A python library wrapper around asyncpg for use with sqlalchemy
Backwards incompatibility notice
Since this library is still in pre 1.0 world, the api might change. I will do my best to minimize changes, and any changes that get added, I will mention here. You should lock the version for production apps.
0.9.0 changed the dialect from psycopg2 to pypostgres. This should be mostly backwards compatible, but if you notice weird issues, this is why. You can now plug-in your own dialect using
pg.init(..., dialect=my_dialect), or setting the dialect on the pool. See the top of the connection file for an example of creating a dialect. Please let me know if the change from psycopg2 to pypostgres broke you. If this happens enough, I might make psycopg2 the default.
0.18.0 Removes the Record Proxy objects that would wrap asyncpg's records. Now asyncpgsa just returns whatever asyncpg would return. This is a HUGE backwards incompatible change but most people just used record._data to get the object directly anyways. This means dot notation for columns is no longer possible and you need to access columns using exact names with dictionary notation.
0.18.0 Removed the
insertmethod. We found this method was just confusing, and useless as SqlAlchemy can do it for you by defining your table with a primary key.
Currently this repo does not support SA ORM, only SA Core.
As we at canopy do not use the ORM, if you would like to have ORM support feel free to PR it. You would need to create an "engine" interface, and that should be it. Then you can bind your sessions to the engine.
This repo supports sqlalchemy core. Go here for examples.
Go here for docs.
Go here for examples.
pip install asyncpgsa
Note: You should not have
asyncpg in your requirements at all. This lib will pull down the correct version of asyncpg for you. If you have asyncpg in your requirements, you could get a version newer than this one supports.
To contribute or build this locally see contributing.md
Does SQLAlchemy integration defeat the point of using asyncpg as a backend (performance)?
I dont think so.
asyncpgsa is written in a way where any query can be a string instead of an SA object, then you will get near asyncpg speeds, as no SA code is ran.
However, when running SA queries, comparing this to
aiopg, it still seams to work faster. Here is a very basic
timeit test comparing the two.
aiopg.sa: 9.541276566000306 asyncpsa: 6.747777451004367
So, seems like its still faster using asyncpg, or in otherwords, this library doesnt add any overhead that is not in aiopg.sa.