I have model FruitCategories which uses the bidirectional adjacency list pattern ("Node") from the documentation. It is used to create a many-to-many connection to a model, say, Fruit, with an association table ("fruits_cats"), again vanilla like the docs. This all works great.
I have other completely unrelated categories for unrelated entities in similar many-to-many , and I though I could convert this into a generic setup. The categories table would become a general single-table polymorphic inheritance setup, where FruitCategories might have polymorphic type 1, HighwayCategories (which would map with a Highway entitiy) as 2, etc. It would seem the different category systems could share the same table. What I was wondering was if there would be a way to share the association table in this setup, instead of having to create one for each new category-entity combo? Presumably a polymorphic association table isn't a thing; could a polymorphic association object be set up, and each mapping combo would create a subclass of Category and the association object. I have a hazy sense that declared_attr would have to be involved for one side of the association and the Category children definition, but my head starts spinning when I get this far. Or am I going down a rabbit hole and should just create a new association table for each mapping combo? -- 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.