pipx VS psycopg2

Use pipx to install Cog and my aws-sso-config-builder tool in the same environment:

Given how useful pre-commit is across projects I generally recommend installing via pip install --user, making it part of a tooling virtual environment, or using pipx:

I would recommend going with PipX. You toss in a setup.py file, put your project on github, and then anyone on any OS can pipx install your project. It's a glorious thing. The only thing they need is 1) some supported version of Python installed, 2) pipx installed. They can even get updates by calling pipx upgrade.

See https://github.com/pypa/pipx/issues/278

Good overview. There are quite a few on there I was not aware of. That said, I am not sure the organizational schema makes a tone of sense. I would assume most users that come across this would be looking for a package manager for a specific platform and then weighing the options of binary/source/etc., instead of the other way around.

Also, pipx (https://github.com/pypa/pipx) would be a good addition to the list. I'd add it but I'm not sure where it would go. Maybe every section? It's cross platform and handles both binary and source based app distributions.

Pip is pretty simple and useful for me - you have your own environment for every script/program, requirements.txt is simple to understand too... It's kinda good solution for regular users... For more complex projects we have Poetry, PipX, that was inspired by NPM(x), I think...

What benefit would joining your cult bestow upon me that brew does not already?

My brew list is intentionally very short and my faffing about desire is limited.

Generally I use brew to pull in asdf (https://github.com/asdf-vm/asdf) to install programming languages/tooling, it works flawlessly.

I use Pipx (https://github.com/pypa/pipx) to install python thingies (such as yt-dlp) as a cli. Go and Rust handle binaries in their languages beautifully and without issues.

You can practice both by using https://www.psycopg.org from your Python code to communicate with your database. When I wanted to practice some SQL, that's what I did (we use psycopg at work, so that's what I practiced with, making a dream journal thingy for myself that was better than just noting stuff in a notepad because I could then look up e.g. what other stuff was correlated with Y, how many times I dreamed of X, etc. etc.)

But seems like it should work with Django 3, which you have specified https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg2/issues/1293

If you're using Postgres for your SQL, look at the "copy' method of the psycopg module (see https://www.psycopg.org/articles/2020/11/15/psycopg3-copy/) . It's much faster than INSERTs in my experience (YMMV).

Back when I used Psycopg2, there was no -binary package, so you'd get libpq set up similarly to pg-native. Docs say:

> The binary package is a practical choice for development and testing but in production it is advised to use the package built from sources.

Relevant GitHub discussion: https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg2/issues/674

I dunno, this seems worse to me.

Just go to the more easily readable docs here. I’m sorry, but the linked article is terrible.

psycopg2-binary. See https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg2/issues/1286.

psycopg2-binary, PostgreSQL Database adapter for python.

... # psycopg2==2.9.3 # https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg2 ...

I sometimes do this in testing. For example, consider the library used to communicate with a Postgres database, psycopg.