Michael Bayer wrote:
> OK, let me tell you what just happened the other day. Im dealing
> with a Pylons application, and Pylons provides the SA engine by
> binding it to the Session. but the application also had a
> DynamicMetaData stuck in there, and at some point they were creating
> their own engine and connecting it to the DMD. needless to say I
> quickly got uber-confused as the app was running with *two* engines,
> which happened to point to the same database, but still completely
> weird. So i fixed it. But by changing the DynamicMetaData to just
> plain MetaData, i was then *sure* that no other part of the app was
> trying to sneak a connect() on there. Whereas if we only had one
> kind MetaData I could not rely upon that.
So you are saying you got "uber-confused" because of DynamicMetaData?
Thats even more reason to not use it :) If it confused you, its sure
to confuse me (as it already has before)!
Just joking around...
> Not sure if that justifies the existence of DMD since its Python,
> things are dynamiclaly typed, theres an endless number of operations
> that you cant really "guard" against. But was just a moment that I
> felt thankful that there *were* two versions of MetaData.
I see your point. I don't care what you do with DynamicMetaData, as
long as I can do this one day:
metadata = MetaData()
engine = create_engine(...)
metadata.connect(engine)
... preferably soon ;)
--
Jonathan LaCour
http://cleverdevil.org
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
