[sqlalchemy] Re: using ORM in AttributeExtension

2009-11-02 Thread Tefnet Developers
Dnia 2009-10-19, pon o godzinie 18:20 -0400, Michael Bayer pisze: you can disable the autoflush if you say query.autoflush(False).whatever(). I'd start there. Well I need autoflush there to have current data. At the same time the AttributeExtensions are firing off in the middle of a

[sqlalchemy] Re: using ORM in AttributeExtension

2009-11-02 Thread Michael Bayer
Tefnet Developers wrote: Dnia 2009-10-19, pon o godzinie 18:20 -0400, Michael Bayer pisze: you can disable the autoflush if you say query.autoflush(False).whatever(). I'd start there. Well I need autoflush there to have current data. flush what you need first. then do things that are

[sqlalchemy] Re: using ORM in AttributeExtension

2009-11-02 Thread Michael Bayer
Tefnet Developers wrote: Dnia 2009-11-02, pon o godzinie 11:05 -0500, Michael Bayer pisze: flush what you need first. then do things that are not compatible with autoflush. The point is that I am developing a layer which attempts to hide all sqlalchemy/relational details and provide a

[sqlalchemy] Re: using ORM in AttributeExtension

2009-11-02 Thread Michael Bayer
patch added as ticket #1601 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

[sqlalchemy] Re: using ORM in AttributeExtension

2009-11-02 Thread Tefnet Developers
Dnia 2009-11-02, pon o godzinie 16:07 -0500, Michael Bayer pisze: Providing AttributeExtension hooks to end users who can then write custom code without any attention to object/session state is never guaranteed to work completely. Um, that's not the case. We develop the extensions

[sqlalchemy] Re: using ORM in AttributeExtension

2009-11-02 Thread Michael Bayer
Tefnet Developers wrote: Dnia 2009-11-02, pon o godzinie 16:07 -0500, Michael Bayer pisze: Providing AttributeExtension hooks to end users who can then write custom code without any attention to object/session state is never guaranteed to work completely. Um, that's not the case. We