I think I get why Cloudflare’s CTO is asking this question. personally started using Django for backend development, boy, that thing is robust and cool, esp…
I think I get why Cloudflare’s CTO is asking this question. personally started using Django for backend development, boy, that thing is robust and cool, esp…
That’s a pity.
One of the biggest things I miss about django is its ORM. There is simply nothing better in my opinion. It allows me to think about the application I want to write, not about all the database nonsense and how to join tables, make unions, or aggregate stuff, etc. I have to reevaluate if async is that important to me or not. Every other solution without a similar ORM feels inferior.
Possibly SQLalchemy? But yeah, it’s quite good, and there are ways you can bypass the Django ORM and write your own SQL in the cases where it’s suboptimal. I’ve only had to do that a very small number of times during the 20-plus years I’ve been using Django (I was an early adopter, left Zope like a .38 round leaves a gun).
It also helps that I have some decent SQL optimization skills: when I was doing consulting, I triggered the resignations of two client DBAs because they insisted that there was no way to significantly improve a query’s performance, then I did it. Stupid hill to die on, all they had to have done was to have said “OK, let’s prototype it and see” instead of getting all dogmatic about it. Ego’s a dangerous thing in software development.
SQLalchemy is horrible, IMO. You have to read so much of its documentation to get a grip on things. And the backwards compatible changes they made while moving to (I think) SQLAlchemy2 make it terribly difficult to tell apart the API. And type hints were an abomination to deal with when they tried adding them (it’s better now).
And don’t get me started on migrations with alembic.
I wish the Django ORM could be extracted from Django and used in other projects, but then I also just want to go back to Django.
Reply to /u/onlinepersona SQLAlchemy crocodile tears.
Really need a layer between SQLAlchemy and FastAPI (or litestar, …). Otherwise would be messing around with SQLAlchemy/alembic internals for years. SQLAlchemy is an incredible time sink without that additional layer.
Created just such a package just never got around to publishing it:
Issues:
Remember back in the day … raw SQL. All the children in unison say, “Woah”!
There is no avoiding the database part: model module, alembic migrations, static type checking, UDF, UDF rtyping, string PRAGMAs/SET|SHOW. And a beautiful config file to link them all!
Database work is very time consuming.
Why would be concerning yourself about that? Should have both [a]sync support throughout. Discussing this shouldn’t even be a topic it should be the norm.