Thanks for the explanation! The root of the issue is now very clear. But are you saying that this is intended behavior? Was I wrong in trying to use the session as an object cache?
Now onto a possible solution or workaround... Please forgive me if the following does not make sense, but would it be possible to store our object in the identity map under a second key: (Person, (2,))? Then the Person mapper would find it and we'd avoid having to generate a DB query. Is there any technical issue that would prevent the same object from being registered under different keys in the identity map? Cheers! On Jul 15, 11:47 pm, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the "non polymorphic" search is against the Person mapper; it > recieves id "1" and looks in the identity map for (Person, (1,)) and > locates the existing object immediately. For id 2, it also looks in > the map for (Person, (2,)), and finds nothing; it must issue a query > which returns the fact that id 2 is of type "employee", creates the > proper identity key of (Employee, (2,)), and returns the value from > the identity map. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
