Yes, that's why the proposed patch for the documentation says that
both must be of the same type:
http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/7785/note-about-primary-keys.diff
Rudolph
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to
A documentation change about using a different field type is not
enough in some cases (PostgreSQL 8.3), as noted in #6523 [1].
PostgreSQL 8.3 won't implicitly cast variables anymore, so if you pick
integer for your generic relation you'll have problems relating models
with varchar, and vice versa.
> Well, that depends. Would you like the problem to be fixed or not? :-)
>
> Malcolm
I can imagine that it will be complex to fix (lot's of field types). A
note in the docs would be nice since an integer primary key is a
requirement for generic relations. I've opened a ticket that adds this
requi
On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 01:13 -0700, Rudolph wrote:
> The documentation for Generic Relations uses a PositiveIntegerField
> for the "object-id". However some models might have a non-integer
> field as a primary key, so it might be good to add a note to the
> documentation that a different field typ
On Wednesday 16 July 2008 09:13:21 Rudolph wrote:
> The documentation for Generic Relations uses a PositiveIntegerField
> for the "object-id". However some models might have a non-integer
> field as a primary key, so it might be good to add a note to the
> documentation that a different field type
The documentation for Generic Relations uses a PositiveIntegerField
for the "object-id". However some models might have a non-integer
field as a primary key, so it might be good to add a note to the
documentation that a different field type is needed if one of your
models uses a non-integer primar
