On 10/01/2012 04:48 PM, Michael Bayer wrote:

I wasn't using explicit .join(), except an outerjoin on a one-to-one
relation with images table (which by default is lazyloaded). I thought
SQLA would figure it out itself based on foreign keys, as it usually
does. Maybe that's wrong, maybe I should be explicit, but so far it
worked (when entire instances of declarative_base were given to
session.query()).

I forgot to mention, and this could be the cause of perceived problems,
that I was listing columns of more than one model in the
session.query(). Maybe that confused it.

What happened was that the query returned a list of named tuples for
each of the rows returned by the database, while I was expecting only
one instance of the main model (see below).

I mean the cartesian cross-product in queries with many-to-many
relations. SQLA would "automatically" recognize the queried models and
construct the model instances and their relationships properly.

E.g. if I query for single model that has X related in a many-to-many
fashion, the query would return X number of rows, like with
.joinedload(), but SQLA would return only one instance of the model, and
its related property filled with a list of X instances of that model,
i.e it would automatically process the joins and create a relationship
tree in the session.

I hope I'm making sense here. :)

I guess I should make a minimal example case for this, and will do as
time permits.

--

.oO V Oo.

Work Hard,
Increase Production,
Prevent Accidents,
and
Be Happy!  ;)