Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #63167 > unrolled thread

Using multiple ORMs? - And SQLalchemy vs Pony vs Peewee vs stdnet vs …

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Using multiple ORMs? - And SQLalchemy vs Pony vs Peewee vs stdnet vs … Alec Taylor <alec.taylor6@gmail.com> - 2014-01-05 14:58 +1100
    Re: Using multiple ORMs? - And SQLalchemy vs Pony vs Peewee vs stdnet vs … Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> - 2014-01-05 18:22 +0100

#63167 — Using multiple ORMs? - And SQLalchemy vs Pony vs Peewee vs stdnet vs …

Investigating possible using multiple ORMs in my project.

Toy project, want to make it as generic as humanly possible; whilst
still exposing abstract pythonic interfaces.

E.g.: support most number of backends, including SQL ones like:
Postgres, SQLite, MySQL, … and NoSQL ones such as Redis (using
python-stdnet).

One way of doing this is to write generic Python libraries; with
different models, insert and query lines for each of the backend ORMs.

What are your thoughts on this?

Additionally, there are a variety of new ORMs popping up, what are
your thoughts on them; and is there something other than the 4
mentioned in the subject which I should look into?

Thanks for all suggestions,

Alec Taylor

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#63204

> Thanks for all suggestions,

Two essential criteria:

If an ORM only allows 1:1 mapping between classes and tables à la
"active record", then it's entirely pointless.

And if an ORM allows only surrogate keys, then its developers don't
have a clue of databases or they don't give a darn. Or both.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web