Michael Bayer wrote: > we've just added the atomic update thing to 0.4 (note the uppercase > Article which produces a column expression): > > article.comment_count = Article.comment_count + 1 > session.flush() > That's great! It's quite unconvenient here, but has a lot of good use cases. > i wonder though if theres some way that could get "out of sync" with > the actual number. you'd have to be careful to establish this > update. if you wanted to use a mapper extension to do it, then youd > have to issue the UPDATE directly, the change to the "comment_count" > attribute wont get picked up if its established within the flush itself. If you mean out of sync with article instance - it's not a problem. If you have a highly concurent database you'll get out of sync instances in any case, if not - field will be quite up to date.
Well, while writing this e-mail I've realized that there can be some problems with deletes and updates that probably can make value out of sync. I'll just try and give a feedback after that :) -- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
