Evidently, when the autoflush occurred within the commit(), the database transaction COMMIT itself happened before the call to after_update() . The fact is that explicitly calling session.flush() immediately before calling session.commit(), changed the final state of the DB. This means the commit() with autoflush is not equivalent to flush and then commit.
On 5/23/08, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On May 23, 2008, at 7:26 AM, Moshe C. wrote: > > > > > PLEASE IGNORE PREVIOUS. > > > > It turns out that explicitly flushing does change the order (made a > > silly coding error before). > > > > I am all set, but the question remains why autoflush isn't enough. > > autoflush will occur before every query execute and within the > commit(). the behavior of after_update() is consistent in all cases. > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
