On Jun 6, 2007, at 11:58 AM, Eric Ongerth wrote:
> > So then I thought: maybe I just need to reflect the skiboots table > and override the size column to the desired type? That would make > sense... so I tried it, using the same script as above but adding the > line "autoload=True" as the final clause in each Table definition. > > Now i'm getting a different error: > sqlalchemy.exceptions.ArgumentError: Can't determine join between > 'items' and 'skis'; tables have more than one foreign key constraint > relationship between them. Please specify the 'onclause' of this join > explicitly. > > Ok, so my item_join definition was too loose. > Changed the ski and skiboot lines in it to read: > 'ski':join(items, skis, items.c.id==skis.c.id), > 'skiboot':join(items, skiboots, items.c.id==skiboots.c.id) > > ...and still get the same error. How much more specific can I get > with my onclause? In each case the items table and each of its > children are only joined by a single column, 'id'. > the error is probably not raised there, maybe in mapper compile when it tries to join the tables together as part of the ordinary joined table inheritance. try specifying inherit_condition on the 'skis' mapper. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
