Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Removing use of non-batchable request in storage regression. - #694
Merged
Conversation
tseaver added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 11, 2015
Removing use of non-batchable request in storage regression.
dhermes
commented
Mar 11, 2015
ContributorAuthor
I assume you merged because it LGTY :) |
tseaver
commented
Mar 11, 2015
Contributor
Yeah, one-liner, etc. -- didn't seem worth any more overhead. |
parthea added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 22, 2025
Source-Link: googleapis/synthtool@25083af Post-Processor: gcr.io/cloud-devrel-public-resources/owlbot-python:latest@sha256:e6cbd61f1838d9ff6a31436dfc13717f372a7482a82fc1863ca954ec47bff8c8 Co-authored-by: Owl Bot <gcf-owl-bot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Anthonios Partheniou <partheniou@google.com>
parthea pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 24, 2025
* feat: add async unsupported paramater exception * Update google/api_core/exceptions.py Co-authored-by: Victor Chudnovsky <vchudnov@google.com> * 🦉 Updates from OwlBot post-processor See https://github.com/googleapis/repo-automation-bots/blob/main/packages/owl-bot/README.md --------- Co-authored-by: Victor Chudnovsky <vchudnov@google.com> Co-authored-by: Owl Bot <gcf-owl-bot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
parthea pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 24, 2025
* chore: Update gapic-generator-python to v1.8.5 PiperOrigin-RevId: 511892190 Source-Link: googleapis/googleapis@a45d9c0 Source-Link: googleapis/googleapis-gen@1907294 Copy-Tag: eyJwIjoiLmdpdGh1Yi8uT3dsQm90LnlhbWwiLCJoIjoiMTkwNzI5NGIxZDgzNjVlYTI0ZjhjNWYyZTA1OWE2NDEyNGM0ZWQzYiJ9 * 🦉 Updates from OwlBot post-processor See https://github.com/googleapis/repo-automation-bots/blob/main/packages/owl-bot/README.md --------- Co-authored-by: Owl Bot <gcf-owl-bot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
parthea pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 24, 2025
parthea pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2026
parthea pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2026
* chore: release 2.2.1b3 * Updated CHANGELOG.md Co-authored-by: release-please[bot] <55107282+release-please[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Vikash Singh <3116482+vi3k6i5@users.noreply.github.com>
parthea pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 9, 2026
Spanner uses protos for enums. Creating a column like
Column("an_enum", Enum("A", "B", "C")) will result in a String
column. Setting supports_native_enum to False allows SQLAlchemy
to generate check constraints to enforce the enum values if the
create_constraint=True flag is passed to the Enum constructor.
Fixes: #686
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
See my comment on #15 for context.
I was in general playing around with ditching
_PropertyBatch(or just merging that functionality intoBatch) and trying to figure out how to properly handle the 204 response in a patch within a batch.