On 13/09/10 18:21, Michael Bayer wrote:
On Sep 13, 2010, at 12:26 PM, Jon Siddle wrote:
This relationship is satisfied as you request it, and it works by looking in the current
Session's identity map for the primary key stored by the many-to-one. The operation
falls under the realm of
On 13/09/2010 22:37, NiL wrote:
Has anyone tried ti implement this ? a working solution ? willing to
participate in a effort to provide a solution ?
Isn't this something better suited to the application framework rather
than the database framework (ie: not SQLAlchemy)?
cheers,
Chris
--
On 13/09/2010 18:02, Chris Withers wrote:
What ensures obj.id will be unique and will it always be unique, even in
the case of high volumes of parallel writes to the database? Does it
depend on the back end? Are any backends known not to work this way?
In short, the unique constrant of the
hey yacine, friends,
indeed the problem came partly because i haven't followed the traces of elixir
close enough: i've used backref instead of inverse for manytoone relations.
the only drawback of using inverse, is that it requires the inverse relation to
really exist, hence it can't be
Hi chris,
thanks for your reply.
I guess it is not an application framework oriented question. It seems
to me rather a question of database design/access. I have a pointer to
modify the elixir versioning extension to provide this functionnality.
It would be framework oriented, if we were
On 09/13/2010 05:49 PM, Michael Bayer wrote:
On Sep 13, 2010, at 11:16 AM, alex bodnaru wrote:
hope my approach isn't too simplist, but onetomany is usually implemented in
rdbms by an manytoone column or a few of them, with or without ri clauses:
thus,
a foreign key or an index.
Channel is just type of object. I realize what my problem is. I don't
know why my object isn't saved correctly.
for chan in channels:
if chan.id == channel.id:
chan = session.merge(channel)
break
On Sep 13, 2:47 pm,
On Sep 14, 2010, at 11:42 AM, Victor Olex wrote:
We have discussed one aspect of this before and it was hugely helpful
(http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy/browse_thread/thread/
965287c91b790b68/361e0a53d4100b5d?lnk=gstq=padding#361e0a53d4100b5d)
This time I wanted to ask not about
Thank you for such a full elaboration. I still think the end result is
something a little unintuitive (albeit only for those using detached
objects, who will come across it); but I can't argue against your
decision here. Based on the information you've given, keeping
things the way they are is
On Sep 14, 2010, at 12:22 PM, Jon Siddle wrote:
Thank you for such a full elaboration. I still think the end result is
something a little unintuitive (albeit only for those using detached
objects, who will come across it); but I can't argue against your
decision here. Based on the
Hi Nil,
On 13/09/2010 23:37, NiL wrote:
Hi all,
I'm lookin for a good solution to internationalize the content of my
application. that is provide many translations for the database
content (as opposed to the translation of the application itself with
babel/gettext for template and code
Is it possible to use a regexp in a like() clause? Or some other way to achieve
something similar?
Thanks,
Michael
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sqlalchemy group.
To post to this group, send email to sqlalch...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe
Hi Werner,
many thanks for your rich reply.
I'm going to try an elixir implementation for now. If you want follow
the thread of the same title in the elixir mailing list.
I'll stay tuned to any sqla development
best
NiL
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
13 matches
Mail list logo
