On Jun 27, 2008, at 3:25 AM, Nabla wrote:
Is there some easy solution of this problem?
yes, the receiving application needs to have the same mapper() setup
as the sender. If you use the declarative extension to setup your
classes, this task is made easier.
And additional question -
: Michael Bayer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 9:56:59 AM
Subject: [sqlalchemy] Re: Pickling/unpickling mapped class
On Jun 27, 2008, at 3:25 AM, Nabla wrote:
Is there some easy solution of this problem?
yes, the receiving application needs to have
I don't understand how can remote client application have the same
mapper setup in situation where there is no direct connection to
database to reflect the tables and map to the classes.
In addition at the server side the classes are declared only like
class XYZ(object):pass and the internal
), then that is quite different. Gnosis has a concept
called mutators for this.
Barry
- Original Message
From: Michael Bayer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 9:56:59 AM
Subject: [sqlalchemy] Re: Pickling/unpickling mapped class
On Jun 27, 2008, at 3
u need to recreate the same graph of objects on the client side
without the db underneath?
just serialize all the objects u have then and send them over.
what is to be serialized - maybe something like
dict( (p.key, getattr(obj,key) )
for p in object_mapper(obj).iter_properties )
for
On Jun 27, 2008, at 12:23 PM, Petr Dlabal wrote:
I don't understand how can remote client application have the same
mapper setup in situation where there is no direct connection to
database to reflect the tables and map to the classes.
In addition at the server side the classes are
