On Tuesday 11 August 2015 03:44 AM, Claudio Freire wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:42 PM, kk <krm...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
Tahnks to you and Mike for detaild insight, My questions follow in-line.On
Friday 07 August 2015 08:48 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 12:05 PM, kk <krm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday 07 August 2015 03:03 PM, Ladislav Lenart wrote:
Hello.
ORM is certainly slower. How much depends A LOT on your workload. For
example
bulk operations with ORM are an order of magnitude slower than raw SQL.
On
the
other hand, SQLAlchemy Core let's you write generative SQL queries
without
ORM features which are as performant as raw SQL.
I am going to be mostly with Postgresql for now so I don't wish database
independent queries. Perhaps we will shift to NoSql in near future (more on
that in some time ).
So if I were to write core queries then I could as well do directly with
psycopg2. What advantage I will then get by using SQLAlchemy?
For one benefit, building complex queries programatically is much
easier with Core than with SQL strings, and less error-prone.
I see, I am sorry, I had misunderstood that with core I will have to
actually right the select insert and update statements with all the
concatenation as-is.
If that is the case then definitely I will try experimenting with core.
happy hacking.
Krishnakant.
--
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.
