[BangPypers] Simple python database library

Dhananjay Nene dhananjay.nene at gmail.com
Fri Mar 5 12:03:24 CET 2010

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 3:59 PM, steve <steve at lonetwin.net> wrote:

>  I personally prefer SQLObject because it comes across as being more
> pythonic than SQLAlchemy, of course YMMV.
> Quite likely .. but it doesn't try to be pythonic, its focused more on
staying consistent with its relational underpinnings. A ^C^V from the
documentation -

DBA Approved

Built to conform to what DBAs demand, including the ability to swap out
generated SQL with hand-optimized statements, full usage of bind parameters
for all literal values, fully transactionalized and batched database writes
using the Unit of Work pattern. All object-relational patterns are designed
around the usage of proper referential integrity, and foreign keys are an
integral part of its usage.

SQLAlchemy places the highest value on not getting in the way of database
and application architecture. Unlike many tools, it *never* "generates"
schemas (not to be confused with issuing user-defined
in which it excels) or relies on naming conventions of any kind. SQLAlchemy
supports the widest variety of database and architectural designs as is
reasonably possible.

> cheers,
> - steve
> --
> random non tech spiel: http://lonetwin.blogspot.com/
> tech randomness: http://lonehacks.blogspot.com/
> what i'm stumbling into: http://lonetwin.stumbleupon.com/
> _______________________________________________
> BangPypers mailing list
> BangPypers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers

blog: http://blog.dhananjaynene.com
twitter: http://twitter.com/dnene http://twitter.com/_pythonic

More information about the BangPypers mailing list