That would be my guess too. So if it went into the Django core at all, it
would need to be documented as a Postgresql only thing I guess (if the
guess proves right). This might also then figure in the recommendation on
databases. Postgresql is already recommended as the production database by
D
My guess is this does not work on MySQL or SQLite, since as far as I can tell
it’s the only DB that will return IDs when bulk inserting. I’d think you’d have
to have some other code path to handle those DB backends.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
That's an idea I like. Though it affects OneToMany relations too (no idea
why this is so often presented as an m2m issue, when it's literally a 2m
issue. So I'd prefer the attribute to be something like
validate_tomany_relations or validate_2m perhaps. The focus on m2m is
misleading.
Either
I don't think a new setting is the way to go. I'd prefer to add an
attribute (validate_m2m = False?) to the CreateView and UpdateView classes
that allows a developer to opt-in to the new behaviour when they need it.
This is more flexible and still maintains backwards compatibility.
Regards,
Ian
O
Most once sided discussion I've seen on a developers group in a while ;-),
but I'll go so far as to suggest an API for the Django Core on this one. I
mean I have a way to advance myself now, but methinks this need is so
common that perhaps it's best sitting in the Django Core, albeit with a
set
Ouch, I am not believing my eyes, but somewhat overjoyed with what I have
found in my explorations over recent evenings empirically exploring
transactions. The TLDR is this: I am puzzled that I haven't tested and
found this to date, and that all the folk I read online asking for m2m ORM
validat
. Propose an API, and speak to how it won't impact existing
> users, and I think you'll find lots of people will have something to say.
>
> FWIW, I'd be interested in seeing some kind of solution. Our ($work$)
> current response to feature requests that involve validation
existing
users, and I think you'll find lots of people will have something to say.
FWIW, I'd be interested in seeing some kind of solution. Our ($work$)
current response to feature requests that involve validation of m2m fields
is "too hard for the effort".
Cheers
On Friday
I'm curious what consensus looks like. In what forum among which
stakeholders. Clearly among developers who have some knowledge of Djangos
innards, and so I suspect here. But I find conversation here on this thread
so neatly short I can digest it in a short read, and
https://code.djangoproject
It could be a potential ticket to work on my next django dev sprint.
But first it would be nice to have some basic consensus on how to proceed.
Was it ever discussed in any older thread or ticket?
On Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 5:21:06 PM UTC+1, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Here's an open ticket ab
Here's an open ticket about adding model level validation for many-to-many:
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12938
On Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 11:04:22 AM UTC-5, Federico Capoano wrote:
>
> Thanks Aymeric,
>
> I decided to post this problem on django-developers because I've read this
>
Thanks Aymeric,
I decided to post this problem on django-developers because I've read this
ticket:
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24731
Sorry for omitting this information.
Has there been a discussion about this topic already?
Would it be hard to implement an easier solution into django?
Hello Frederico,
It appears that you're hitting the problem described in the "Avoid catching
exceptions inside atomic!" warning on this page:
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.8/topics/db/transactions/#handling-exceptions-within-postgresql-transactions
To obtain that sort of result, I suppose y
Hi everybody,
I am sure it has happened to many of you.
Validating m2m BEFORE saving the relationships is very hard and time
consuming.
Now this solution:
http://schinckel.net/2012/02/06/pre-validating-many-to-many-fields./
Proposes to solve it with a ModelForm in the admin.
Cool, that works.
14 matches
Mail list logo
