Re: [SQLObject] two postgres questions

[Bud P. B. <bu...@si...>]

On Thu, 15 May 2003 16:20:30 -0400
Edmund Lian <el...@in...> wrote:

> I cannot confirm this--I do not use SQLObject. I'm following discussions 
> off and on, but have not tried to use it since it cannot support what I 
> do (multi-table joins, extensive referential integrity checks, etc.) yet.
> 
> This is not to knock SQLObject. So far, I haven't seen an ORM that can 
> support complex schema, and does not get in the way of exploiting the 
> relational model to the max.

Can you tell us more about it?  Maybe an example? My experimental code
is almost there to support foreign keys all the way.  I thought of
adding arbitrary table constraints later (with those, you can do
things such as Check constraints, Unique constraints etc that involve
a single or multiple fields).  

I have been thinking about constraints etc a bit and my impression is
so far that this is better dealth with in python objects than in the
dbms.  I see some advantages by doing it in Python:

* the app programmer doesn't need to worry about SQL.  [The difficulty
  here is particularly the marshalling that separates the two worlds
  that either the app programmer or the backend programmer has to deal
  with]

* it is more portable across dmbs (particularly those that don't do
  constraints well)

* the backend developer has to worry about less things

* SQL constraints may not be expressive enough to do full consistency
  checking, so you need python code in any case.  

Just thoughts and if anyone has oppinions, I'd be very interested to
hearing them...

-b

/-----------------------------------------------------------------
| Bud P. Bruegger, Ph.D. 
| Sistema (www.sistema.it)
| Via U. Bassi, 54
| 58100 Grosseto, Italy
| +39-0564-411682 (voice and fax)
\-----------------------------------------------------------------