Hi,
Ok, I have updated ticket #415 with a proposed patch. Also, #298 is I
think ready to commit, if someone gets a chance to look at it.
On another note, I'm having no luck getting hold of the adodbapi author.
Any ideas what I can do about this?
Best wishes,
Paul
Rick Morrison wrote:
ive made a commit on #298 but not what we originally planned. give it
a try and see if it works since i didnt test on ms-sql.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sqlalchemy group.
To post to this
Oops, sorry about the garbage at the end
On 1/10/07, Rick Morrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A bit of background might be helpful here. The psuedo-sequence mechanism
that the MSSQL modules uses may seem a bit complex, but by leveraging the
same Sequence() mechanism that the PG and Oracle
I myself don't need it, but Paul, if you want to take a swag at it, I'll be
happy to review any patch.
Rick
On 1/10/07, Michael Bayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the Column has the autoincrement=True flag on it, and you can detect
that its a PRIMARY KEY column + Integer. if MS-SQL dialect
Hi Rick,
I think we're actually agreeing about almost everything, although I have
responded to your points individually. Lets see what Michael says about
this. Actually reading over my post again, my preferred fix was a little
hidden at the bottom. I will highlight it here:
The fix that
the current behavior of SA is to utilize the databases implicit PK
generation feature *if one is available*. the three databases that I
know have this are sqlite (send None in to a PK INSERT, it gets
generated), MySQL (AUTOINCREMENT) and Postgres (SERIAL/BIGSERIAL,
which results in the
