to pass upstream.
Rhett
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 8:21 AM, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote:
There's really two concepts of isolation level at play.
The isolation_level parameter in SQLA is usually linked to
database-specific SQL commands that we issue, in the case of PG its SET
and adding
this overhead for information that probably shouldn't change seems
unnecessary.
(MySQL 5.0.x, sqlalchemy 6.0beta)
Rhett
--
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
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:35 AM, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote:
Rhett Garber wrote:
This would be much easier, I could potentially be what we go with. I
think this is similar to my 'original implementation'
I just found the syntax to be a bit bothersome since the person
.
This is all getting very complicated.
Is there any other way to get some control over getting of a column ?
AttributeExtension handles the setting, I think,
but there is no interface for getting.
I'm hoping I'm missing something.
(Using sqlalchemy 6beta1 and declarative)
Thanks,
Rhett
--
You
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote:
On Apr 20, 2010, at 7:06 PM, Rhett wrote:
I've run into some difficulty getting the ORM to fit into an existing
code base with some, I suppose, non-standard conventions.
One of the conventions is to not allow
