On Wednesday, June 8, 2016 at 10:15:37 AM UTC-4, Krishnakant wrote:
>
> So essentially opening a connection at the start of a class method/
> function, doing number of queries and then closing it just before return
> would be the right strategy I think?
>
No.
The scope should last for one
On 06/08/2016 09:21 AM, Søren Løvborg wrote:
Hi,
What's the best practice for "tagging" an Alembic revision, that is to
denote e.g. that 1ffbeb5179a5 is the database revision matching version
1.4.0 of the software?
I can do it in documentation, of course, but would prefer a method
allowing
the "existing type" comes from what is reflected from the database and
your custom type is not automatically reflectable.
The "existing type" for a PG alter_column is not important here because
Postgresql's "ALTER COLUMN" doesn't require it. It's mostly for MySQL
and SQL Server that
On Friday 03 June 2016 09:07 PM, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
On Friday, June 3, 2016 at 7:49:23 AM UTC-4, Krishnakant wrote:
So it will have no performance difference is it?
If both do same thing then how and why will explicit connection
help me
better?
the
Hi,
What's the best practice for "tagging" an Alembic revision, that is to
denote e.g. that 1ffbeb5179a5 is the database revision matching version
1.4.0 of the software?
I can do it in documentation, of course, but would prefer a method allowing
e.g. "alembic downgrade v1.2.1".
I guess I could
