[Django] #27614: Storing the DB used in the state before calling `_save_table`
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: Joseph | Owner: nobody
Kahn |
Type: | Status: new
Uncategorized |
Component: Database | Version: 1.10
layer (models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Keywords:
Triage Stage: | Has patch: 0
Unreviewed |
Needs documentation: 0 | Needs tests: 0
Patch needs improvement: 0 | Easy pickings: 0
UI/UX: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
I was trying to figure out why when calling `.using` before `.create` the
`self._state.db` was not available. I happen to want the result of that to
use in the `pk` value, so right now I have to re fetch that information.
As it turns out, the cause can be narrowed down to a single line. However,
I'm not sure if it was ordered that way for a reason but here:
https://github.com/django/django/blob/d2a26c1a90e837777dabdf3d67ceec4d2a70fb86/django/db/models/base.py#L831-L836
Since not every function call gets the `using` param passed to it, but
most get the `instance` like when it wants to get a pk value prior to
saving.
I was wondering if it's possible to move that `self._state.db = using` up.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27614>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Type: Uncategorized | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: 1.10
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage:
| Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Tim Graham):
Does the test suite pass with the change?
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27614#comment:1>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Component: Database layer | Version: 1.10
(models, ORM) |
Keywords: | Triage Stage:
| Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* status: new => closed
* resolution: => needsinfo
Comment:
The proposed change doesn't seem to work, at least
`multiple_database.tests.RouterTestCase.test_deferred_models` fails. Feel
free to reopen if you have a working patch.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27614#comment:2>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Type: Uncategorized | Status: closed
Component: Database layer | Version: 1.10
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution: needsinfo
Keywords: | Triage Stage:
| Unreviewed
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Joseph Kahn):
I created a PR with a change that doesn't break that test but fixes it for
a lot of the edge cases I run into with multiple databases.
https://github.com/django/django/pull/7841
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27614#comment:3>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Component: Database layer | Version: 1.10
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
| Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* status: closed => new
* resolution: needsinfo =>
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27614#comment:4>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: Joseph Kahn | Owner: nobody
Cleanup/optimization |
Component: Database layer | Version: 1.10
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 1 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* has_patch: 0 => 1
* stage: Unreviewed => Accepted
* type: Uncategorized => Cleanup/optimization
* needs_tests: 0 => 1
Comment:
Tentatively accepting, although I haven't analyzed this in detail. Perhaps
adding a test to the pull request will clarify the use case.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27614#comment:5>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: Joseph Kahn | Owner: nobody
Type: | Status: new
Cleanup/optimization |
Component: Database layer | Version: 1.10
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Needs tests: 1 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* has_patch: 1 => 0
Comment:
The pull request has been withdrawn.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27614#comment:6>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Type: | Cameron
Cleanup/optimization | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: 1.10
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Needs tests: 1 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* owner: nobody => Paul Cameron
* status: new => assigned
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27614#comment:7>