dumpdata with custom auth model

uot;, "auth_user"."is_superuser", "auth_user"."date_joined" FROM "auth_user" ORDER BY "auth_user"."id" ASC; args=() CommandError: Unable to serialize database: relation "auth_user" does not exist LINE 1: ...r"

Re: Perimission field name on the new Custom User Model

uld change the database field name > without interfering with Django's ModelBackend. > > Best, > Alex Ogier > > > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Christian Jensen > wrote: > >> I was tweaking around with making an email address only User model (sans >> userna

Perimission field name on the new Custom User Model

delBackend and fix it there. I am probably an idiot and just not know the better way to fix this. Christian -- *Christian Jensen* 724 Ioco Rd Port Moody, BC V3H 2W8 +1 (778) 996-4283 christ...@jensenbox.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Djan

Re: Custom user models in 1.5, not flexible/dry enough?

I think this is the right approach when I was making my custom user model I was thinking the same thing. I hope these mixins make it in. Sent from my iPhone On 2012-11-06, at 2:55 PM, Alex Ogier wrote: So, I went ahead and implemented the most useful mixin of the three that I defined previously

Re: 1.5, update_fields and PostgreSQL (or other MVCC style database) - request for documentation note

e database, even if someone else had > changed them and > you didn't. > > Now if you fetch a particular instance, and make a change, you can save > only that value, and you > won't clobber other peoples saves if they made a change to an unrelated > field on that row. > &

1.5, update_fields and PostgreSQL (or other MVCC style database) - request for documentation note

I was just writing some code against 1.5 and thought I might use the new .save(update_fields=['xyz']) then I realized I was using PostgreSQL - which is an MVCC... which re-writes the entire row as far as I know even when one column is being updated. I popped into the release notes and it does i