pymssql does better, but as the underlying dbLib does not support unicode, most of the unicode-based unit tests fail.
For me, at least, "solid" and "passes all tests" are not necessarily the same thing.... The issue I think likes more with the test suite than with MSSQL or any of its connectors, and I just haven't really found the time to dig into the underlying reasons, as the basics all work for me -- I use pymssql with SA in a commercial application that processes millions of rows per day with some really complex SQL, mixing ORM with SQL layer operations, mixing transactions between ORM and the SQL layer, calling database functions and stored procedures and working with lots of different datatypes, and the thing works fine. It runs under Pylons with Paste, and stays up for weeks at a time. It's stable. It's solid. And yes, it fails unit tests. Writing a comprehensive test suite for like six different database engines is really, really difficult, because of all the various feature sets involved. Trying to run that test suite on a database that was more or less a late entry to the game, with three (count em!) DB-API access modules, each with their own sets of annoying problems, and then add the issue of crossing the Unix - WIndow DMZ, and I'm not surprised we get test failures. I'll be working on getting pyodbc stable and supported on Unix over the next weeks and months, but it's going to be a slow process that's going to involve more adjusting of the tests than fixes to the MSSQL module. In a fast-changing library like SA, that's difficult because test changes are likely to break other databases and annoy the author ;-) What will help, at least a little is a buildbot that will run the tests on Unix across a range of databases. I'm setting that up to run from the Pylons buildbot master, which will watch SQLalchemy trunk checkins. This way, when you make changes for Windows, we can see their effects for Unix within a few minutes on all databases. The other thing that's going to have to happen is a pretty big effort to straighten out dependancies on database feature sets in the unit tests, and factor those out so we don't see spurious failures. So, if your acceptance criteria for SA + MSSQL is going to be "passes all unit tests", then it's going to be a while before that happens. But we will get there eventually. On 6/6/07, Paul Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > >>If you could mail the output off list to both myself and Rick Morrison, > >>that would be magic. > >> > >> > Well, the summary is: FAILED (failures=20, errors=245) > > Looks like making this solid on Unix would be a mammoth task. Not one > I'm prepared to take up at the moment, being mostly a Windows user. I > hope someone steps up for this in the future. > > Rick - how do the unit tests fare with PyMSSQL on Unix? > > Paul > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
