In advance I should mention that I want to multi tenant app (same models for multiple databases) with tortoise. So in testing this actually work or not I created test project
I wrote multiple connection params in config dict, wrote models, showed them in modules, in order to test I wrote insert data
To Reproduce
I placed the code here https://dpaste.org/PMRx
Expected behavior
It should save Model with, different databases BaseDBAsyncClient. and then get them get them with, but shows error : tortoise.exceptions.OperationalError: permission denied for table tournament
Additional context
I saw NotImplemented areas inside tortoise-orm's source code. so what is the cause of error? how it can be solved? Is it even possible to create such app with tortoise?
Related
In my current dbt project, I run everything on the same Google cloud project (let's say project : dataA). Since datasets becomes a lot, I decide to split the project into 2: The current project for import of raw data and a new project (for example : dataB) for production environment where I stock all data marts.
I use a service account to manage the lecture or editing data sources for both two projects. And I am sure that there is no issues on rights. The profile setting is quite similar to my current settings which work fine.
But I am experiencing some Database Error issues from dbt say that I don't have Insufficient Permission.
Does anyone have an idea about the reason of the issue? And how to fix it?
Many thanks!
I'm working on a project where multiple users work on for example Documents. Every user can own one or more document, edit them and release them again. A Central database handle what user own what documents.
Initial i started with SQLAlchemy and i thought the following workflow:
An user table
A Role table with corresponding allowed actions
Couple the users and the roles
Every user start an engine on the server.
But then i saw the following sentence in the tutorial(SQLAlchemy 1.4 tutorial - Enginehttps://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/14/tutorial/engine.html)
The engine is typically a global object created just once for a particular database server, and is configured using a URL string which will describe how it should connect to the database host or backend.
Since then i start running in circles when it goes about login / logout and multiple user that have access to the database.
My first question is: What are normal workflows for this kind of situations?
Have a single 'Admin' login that handle all the actions and handle the user login as separate python functionality
start as what i thought that is logical but move the engine to the user (not sure if this is possible since it looks like just move the same problem to another place)
A Webserver? (Most examples i see use one... but except for logging in i don't need it currently)
Something else. because i don't know it
My Second question: Please link to some source that can me help bring up my knowledge
I have no software background so forgive me if my question is almost basic knowledge...
We've made use of environment specific migrations for things like seeding data, data correction, applying table grants. There are times when we'd like to take a copy of production, for example, and import it to another lower environment, either as a periodic refresh, or to start a new test environment. However, as expected, we end up with various failures like Detected applied migration not resolved locally and Detected resolved migration not applied to database. I see there are various flags (ignoreIgnoredMigrations, ignoreMissingMigrations and outOfOrder) to allow us to bypass these issues.
Are there best practices for handling scenarios like I described? Is there a way to run an environment specific migration that doesn't file an entry in the flyway_schema_history table? Other approaches to this issue that I haven't mentioned?
Thanks in advance for any insights.
We have used ignoreMissingMigrations as one approach around this issue.
I'm using MigratorDotNet to manage Rails-style migrations for my web app. I have a workflow where, if I delete all the tables in the database, I can access an installation view that will run MigratorDotNet and create all the necessary tables.
This works locally. For some reason, when I upload my code to my Arvixe hosting, the migrations just never run. I get this odd error:
There is already an object named 'SchemaInfo' in the database.
This is odd because, prior to running migrations, I manually deleted all the tables in the database (to make sure it wasn't left over from a previous install).
My code essentially boils down to:
new Migrator.Migrator("SqlServer", connectionString.ToString(), migrationsAssembly).MigrateToLastVersion();
I've already verified by logging that the connection string is correct (production/hosting settings), and the assembly is correctly loaded (name and version).
Works locally, but not on Arvixe. How do I troubleshoot this?
This is a dark day.
It turns out (oddly) that the root cause was my hosting company used a schema other than dbo for my database. Because of this, the error message I saw (SchemaInfo already exists) was talking about their table.
My solution, unfortunately, was to rip out MigratorDotNet and go with FluentMigator instead. not only did this solve the problem, but it also gave me a more intelligible error message (one referring to the schema names).
While it doesn't seem possible to auto-set the schema, and while I need to switch the schema on my dev vs. production machine, it's still a solvable problem (and a better API, IMO). I googled, but did not find any way to change the default schema in migratordotnet.
I'm sorry for the issues that you were having. On shared hosting, unfortunately the only way that we may be able to change the schema is manually. If you are still looking for a solution that requires our assistance, please forward your ticket ID to qa .at. arvixe.com as well as arvand .at. arvixe.com and we can look into the best way to resolve this.
I'm trying to track down a problem on our test environment. Previously it was set to use InProc Session State Type, but I've added in the SQLServer type for one specific Web App. I did this because we use the SQLServer type in our production environment and I want our test env to match as closely as possible.
However, after changing it to SQLServer I do not get any errors when trying to store unserializable data in session like I would expect. It works just fine, even though I would think it shouldn't. I'm a relative newbie when it comes to configuring this, but from the various tutorials I googled, I thought I covered all the bases.
I was wondering if there's any code snippets to verify which session state type an application is actively using.
Thanks
Ok, found it by accessing:
System.Web.SessionState.HttpSessionState.Mode
Was also able to look at the tables in the ASPState database to see sessions being added/removed.
Apparently it was just the test code we were using that we expected to break that was not behaving as we expected..