On Wednesday 15 October 2008 07:04:29 Jorge Vargas wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 11:59 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > this is somewhat frequent question, lookup the group in the past
> > if anyone has something usable.
> >
> > maybe something like
> > query(cls).filter(
> > or_(*[column == value for column in alternatives] ))
> > if many values, use column.in_(values) instead of ==
> >
> > alternatives can come from yourtable.columns or
> > classmapper( yourclas).iterate_properties.
> >
> > things to check:
> > - types, e.g. comparing strings and integers may fail or succeed
> > - primary_key = set( c.key for c in class_mapper(
> > cls).primary_key ) - relations/references maybe also be checked
> > via .has/.any e.g. references = [ p for p in
> > classmapper(yourclass).iterate_properties
> > if (p not in primary_key
> > and (not isinstance( p, PropertyLoader) #not a relation
> > or p.use_list == False )) #or a singular reference
> > ]
> > these above are just for example, do your own filtering
>
> Thanks for this it got me going to where I wanted, now I'm a bit
> lost on how to extract that into a function. Ideally I want a
> function that will return a value I can put into the filter clause
> but it seems to be expecting code not an object. How can I write a
> function to take care of the branching you say below. Something
> along the lines of. query(cls).filter(
> or_(*[build_clause(column,value) for column in alternatives]
> ))
simplest is:
def build_clause(column,value):
return column == value
that gives sql expression to put into filters (or assemble in another
way). use whatever operator instead of ==
if u also differentiate plain values from references from relations,
that would be 3 functions, operating on the 3 separate subsets of
attributes. or one function that does the differentiating by itself,
so it would need the class and attr-name. but i guess this relation
stuff is not very useful, as it is recursive and has to be
level-limited.
ciao
svil
> > On Tuesday 14 October 2008 20:26:16 Jorge Vargas wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I'm trying to implement a "simple search" field in my
> >> application and I was wondering which will be the best way to
> >> implement it on SQLAlchemy. I have googled around and found
> >> several partial solutions but none of them convince me of being
> >> the right way.
> >>
> >> My use case is the following. I got a textfield search box which
> >> will post a set of words, my webapp is to take those words and
> >> do a query in *any* field of the corresponding table, and it is
> >> to say within just one table. For example I got a User class
> >> that has first_name,last_name,address_fields. And I ran a query
> >> for "John Thompson", that will bring me back a list of user
> >> objects where any of the following is valid, "John" in
> >> first_name, "John" in last_name, "John" in address, "Thompson"
> >> in first_name, "Thompson" in last_name, "Thompson" in
> >> address_field.
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
