"Half" merge/save cascade support for M:N relationships

[Kent]

I suspect this doesn't interest you so much, and no offense taken if not, but have you ever considered supporting the idea of a "half merge/save-update" cascade for many to many relationships? 
The use case is where I want to merge/save-update to the secondary table only (collection status), but I don't want to merge/save changes to the actual related objects. 

[Michael Bayer]

I get what that would do for merge and might not be a big deal, what would it do for save-update?

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 29, 2012, at 8:55 AM, Kent <jkent...@gmail.com> wrote:

I suspect this doesn't interest you so much, and no offense taken if not, but have you ever considered supporting the idea of a "half merge/save-update" cascade for many to many relationships? 
The use case is where I want to merge/save-update to the secondary table only (collection status), but I don't want to merge/save changes to the actual related objects. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sqlalchemy/-/lvDys29gJncJ.
To post to this group, send email to sqlal...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sqlalchemy+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.

[Kent Bower]

I hadn't really thought the save-update through, my real interest was regarding merge.  For "save-update" it may not make as much sense.