On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 02:25 +0000, DavidA wrote: > > Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > > I was trying to avoid a hash-based solution because it leads to > > unreadable names (and I don't think every database supports unnamed > > constraints, so that isn't a universal solution, either). I need to do a > > bit of research and them come up with a legal hash construction. > > But why not let the backend decide the best way to build the ALTER > TABLE/ADD CONSTRAINT statement? Then the MySQL backend could leave them > unnamed, avoiding the uniqueness/length issues, and other backends > could do it the old way since they aren't affected. It seems this bit > of SQL is non-standard enough that it might benefit to move it out of > management.py.
That is also possible, but I was trying to avoid another reliance on the backend (things like "sqlall" start to get complex). Still, it's probably only a single proxy function call, so not too hard to maintain. I'm sure if I keep coming up with bad implementations, you'll keep pounding. So one day it will be perfect. :-) Regards, Malcolm --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
