On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:48 AM, Malthe Borch wrote:
> > Certainly stable is good; strictly looking at FKs only might > ultimately > make for a simpler implementation though. It starts out as simpler, but that simplicity breaks down almost immediately as the "dependency rules", which include rules for populating foreign key columns from source columns, as well as delete/ update operations which need to be cascaded, also need to execute in the proper sequence (largely because newly generated PK values are created in tandem with INSERTs in all cases). Those rules are all derived from the actual objects at play, so it would still be quite complex to link the tables/rows for insert/delete/update to the classes/objects they represent. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
