Hmmm.... 0.7 is missing expression.FromGrouping... I imagine that is a big deal, isn't it, like not really patchable?
On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 at 3:11:29 PM UTC-5, Kent wrote: > > Here it is: > > commit 85368d25ed158c85bd19f4a63400884ab1cda26a > Author: Mike Bayer <m...> > Date: Sat Jun 8 18:54:14 2013 -0400 > > get nested joins to render on oracle 8 > > > > Sounds like the right commit notes. You still maintaining 0.8? Should > that change be patchable in 0.7? > > > On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 at 1:13:21 PM UTC-5, Michael Bayer wrote: >> >> >> >> Kent <jkent...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Mike, >> > >> > When using use_ansi=False for Oracle (8) in conjunction with >> joinedload-ing an inline view property, SQLAlchemy-0.8.7 renders an inner >> join instead of an outer join. This has been fixed in SQLAlchemy-0.9.0, >> but, as I'm not prepared for the migration yet, I was hoping and failing to >> find the bug ticket and hopefully a patch. Do you know when/where this was >> fixed and whether the fix would be patch'able in 0.7 or at least 0.8? >> > >> > The attached script runs on 0.9.0+ but the assertion fails on 0.8.7. >> > >> > The only difference in SQL output is the outer join "(+)": >> > >> > SELECT products.productid AS products_productid, anon_1.productid AS >> anon_1_productid, anon_1.siteid AS anon_1_siteid, anon_1.qty AS anon_1_qty >> > FROM products, (SELECT inventory.productid AS productid, >> inventory.siteid AS siteid, sum(inventory.qty) AS qty >> > FROM inventory GROUP BY inventory.productid, inventory.siteid) anon_1 >> > WHERE anon_1.productid(+) = products.productid ORDER BY anon_1.siteid >> > >> > Interestingly, use-ansi=True correctly renders "LEFT OUTER JOIN" in >> 0.8.7 but it fails to render as an outer join with use-ansi=False. >> > >> > Thanks for you time and exceptional software, >> > Kent >> > >> >> >> no specific fixes are logged, however >> http://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/rel_0_9/changelog/migration_09.html#many-join-and-left-outer-join-expressions-will-no-longer-be-wrapped-in-select-from-as-anon-1 >> >> refers to a very large change in how the ORM decides to join things. >> That would cause some kinds of joinedloads to render differently , which >> would impact how (+) comes out as well, but i wouldn’t think it would have >> the effect that the missing (+) is the only change, it would be more than >> that. >> >> So I have no better idea than you, so the method I’d do is just to git >> bisect (http://git-scm.com/docs/git-bisect) through revisions until you >> find the fix. If it’s a big merge revision, I can look into it to find >> something specific, but if you can get me a rev ID that would be a good >> start. >> >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
