On Sep 13, 2010, at 11:16 AM, alex bodnaru wrote: > hope my approach isn't too simplist, but onetomany is usually implemented in > rdbms by an manytoone column or a few of them, with or without ri clauses: > thus, > a foreign key or an index. > conversely, a manytoone relation has an implicit onetomany one (or an explicit > onetoone).
if you read what I wrote, I was explaining, that we architecturally choose not to generate the implicit reverse direction when it isn't specified by the user. And that this decision is not too controversial since Hibernate made the same one. > > the example i've given with elixir (look at the sql echo) shows the onetomany > updates the foreign key to null, not knowing they wouldn't be found in the > cascading delete. i'm searching the exact point elixir should give the > passive_deletes to the sa relation, thus to force it to give it to the right > side of it. right - Elixir has a more abstracted layer of user configuration, which is basically what you're asking SQLAlchemy to build into it. Id rather make things simpler on the inside, not more magical. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalch...@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.
