On Jul 3, 10:00 pm, David Bolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In re-reading the documentation with your comments in mind, it's clear
> that the docs do mention connecting a normal MetaData object, but the
> examples (and those in the source tree) tend to use BoundMetaData or
> DynamicMetaData, so I think I probably mentally excluded a plain
> MetaData as an option. The fact that the discussion of the single
> global Metadata object also uses DynamicMetaData probably didn't help
> my mental picture. Of course, my bad for not also checking out the
> class itself. Perhaps having the docs show the use of connect() with
> MetaData itself might be helpful to other new users.
this is all stuff thats been sorting itself out as we've gone through
0.3 versions. At this stage I can see that having the name
"BoundMetaData" floating around there works against things being
simple, so the docs/book are going to talk mostly about "MetaData".
for DMD it seems like it would probably be a good idea to call it
ThreadLocalMetaData. ThreadLocalMetaData is very specific to that one
less common use case where a single process dishes out among many
independent databases.
the pattern im starting to use in 0.4 with metadata replaces
'connect()' with just the 'engine' property:
meta = MetaData()
engine = create_engine(...)
meta.engine = engine
as well as:
meta = MetaData()
meta.engine = 'sqlite://'
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
