Patryk Zawadzki skrev 2010-09-07 16.47:
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
It would be more useful if you could explicitly
enter_isolation_block() and leave_isolation_block() as needed
(currently there is no way to commit the isolating transaction other
than doing a raw SQ
Patryk Zawadzki skrev 2010-09-06 15.29:
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Robert Gravsjö wrote:
I'm not sure what you think you are doing but if you end up with "
in transaction" that means you have not commited your transactions.
See below.
For instance, open two connec
Patryk Zawadzki skrev 2010-09-06 12.20:
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Kirit Sælensminde (kayess)
wrote:
--- snip ---
You can check this by creating a fresh project using psycopg2 and
creating a model. Then write a view that queries the database and
invoke it. Now, leaving the server r
Charlie Nolan skrev 2010-05-27 16.10:
My interpretation of the "version" field is "the most recent version
in which the problem has been confirmed". If a user spots something
in an older version, it could be fixed or made irrelevant in SVN,
leading to a search for a problem which doesn't exist
Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
--- 8< ---
> What kind of injection? It did not terminate the SQL query, just the
> contents of one field. SQL termination in the middle of a quoted
> string would result in a failed transaction. Also, AFAIR Django uses
> prepared statements so there's no possibility to
