It'd be nice if there was a way to query stores for their databases
Bug #506536 reported by
Guilherme Salgado
This bug affects 1 person
| Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Storm |
Fix Released
|
Undecided
|
Guilherme Salgado | ||
Bug Description
In Launchpad we have a custom Database class which stores the dsn that was passed to psycopg2.connect(), which we need to know in some cases. The problem is that to get to our Database from a store we need to go through private attributes (store.
Since the database is passed in when a new Store object is created, we could either store that as an instance variable or make it a @property that returns self._connectio
Related branches
lp:~salgado/storm/bug-506536
- Gustavo Niemeyer: Approve
- Jamu Kakar (community): Approve
-
Diff: 48 lines (+13/-1)2 files modifiedstorm/store.py (+5/-0)
tests/store/base.py (+8/-1)
Revision history for this message
| Jamu Kakar (jkakar) wrote | #1 |
| Changed in storm: | |
| assignee: | nobody → Guilherme Salgado (salgado) |
| status: | New → Fix Committed |
| Changed in storm: | |
| milestone: | none → 0.17 |
| Changed in storm: | |
| status: | Fix Committed → Fix Released |
To post a comment you must log in.
We talked about it and had some different opinions:
<salgado> jkakar, around? did you see my question earlier about adding a 'database' @property to Store?
<therve> salgado: what about getUtility(
<salgado> therve, we don't use set_default_uri() to populate the default uris -- we always pass the URI to IZStorm.get()
<therve> ah, sorry
salgado: is the uri stored anywhere on the database though?
<salgado> and I was confused when I said I need the uri
what I need is something else that is stored in our custom Database class
<therve> ah :)
<salgado> we store the dsn that is passed to psycopg2.connect()
that's actually stored by Postgres too
<therve> yeah but the dsn is private
<salgado> right, but since we already have a custom Database class, we can create a public version of it there. if only we didn't have to go store._
<therve> it seems kind of weird to me
you can maintain a mapping outside of storm to keep track of that
<salgado> why is it weird? we already pass a Database object when creating new storm instances, so why not allow the store to be asked about its database?
<therve> I just gave my opinion :)
<salgado> I could maintain a mapping myself, but it'd be a lot easier if storm had that facility. would you be against such a change even if one of your dear users were to do all the heavy lifting? ;)
<therve> the thing is that the default database objects in Storm don't provide anything
but it doesn't seem like a terrible idea, I'm just saying :)
<salgado> yeah, that's a good point, but it'd be reeeeeaaaaaly nice if storm had that. guess I'll describe my use case in a bug and hope for the best
<jkakar> I think it makes sense.
I can imagine storing things like a schema generator on the database object.
Then you could do things like if no_schema(): store.database.
<salgado> jkakar, super! would it be ok to just save the database that's passed in to __init__()? (https:/
<mup> Bug #506536: It'd be nice if there was a way to query stores for their databases <Storm:New> <https:/
<jkakar> salgado: That's what I was thinking. That way you can specialize it, like you have, to do useful things.
salgado: It certainly feels like a very natural place for a schema and read-only status and other database metadata that your application might care about.
<salgado> indeed