We are in situation to create the separate API in Python FastApi for one functionality. Other functionality in Laravel. The application which exists already. It created set of tables and using them. Now, we are required to create Pydantic schemas for new API. That schema has a relationship with existing tables. We don't want to create separate schemas for existing tables.
We are forced to create schemas for existing tables as well in the new API. We don't want to create the separate schemas and models for existing tables.
Kindly suggest
Thanks in advance
If you don't care about automatic documentation you don't need to use pydantic at all - you can just return dict and use swagger. If you do, I have no good news.
As far as I know it's not easily achievable. Even if you have tables definitions implemented in sqlalchemy there is not easy way of creating schema from them (there is a tool but it's still experimental).
There are ORM's that can do that (like tortoise) but you still need to implement schema somewhere. Dynamic creation of python class based on database schema would be very hard, very long, very bugable and would break static checkers so I am pretty sure they never exist.
Related
I have an existing sqlite db schema (about 30 table) which I have to import into my Android project.
I'd like to use greenDao in my code but I don't know how it's possible if I have already sqlite db created.
Is it possible to work with greenDao even if I haven't my pojo/entity class generated by greenDao Generator? Could I generate them manually?
I think I need also DaoMaster and DaoSession!??!
Thank you very much.
I've never done it, but theoretically, yes you can.
From greenDao FAQ page:
Can I use existing entity classes? Can I skip entity generation?
Yes. In your generator project, call setSkipGeneration(true) on entities you do not want to generate. Like this, you have the most possible control over your entities at the cost of manual maintenance. However, this is considered advanced usage and should be reserved for special cases only: the recommended way is to generate entities and use “keep sections” to inject custom code into them. If you choose to skip entity generation, you must either provide a constructor with all property fields in the order they were added in the generator project. Or alternatively, call setConstructors(false) on entities to make greenDAO use setters instead of the constructor to create entities.
I understand that you have to implement the generator project normally but skype de generation of the entities. This should generate the DaoMaster and DaoSession only.
I'm well aware of the standard SilverStripe Data Structure and table/field naming conventions. But how do you integrate SilverStripe with a pre-existing database? Is there any way to map existing tables/fields with a different naming convention to be useable by the SilverStripe ORM and DataObjects? Also, is it possible to use the ORM with two different databases?
In a recent project I had the same issue, and I solved creating views in the SS database over the CRM database, in order to present to SilverStripe the data in the way it likes. Obviously I also created DataObjects mapping the data, and so no dev/build is needed. It's not an easy way to do it, but if you're lucky and the second database logic is similar to SS logic it's a feasible task.
Now I have a CRM that write data into its database with its logic, and SS that reads it through views as if it were its own DataObject.
Good luck :)
I am afraid that, as far as I know, the answer to both questions is no.
I guess the best option would be to write an importer that connects to the old database, fetches the data, and then creates silverstripe objects for it.
If you have to run both systems at a time it will be come trick. The first thing I would consider here would probably be a rest api between the 2 systems, but not sure how well that would work out.
I want to know whats the standard way of structuring DB related operations? Because a structure is not defined in the documentation.
E.g. Have a repoclass and have functions written for getUsername likewise?
That's exactly like that.
Your model only contains the entities skeleton. Everything related to querying data for these entities has to be in a Repository.
From the Cookbook:
In order to isolate, test and reuse these queries, it's a good idea to create a custom repository class for your entity and add methods with your query logic there.
I'm attempting to setup Entity Framework using Code First on an existing database. The database isnt in great shape (poor naming convention and some constraints are needed). The application I'm building is an MVC app. I have a "Model", "Repository", and "Web" (mvc) tiers.
To setup EF and map my model objects (POCO objects), is it required that I match my objects to database tables? Can I, instead, use my own stored procedures for CRUD operations? Would it help if I use WCF data services?
I'm planning on using fluent configurations to map my objects, but having some issues due to the database schema. I'm know considering redesigning the database just to get EF to map correctly. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!!
Looks awfully similar to this question:
Does Entity Framework Code First support stored procedures?
The answers there may be helpful to you, as well as the discussion surrounding how Code First and Stored Procedures don't make a whole lot of sense.
Wow, Julie Lerman answered!
Yes, it's possible, but not particularly easy. In particular, you must call context.Database.SqlQuery<T>() where T is the entity type you want to return, and your SQL must match up to that entity type. Otherwise, you will have to massage a result set into a type.
In general, you will have to do most of this manually, although you could probably figure out a T4 template to generate it for you, or maybe use some other tool like CodeSmith.
I'm creating a data model first using the LINQ-To-SQL graphical designer by using right-click->Add->Class. My idea is that I'll set up everything first using test repositories, design the entire website, then as a final step, create a database using the LINQ-To-SQL classes as a model for the database tables and relationships. My reasoning is that it's easy to edit the classes, but hard to modify DB tables (especially if there's already data in them), so by doing the database part last, it becomes much easier to design the structure.
My question is, is there an automatic way to link the two once I have the DB tables created? I know you can manually fill out the class properties for the LINQ-To-SQL entities but this is pretty cumbersome if you have a lot of tables to deal with. The other option is to delete your manually-created classes and drag the tables from the database into the designer to auto-generate the classes, but I'm not sure if this is the best way of doing it.
Linq to Sql is intended to be a relatively thin ORM layer over a database. While you can of course just add properties to a data context and use them as a sort of mock, you are correct, it isn't really easy to work with.
Instead of relying solely on Linq to Sql generated classes to give you freedom from the database implementation, you may want to look into the repository design pattern. It allows you to have a smooth separation between your database, domain model, and your middle tier; I have used it on two projects now, and have been able to (for the most part) build everything top-down, leaving the actual database for last. Below is a link to a good tutorial on the pattern (better than I could scribble down here).
https://web.archive.org/web/20110503184234/http://blogs.hibernatingrhinos.com/nhibernate/archive/2008/10/08/the-repository-pattern.aspx
Depending on your database permissions, you may call your datacontext's DeleteDatabase() and CreateDatabase() methods as a ungraceful way of resyncing your classes and tables. This is not much of an option when you have actual data in the database, but does work when you are in your development stages.
Take a look at my add-in (which you can download from http://www.huagati.com/dbmltools/ , free 45-day trial licenses are also available from the same site).
It can generate SQL-DDL diff scripts with the SQL-DDL statements for updating your database with only the portions that has changed in the L2S model (e.g. add missing columns, missing tables, missing FKs etc), instead of the L2S-out-of-the-box support for recreating the entire db from scratch.
It also supports syncing the other way; updating the model from the database.