Hi Mike,
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 00:01 -0400, Michael Bayer wrote:
> i am mostly in favor of whatever rfc1738 says.
>
> though its not clear what is. does "foo/bar" mean "/foo/bar"
> on disk ? or "/foo/bar" ? its not so clear.
> intuition would say the former. however on pretty much any we
On Jul 1, 2006, at 12:10 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:On 7/1/06, Charles Duffy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Additionally, there is a rather massive performanceimpact on account of this same decision -- I've seen Oracle logsindicating that 50% of the time spent by the database was soft parsetime, which wou
On 7/1/06, Charles Duffy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jonathan Ellis wrote:> SQLAlchemy uses bind variables wherever the db driver supports it. I> think this even includes mysql, these days.Yes, but I was talking about SQLObject (to which SQLAlchemy was being
compared). "Is SQLAlchemy ready for prod
Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> SQLAlchemy uses bind variables wherever the db driver supports it. I
> think this even includes mysql, these days.
Yes, but I was talking about SQLObject (to which SQLAlchemy was being
compared). "Is SQLAlchemy ready for production" was not really so much
the intended q
On 7/1/06, Charles Duffy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tzahi Fadida wrote:> I am interested to know if SQLAlchemy is considered production ready,> at least the ORM and the basic CRUD SQL queries areas and transactions.> (and the connection to PostgreSQL).
> Well, at least compared to SQLObject.> Obvio
sure its committed in 1680.
On Jul 1, 2006, at 10:10 AM, Charles Duffy wrote:
> Daniel Miller wrote:
>> Charles Duffy wrote:
>>> Perhaps the attached is a bit better?
>>
>> Yes.
>
> Michael, would you consider merging the patch I attached earlier in
> this
> thread (archived at
> http://permali
as far API, it should be fairly stable; I put the users through a
very bumpy ride going from 0.1 to 0.2 so im pretty sure we wont have
to do something like that again.
as far as performance and operational stability, i would place it in
the nether-region of "production ready for the not-fai
it looks very much like something i just fixed, which is fixed in the
trunk, and will be in 0.2.5. give the trunk a try and see if that
fixes it.
On Jul 1, 2006, at 4:46 AM, Yuan HOng wrote:
> I upgraded from 0.2.2 to 0.2.4, and table row creation that worked
> before now throws the followin
On Jul 1, 2006, at 1:31 AM, Mike Bernson wrote:
> The data is array of dict. the dict has the list of columns as keys
> that
> value as the data for the row. There are None in place for values
> to keep the number of keys align.
>
> Has this been seen before?
> I will start looking at the sql c
OK i cant tell exactly what happened, but one major gotcha with
these unittests is that they all run with the same database
connection all the way through. so if it trips up really bad on a
few tests, it can sometimes throw the DB out of whack (usually by
leaving a table present that was
Daniel Miller wrote:
> Charles Duffy wrote:
>> Perhaps the attached is a bit better?
>
> Yes.
Michael, would you consider merging the patch I attached earlier in this
thread (archived at
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.sqlalchemy.user/2486), or
giving feedback on why you aren't in
Tzahi Fadida wrote:
> I am interested to know if SQLAlchemy is considered production ready,
> at least the ORM and the basic CRUD SQL queries areas and transactions.
> (and the connection to PostgreSQL).
> Well, at least compared to SQLObject.
> Obviously SQLAlchemy is more powerful but sometimes y
Hi,
I am interested to know if SQLAlchemy is considered production ready,
at least the ORM and the basic CRUD SQL queries areas and transactions.
(and the connection to PostgreSQL).
Well, at least compared to SQLObject.
Obviously SQLAlchemy is more powerful but sometimes you have to sacrifice
feat
I upgraded from 0.2.2 to 0.2.4, and table row creation that worked
before now throws the following exception:
File "build\bdist.win32\egg\sqlalchemy\orm\unitofwork.py", line 232, in flush
File "build\bdist.win32\egg\sqlalchemy\orm\unitofwork.py", line 228, in flush
File "build\bdist.win32\egg\s
14 matches
Mail list logo
