Michael Bayer wrote:
The most crucial, although not the issue in this specific example, is
that the relations table is used both as the secondary table in a
relation(), and is also mapped directly to the Relation class. SQLA
does not track this fact and even in a working mapping will
On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:48 AM, Malthe Borch wrote:
Certainly stable is good; strictly looking at FKs only might
ultimately
make for a simpler implementation though.
It starts out as simpler, but that simplicity breaks down almost
immediately as the dependency rules, which include rules
I can add to this that the issue occurs only on consequent appends.
Here's the excerpt that leads to the IntegrityError, demonstrating this.
collection = Collection()
session.save(collection)
session.flush()
vinyl = Vinyl()
colletion.records.append(vinyl)
you'd have to work this into a full self-contained script which I can
run locally since it seems theres some specific usage pattern creating
the issue. (i.e. its very difficult for me to piece together snippets
and guess where the issue might be occuring).
On Jun 11, 2008, at 5:43 AM,
Michael Bayer wrote:
you'd have to work this into a full self-contained script which I can
run locally since it seems theres some specific usage pattern creating
the issue. (i.e. its very difficult for me to piece together snippets
and guess where the issue might be occuring).
This is
thanks for this example. There's several issues with this mapping.
The most crucial, although not the issue in this specific example, is
that the relations table is used both as the secondary table in a
relation(), and is also mapped directly to the Relation class. SQLA
does not track
On Jun 10, 10:34 am, Malthe Borch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have an issue with SQLAlchemy planning to execute insertion tasks in
the wrong order.
Basically, I have a utility table Relations which is used to maintain
ordered list relations:
table = rdb.Table(
'relation',
Michael Bayer wrote:
A self-referential relationship, when configured as many-to-one,
requires the remote_side argument to indicate this, as described in
http://www.sqlalchemy.org/docs/04/mappers.html#advdatamapping_relation_selfreferential
. Otherwise it defaults to one-to-many.
That
would need to see mappings.
On Jun 10, 2008, at 11:06 AM, Malthe Borch wrote:
Michael Bayer wrote:
A self-referential relationship, when configured as many-to-one,
requires the remote_side argument to indicate this, as described in
Michael Bayer wrote:
would need to see mappings.
First, let me mention that this issue only occurs on Postgres; I can't
replicate it on SQLite.
This is the many-to-many relation table (posted previously):
table = rdb.Table(
'relation',
metadata,
rdb.Column('id',
10 matches
Mail list logo
