#34165: migrate management command does not respect database parameter when
adding
Permissions.
------------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: Vasanth | Owner: nobody
Type: Bug | Status: new
Component: contrib.auth | Version: 4.1
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
------------------------------+------------------------------------
Comment (by David Wobrock):
Replying to [comment:10 Mariusz Felisiak]:
> Replying to [comment:8 David Wobrock]:
> > I think `bulk_create` already sets the `_state.db` to the value passed
in `.using()`, right?
>
> Yes, but it's a different issue, strictly related with `Permission` and
its `content_type`. `get_content_type()` is trying to find a content type
using `obj._state.db` so when we create a `Permission()` without
`._state.db` it will first try to find a content type in the default db.
Okay, I understand the issue now, thanks for the details!!
First thing, it makes me wonder why we require to have a DB attribute set,
at a moment where we are not (yet) interacting with the DB.
So we are currently checking, when setting the `content_type` FK, that the
router allows this relation. I guess one option is to not do that for not-
saved model instances.
Would it make sense to defer this to when we start interacting with the
DB? But it brings a whole other lot of changes and challenges, like
changing a deep behaviour of FKs and multi-tenancy :/
Apart from that, if we don't want to set directly the internal attribute
`_state.db`, I guess we would need a proper way to pass the `db`/`using`
to the model instantiation.
What would be the most ''Django-y'' way?
- Passing it through the model constructor => this has quite a large
impact, as a keyword argument would possibly shadow existing field names:
`Permission(..., db=using)`. Quite risky in terms of backward
compatibility I guess.
- Adding a method to `Model`? Something like: `Permission(...).using(db)`,
which could perhaps then be re-used in other places also.
What do you think ? :) Or am I missing other solutions?
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/34165#comment:11>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/010701852ef6b16c-5086918c-e150-45ed-b179-e9aa00151a69-000000%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.
