On 17 Nov, 21:41, Michael Bayer <mike...@zzzcomputing.com> wrote: > I'll also make the comment that while the pattern you're illustrating is very > unusual (cascade turned off, re-adding detached objects), the ORM is not > being consistent in its treatment of "non-included" child items in mutated > collections during flush, in that your append got flushed but the delete > doesn't - there's specific code to that effect, which is also not consistent > against one-to-many. I've added ticket 1973 which, if it proceeds, would > likely be in 0.7.
Great, thanks :) -- 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.
