i know how to handle the python
> side. how to "lock" relations, collections etc - how to make an
> instance readonly?
>
> and eventualy if it is poosible after that to unlock that instance at
> some poi
The searching is a bit weird.
If I search for Adjacency I get no results. If I search for adjacency
(all lower case) I get results, the first of which has an upper-cased
Adjacency.
Otherwise they look nice and I'm sure will look nicer-yet as time goes on!
--
Jon
--~--~-~--~~---
Hi all,I'm trying to get deletes and updates cascaded down from a parent
object to the child objects (connected by ForeignKey).
It all seems pretty simple in the docs, but I can't get it to work! I'm
using MySQL with the InnoDB engine, and have played with all the variation
of the onupdate, ondele
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, King Simon-NFHD78 wrote:
> You can get the mapper for a given instance using the
> sqlalchemy.orm.object_mapper function, and that mapper has a
> 'primary_key_from_instance' method. A generic primary_key function might
> look like this (untested):
>
> import sqlalchemy.orm a
i'm asking about SA-related stuff, i know how to handle the python
side. how to "lock" relations, collections etc - how to make an
instance readonly?
and eventualy if it is poosible after that to unlock that instance at
some point - so lock all the user-visible stuff but leave some
flag "_loc
Hi,
There are some sphinx system messages on:
http://www.sqlalchemy.org/docs/sphinxtest/intro.html
Reference Documentation¶
*
System Message: WARNING/2
(/home/classic/dev/sphinx/doc/build/intro.rst)
undefined label: datamapping – if you don't give a link
caption th
> -Original Message-
> From: sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Faheem Mitha
> Sent: 04 December 2008 20:43
> To: sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [sqlalchemy] returning primary key of object without
> know what it is called.
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'
there is... u do not want to know if A points B or B points A, u want
to know if A and B are related in whatever aspect. That is, A and B
are members of some set X denoting that aspect. i.e. moving the
belonginess out of A and B alltogether.
but this isn't going to make your DB simpler... quite
Thanks for the ideas. I thought of all of the above. The one I've
been using is the accessor which unions together the necessary
things. My question came up when I wondered if there was some even
more fundamental way to handle these forwards-backwards cases. I'm
glad to know I'm already doing
37 matches
Mail list logo