Hi Jonathan,
I did some work using "__autoload__ = True." Seems to work perfectly, also
with relations. Thanks a lot for the unimaginabley quick support!
However, I am facing some problem while trying to relate a table to itself
using a many-to-many association table. This is definitely an inde
William K. Volkman wrote:
> Additionally that is a programmer centric view, something that would
> only be applicable to small projects. Once you get 10s of developers
> involved chaos ensues until a DBA is appointed to analyze, normalize,
> and document the data requirements. Even in small syst
On Fri, 2006-07-14 at 10:46, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> On 7/14/06, Jonathan LaCour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Really, when you think about it, defining the schema in the
> code is
> more adherent to DRY than autoloading, since instead of having
> 1 DDL
> scri
On 7/14/06, Jonathan LaCour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Really, when you think about it, defining the schema in the code ismore adherent to DRY than autoloading, since instead of having 1 DDLscript for every database you support, you just have it stated in codeone time ;)
Except you still cant defin
Sanjaya Kumar Patel wrote:
> Is something like this possible, that the tables are autoloaded, along
> with foreign keys, but the relations are defined in the code. I think
> this is what is done in SQLAlchemy when you do autoload?
>
> So, something like this?
>
> [snip snip code]
This is what I w
Michael Bayer wrote:
>> Note that you absolutely *must* have the activemapper metadata bound
>> before you declare your classes, or everything will blow up. It
>> does not yet support relationships (and might not ever, from what
>> Mike stated in his response to me earlier in the thread).
>
>
> w
Thanks for the elaborated replies.
Is something like this possible, that the tables are autoloaded, along with
foreign keys, but the relations
are defined in the code. I think this is what is done in SQLAlchemy when you
do autoload?
So, something like this?
class Employee(ActiveMapper):
On Jul 14, 2006, at 11:04 AM, Jonathan LaCour wrote:
>
> Note that you absolutely *must* have the activemapper metadata bound
> before you declare your classes, or everything will blow up. It does
> not yet support relationships (and might not ever, from what Mike
> stated in his response to me
> Its not *currently* possible, however I don't think it would be hard
> at all to put in something like this into ActiveMapper:
Well, that was easy. Check out revision 1708. It lets you do the
following:
from sqlalchemy.ext.activemapper import *
import sqlalchemy.ext.activemapper as
On Jul 14, 2006, at 9:29 AM, Jonathan LaCour wrote:
> I don't really know anything about how relationships are detected in
> SQLAlchemy when you use autoloading, so I am not sure if doing that
> part is possible, but using the existing infrastructure to load the
> columns themselves should be fai
Charles Duffy wrote:
> I don't think autoloading is possible with ActiveMapper (doesn't it
> defeat the point?)
Its not *currently* possible, however I don't think it would be hard
at all to put in something like this into ActiveMapper:
class Person(ActiveMapper):
class mapping:
Sanjaya Kumar Patel wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I am not being able to figure out how relate to a table having composite
> primary key. To illustrate my problem, I am giving below a schema. Any
> guidence on how to code this in SQLAlchemy (and in ActiveMapper, if
> possible) is more than appreciable
Dear All,
I am not being able to figure out how relate to a table having composite
primary key. To illustrate my problem, I am giving below a schema. Any
guidence on how to code this in SQLAlchemy (and in ActiveMapper, if
possible) is more than appreciable. I would prefer autoloding Tables, rat
13 matches
Mail list logo
