thanks - but how does that query specify a town? It seems like that would just return true if the current user had any town relationships? Or am I reading it wrong?
On Sep 19, 5:46 pm, Michael Bayer <mike...@zzzcomputing.com> wrote: > On Sep 19, 2009, at 11:41 AM, joeformd wrote: > > > > > When we tried that it made a sql query to get all the towns (towns are > > loaded lazily) - that could be an awful lot of information, so this > > would be a much faster query > > so, the most succinct (and efficient) query of all is > > session.scalar(exists().where(user_towns.c.user_id==current_user.id)) > > should return True/False right back > > > > > > > On Sep 19, 4:33 pm, Michael Bayer <mike...@zzzcomputing.com> wrote: > >> On Sep 19, 2009, at 10:19 AM, joeformd wrote: > > >>> Thanks for the speedy response Michael, > > >>> we came up with this: > > >>> current_user_has_town = bool(session.query(User).filter > >>> (User.id==current_user.id).filter(User.towns.contains > >>> (current_user)).count()) > > >>> which maybe has slightly clearer intent? > > >> if you already have the current_user, why not just say "town in > >> current_user.towns" --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
