On Apr 25, 2008, at 9:22 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> Hold on. One of the reasons a fair bit of effort was put into making
> it
> much easier to subclass model fields is so that we don't have to play
> this endless game of adding every type of specialised field under the
> sun.
>
> If your a
I fixed all these problems for me already, Malcolm; but it seems it
may be confusing for some people that Django does not support more
than 4.2G entries in a table out-of-the-box, without such specific
tuning. 4.2G is a really not that large number.
On 26 апр, 06:22, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PR
On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 15:12 -0700, Alex Myodov wrote:
> I am among the people interested in this patch.
> But, looking at the patch concepts from the PostgreSQL perspective, I
> wonder whether it will be possible to use it as a base of native
> BIGSERIAL support in Django (it is likely that MySQL
I am among the people interested in this patch.
But, looking at the patch concepts from the PostgreSQL perspective, I
wonder whether it will be possible to use it as a base of native
BIGSERIAL support in Django (it is likely that MySQL supports
something similar, but sqlite needs double-checking).
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/399
I notice this ticket has been around for a while, and according to the
comments, was only waiting a Triage member to look it over.
SmileyChris was nice enough to point me over to this group to ask
about it.
Also, the most resent patch was missing the
