if you assign a mapper to Base and a separate mapper to Person youre
going to have problems, since each class is associated with a mapper
via an attribute "_mapper" attached to the class, and you effectively
have two different mappers dealing with Person objects and its going
to get ugly.
On 28.02.2006., at 20:10, Michael Bayer wrote:
Ah nice.
When I select objects from Person.select() I get the same
instance. Is possible to obtain this behaviour using custom object
creation?
show me more specifically what you mean.
from the previous attachments (augmented with prints)
On Feb 28, 2006, at 1:15 PM, Marko Mikulicic wrote:
On 28.02.2006., at 17:37, Michael Bayer wrote:
anyway, create_instance is not too different from the
append_result you already figured out:
class MyExt(MapperExtension):
def create_instance(self, mapper, row, imap, class_):
On 28.02.2006., at 17:37, Michael Bayer wrote:
how many classes do you want to be able to add to this ? doing a
giant SELECT that outerjoins many tables, with only one being used
for each row, will perform very poorly.
4-5 classes
Yes it would be slow, but I see two alternatives:
1) h
On Feb 28, 2006, at 11:25 AM, Marko Mikulicic wrote:
On 28.02.2006., at 16:09, Michael Bayer wrote:
it seems to me it would be "easier" to just map against the actual
SELECT statement that joins all three tables, and not use mapper
inheritance for this. youd have one Mapper that knows a
yeah...the hack youre doing, while I havent looked into it deeply, I
can tell is going to be very tricky to make that work. at the very
least you want to be on the latest SVN since I committed some major
fixes to inheritance this weekend.
what I dont understand is, at what point do you wa
Hello,
I would like to have some classes derive from a common ancestor and
access them all together having the mapper select the right class for
each instance. I've done a little hack using MapperExtension and
outerjoins, however there are some problems with this solution.
See the attached
7 matches
Mail list logo
