Michael Bayer schrieb:
> the close() will remove any objects left in the session and may help with
> unit tests in that the subsequent tests aren't interfered with by objects
> remaining from the previous test.
Where is the difference between a process running several tests and one
answering several http requests via mod_wsgi?
The code to set up the session is this:
DBSession = scoped_session(sessionmaker(
autoflush=True,
autocommit=False,
))
Then code running DB-stuff is wrapped into begin/(commit/rollback) via a
decorator. This is the same for my tests as well as the production system.
So if the close() is needed for tests, I presume it's needed for the
production code as well?
> but its better to use a distinct
> Session for each test and keep things simple. I keep hearing about
> Turbogears not allowing complete control over sessions and I'm getting
> annoyed by this "feature".
Actually I removed the TG-session-facilities because of other problems,
and then the troubles with the not-closed session began.
But you have a point, the current way of dealing with SA-transactions in
TG2 isn't satisfactory.
Diez
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
