better way?

Pet petshmidt at googlemail.com
Wed Aug 12 09:49:50 CEST 2009


On 12 Aug., 09:14, Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfr... at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:45:50 -0700 (PDT), Pet <petshm... at googlemail.com>
> declaimed the following in gmane.comp.python.general:
>
> > Oh, forgotten to mention. It's PostGres
>
>         Really? There are still installations of an RDBMS that predates the
> commonalization of SQL?
>
>         I suspect you mean PostgreSQL -- it IS a different beast from the
> older Postgres.

O, yeah. Of course it is PostgreSQL

>
>         In either event -- my old books don't show an "all in one" solution.
>
>         Best answer is probably to create some stored procedures which you
> call instead of plain INSERT; the stored procedure could then do
> whatever is needed to check for a duplicate (actually the easiest, I'd
> think, would be: if primary key is supplied, it is an UPDATE; if primary
> key is NULL or not supplied, it is an insert and the primary key will be
> auto-generated).

I don't really like the idea of stored procedure, because query would
depend on existence of it then. On the other side, it looks like best
option.

>
> --
>         Wulfraed         Dennis Lee Bieber               KD6MOG
>         wlfr... at ix.netcom.com     HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/




More information about the Python-list mailing list