> > one interesting thing here is that i think you've found the oldest > bug in SQLAlchemy ever. so thats fixed in the trunk / 0.3 branch, > the bug being that it was trying to issue an UPDATE on a table which > has no primary keys.
Glad to be of service :-) > now, if theres a reason you can't have a primary key on > account_stuff.account_id, id be interested to hear what that is. Unfortunately the main reason is that the example tables were modelled on a 9 year old legacy Oracle db which is what I really want to use sqlalchemy with. The table which account_stuff is representing has in the order of 18 million rows so making any modifications to it, and we only have Oracle Standard edition, would be too expensive (in time) because the db has to be up 24/7. I guess there is no way of making sqlalchemy thinking that account_stuff.account_id is a PK (equivalent) is there? I guess I could start digging around the underlying code to see if I can convince it! Thanks Andy --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
