I stick with autoflush=True, and flask probably shouldn't make a decision here. But there really shouldn't be any major behavioral changes with autoflush=False other than data stays pending longer, so dynamic here definitely needs some fixes.
On Dec 16, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > Hey thanks a ton! > > Looking at the Flask-SQLAlchemy history, it seems autoflush=False has been > the Flask-SQLAlchemy default since the initial checkin. Not being all that > educated on when you'd want false/true is there any good reason for me to not > just restore the SQLAlchemy default of autoflush=True? > On Sunday, December 16, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Michael Bayer wrote: > >> Flask-SQLAlchemy sets the Session to autoflush=False. That's pretty much >> the difference here, and "lazy='dynamic'" works poorly with this setting. >> There is sort of a bug-like behavior I can pull out of it here where I see >> the history is getting set incorrectly, as I suspected, and I should look >> into that. >> >> But for now just flushing within the get_or_create() step (or setting >> autoflush=True, or not using lazy='dynamic') will resolve this issue: >> >> @classmethod >> def get_or_create(cls, trove): >> try: >> sess.flush() >> obj = sess.query(cls).filter_by(trove=trove).one() >> except NoResultFound: >> obj = cls(trove) >> return obj >> >> >> >> >> On Dec 15, 2012, at 11:31 AM, Donald Stufft wrote: >> >>> Fooled around with this some more. And i'm pretty sure it's got to be >>> something with Flask-SQLAlchemy now. I spent a few hours futzing with the >>> test case and was unable to make it do anything, but as soon as I switched >>> it to Flask-SQLAlchemy (https://gist.github.com/7f15df7a2d20d9736fed) The >>> IntegrityError came back. So now I have a new place to go bother to figure >>> out why :) >>> >>> On Saturday, December 15, 2012 12:12:26 AM UTC-5, Donald Stufft wrote: >>>> >>>> Ugh nevermind me. It's late and I forgot to name the Index :/ >>>> >>>> On Saturday, December 15, 2012 12:06:28 AM UTC-5, Donald Stufft wrote: >>>>> >>>>> So it appears the problem is with UniqueConstraint vs Index(..., >>>>> unique=True). >>>>> >>>>> Test case: https://gist.github.com/4291461 >>>>> >>>>> On Friday, December 14, 2012 11:43:19 PM UTC-5, Michael Bayer wrote: >>>>> its probably some subtlety to the data that's already loaded and how the >>>>> collection is being mutated - it's unlikely Flask has anything to do with >>>>> it. There may or may not be some less-than-ideal or buggy behavior in >>>>> association proxy, or it might be a premature flushing issue, but if you >>>>> can come up with how to reproduce that would be very helpful. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Dec 14, 2012, at 11:38 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hrm. I'll see what I can do. Though looking at what you posted it works >>>>>> for me with that too.. So the problem must either be with >>>>>> Flask-SQLAlchemy or with my own app code. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Friday, December 14, 2012 11:30:57 PM UTC-5, Michael Bayer wrote: >>>>>> I've cobbled together a complete and simplified test case given your >>>>>> mapping and example code and I cannot reproduce with either 0.7 or 0.8 - >>>>>> the count of rows in the association table is one on the first commit, >>>>>> and two on the second. >>>>>> >>>>>> You need to adapt the attached test case into a full reproducing case so >>>>>> that the specific trigger is illustrated...thanks. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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/-/Xn2eZ0gifLgJ. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to sqlal...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>> sqlalchemy+...@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 view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sqlalchemy/-/w7AbNMBU6VIJ. >>> 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. > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
