sqlmodel VS pydantic

Seems like this is a known bug in SQLModel: https://github.com/tiangolo/sqlmodel/issues/10

I have not used it myself but the creator of fastapi has made https://github.com/tiangolo/sqlmodel

I have already posted this question in Stack Overflow and GitHub and have been ignored in both 😢. You guys are my last hope.

I had a requirement to process and validate large payloads of JSON concurrently for a web service, initially I implemented it using jsonschema and fastjsonschema but I found the whole JSON Schema Specification to be confusing at times and on top of that wanted better performance. Albeit there are ways to compile/cache the schema, I wanted to move away from the schema specification so I wrote a validation library inspired by the design of tiangolo/sqlmodel (type hints) to solve this problem easier.

Github Repository

I would say as long as your current solution works and is easy to maintain keep it. If you want to switch I would recommend FastAPI, it is new(ish), but definitely old enough to have been tested and used in a large variety of production usecases. In your case it might be interesting to have a look at SQLModel (works with FastAPI, same author), especially if the API endpoints match closely to the database objects. https://github.com/tiangolo/sqlmodel

SQLModel.

Sounds similar to https://github.com/tiangolo/sqlmodel

There was a lot of hype and excitement around the release of SQLModel, a Pydantic + SQLAlchemy hybrid Model library with native integration for FastAPI. I pulled it out just now and there hasn't been any update beyond the initial anouncment on August 25th.

First, note the method prefix_allowed_tokens_fn. This method applies a Pydantic model to constrain/guide how the LLM generates tokens. Next, see how that constrain can be applied to txtai's LLM pipeline.

utype is a concise alternative of pydantic with simplified parameters and usages, supporting both sync/async functions and generators parsing, and capable of using native logic operators to define logical types like AND/OR/NOT, also provides custom type parsing by register mechanism that supports libraries like pydantic, attrs and dataclasses

I like some of the changes from v1 to v2. But then you have something like this [0] removed from the library without proper documentation or replacement, resulting in ugly workarounds in the link that wont' work properly.

[0]: https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/discussions/6337

The easiest implementation I found was to use a PyDantic class for my target schema — and use that as a parameter for the method call to “ChatCompletion.create()”. Here’s a fragment of the GinAI Python classes used.

Also, FastStream uses Pydantic to parse input JSON-encoded data into Python objects, making it easy to work with structured data in your applications, so you can serialize your input messages just using type annotations.

Pydantic Validation: Leverage Pydantic's validation capabilities to serialize and validate incoming messages

Not sure if it is exactly related, but there is an open issue on Github for that exact message.

Well the performance increase is so huge because pydantic1 is really really slow. And for using rust, I'd have expected more tbh…

I've been benchmarking pydantic v2 against typedload (which I write) and despite the rust, it still manages to be slower than pure python in some benchmarks.

The ones on the website are still about comparing to v1 because v2 was not out yet at the time of the last release.

pydantic's author will refuse to benchmark any library that is faster (https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/3264 https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/1525 https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/1810) and keep boasting about amazing performances.

On pypy, v2 beta was really really really slow.