On Oct 2, 10:39 pm, Michael Bayer <mike...@zzzcomputing.com> wrote: > On Oct 2, 2012, at 4:29 PM, George Sakkis wrote: > > > I had the impression that the Session’s unit of work figures out > > automatically the potential object dependencies and makes sure that > > the insertion order is consistent to a topological sort but apparently > > I misunderstood. I postedhttps://gist.github.com/3822855as an > > example. > > > In the first case (object_lists = [authors, books]), first a bunch of > > Authors is committed and then a bunch of Books. As expected this > > always succeeds. The next two cases though where authors and books are > > commited at once may or may not succeed. Why it doesn't use the > > topological sort of the tables and why it is not deterministic? > > on a quick glance I see no usage of relationship(). The topological sort is > based on the relationship() paths built between mappers, not the foreign keys.
Ah, I see. Out of curiosity, why it's not consistent across runs (i.e. always fail)? Thanks for the super prompt reply! George -- 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.
