and this used to work? if you're using 0.7, it uses a fairly primitive system
based on __import__(). you'd want to make sure py2exe is putting every .py
file under dialects/ into the final package.
On Apr 9, 2013, at 3:35 PM, Don Dwiggins wrote:
> I have an application using SA that I distr
hey lists -
Linode is giving everyone twice the RAM for free, so we're currently undergoing
a short migration period on our host. If it goes well, we should be up in five
minutes, if not, then hopefully within 20 minutes.
- mike
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
I have an applicationusing SA that I distributein "compiled" form, using
py2exe. This has been working well, but I recently ran into a problem.
I do a create_engine with the string
"mssql+pyodbc://%(UserName)s:%(Password)s@%(DSN)s" (the parameters are
filled in using a "%" operator).
This wo
Awesome, thanks a ton for the update and fix.
On Tuesday, April 9, 2013 11:25:44 AM UTC-7, Michael Bayer wrote:
>
> thanks, now I know what you mean by "the class will now have a table
> attached to it". This behavior is a side effect of the issue raised in
> http://www.sqlalchemy.org/trac/tick
thanks, now I know what you mean by "the class will now have a table attached
to it". This behavior is a side effect of the issue raised in
http://www.sqlalchemy.org/trac/ticket/2656 (which also applies to 0.7), but
since __mapper_args__() is evaluated later, this turns it into more or less of
Here is a test. It's possible the failure is because the provided example
uses a mixin, while i am declaring directly on the base class.
from sqlalchemy import *
from sqlalchemy.ext.declarative import (declarative_base,
declared_attr, has_inherited_table)
Base = declarative_base()
class Tes
All right, thank you very much.
Le mardi 9 avril 2013 17:27:38 UTC+2, Michael Bayer a écrit :
>
>
> On Apr 9, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Etienne Rouxel
> >
> wrote:
>
> Hello Michael, thank you for your answer.
>
> It is written in the documentation (
> http://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/rel_0_8/orm/relation
On Apr 9, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Etienne Rouxel wrote:
> Hello Michael, thank you for your answer.
>
> It is written in the documentation
> (http://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/rel_0_8/orm/relationships.html#sqlalchemy.orm.relationship)
> :
> innerjoin=False –
> when True, joined eager loads will use a
On Apr 9, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Werner wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> Didn't see this one before my last post.
>
> On 09/04/2013 16:19, Michael Bayer wrote:
>> 1. is Winracku.combrack intended to be many-to-one or one-to-many ?
> One to many, in other words just to make sure that I don't mess up
> ter
Hello Michael, thank you for your answer.
It is written in the documentation
(http://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/rel_0_8/orm/relationships.html#sqlalchemy.orm.relationship)
:
> *innerjoin=False* –
>
> when True, joined eager loads will use an inner join to join against
> related tables instead of
Hi Michael,
Didn't see this one before my last post.
On 09/04/2013 16:19, Michael Bayer wrote:
1. is Winracku.combrack intended to be many-to-one or one-to-many ?
One to many, in other words just to make sure that I don't mess up
terminology, "w1" can have many children but the children only h
oh and also, make the join an "outer" by adding the option
joinedload(RelationB.relation_c, innerjoin=False)
On Apr 9, 2013, at 10:16 AM, Michael Bayer wrote:
>
> On Apr 9, 2013, at 8:12 AM, Etienne Rouxel wrote:
>
>> Hello
>>
>> I am wondering why the outputs q1 and q2 below are not the
On 09/04/2013 14:29, Werner wrote:
...
Wineracku.combrack = sao.relationship('Wineracku',
remote_side=[Wineracku.id],
cascade="all, delete,
delete-orphan",
single_parent=True)
Wineracku.combrack = sao.relationship(
1. is Winracku.combrack intended to be many-to-one or one-to-many ?
2. Given w1, w2:
w1 = Winracku()
w2 = Winracku()
w1.combrack = w2
which one are you deleting first, and what is the desired behavior as a result?
On Apr 9, 2013, at 8:29 AM, Werner wrote:
> On 09/04/2013 13:18, Werner wrot
On Apr 9, 2013, at 8:12 AM, Etienne Rouxel wrote:
> Hello
>
> I am wondering why the outputs q1 and q2 below are not the same. Is it a bug?
its not a bug. You have "lazy='joined'" and "innerjoin=true" on
RelationB.relation_c, and automatic joined loading isn't automated to the
degree that i
this feature should be added and is http://www.sqlalchemy.org/trac/ticket/2700,
here's a workaround for now:
from sqlalchemy import *
from sqlalchemy.orm import *
from sqlalchemy.ext.declarative import declarative_base
class FixTableArgs(object):
@classmethod
def __declare_last__(cls):
the script below is my best guess what we're talking about, it's my original
test from April 20 2012, and includes an assertion that both Person and
Engineer get their own tables. The script runs identically in 0.7 and 0.8, and
__mapper_args__ is called in the same way in both versions. If you
On 09/04/2013 13:18, Werner wrote:
On 09/04/2013 12:56, Werner wrote:
Hi,
On 01/03/2013 15:59, Werner wrote:
Hi,
Found it in the doc, the "Adjacency List Relationship" is what I
wanted.
http://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/latest/orm/relationships.html#adjacency-list-relationships
I am having a
Hello
I am wondering why the outputs q1 and q2 below are not the same. Is it a
bug?
from sqlalchemy import *
from sqlalchemy.orm import *
from sqlalchemy.ext.declarative import declarative_base
Base = declarative_base()
_relation_a_table = Table('relation_a', Base.metadata,
Column('i
On 09/04/2013 12:56, Werner wrote:
Hi,
On 01/03/2013 15:59, Werner wrote:
Hi,
Found it in the doc, the "Adjacency List Relationship" is what I wanted.
http://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/latest/orm/relationships.html#adjacency-list-relationships
I am having a problem when I try to delete an item
Hi,
On 01/03/2013 15:59, Werner wrote:
Hi,
Found it in the doc, the "Adjacency List Relationship" is what I wanted.
http://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/latest/orm/relationships.html#adjacency-list-relationships
I am having a problem when I try to delete an item where I use this, I
get this except
Hi,
What is the recommended method of specifying constraints on columns
added by a subclass using single-table inheritance? This does not work,
I get a KeyError for "col_a":
class BaseClass(Base)
__table__ = "base"
__table_args__ = (Index("base_col"),
UniqueConstrain
22 matches
Mail list logo
