I get what that would do for merge and might not be a big deal, what would it do for save-update?
Sent from my iPhone On Feb 29, 2012, at 8:55 AM, Kent <jkentbo...@gmail.com> wrote: > I suspect this doesn't interest you so much, and no offense taken if not, but > have you ever considered supporting the idea of a "half merge/save-update" > cascade for many to many relationships? > The use case is where I want to merge/save-update to the secondary table only > (collection status), but I don't want to merge/save changes to the actual > related objects. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sqlalchemy" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sqlalchemy/-/lvDys29gJncJ. > 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. -- 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.
