() ignore fields with db_default when validating empty values. https://github.com/django/django/pull/17831 - Fixed #35044 -- Avoided clearing reverse relations and private

would simply filter/ignore the entire warning which would hide actual positives, but I guess it's better than nothing. To sum up: -1 on implicit pk ordering by default +0 on implicit

up (ignore the execution time when I ran them through pgbench they were roughly the same on average): # update pgbench_accounts set abalance = 10 where bid in (4, 7); UPDATE 200000 # explain

is to ignore a particular filter, thus it has no other requirement than to be identifiable by Django code and distinct from all other valid values of filters. Making it a constant object

context managers ignore count and msg_prefix parameters. (accepted) https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24125 - TemplateDetailView in admindocs requires a single Django

qs.filter(related=Q(...)). (duplicate) https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/31398 - multiple_database.tests.AuthTestCase doesn't flush the default database

work as filter. (worksforme) https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/30822 - Oracle Bulk Create TextField fails when there is a mix of short and long string. (duplicate) https

for tests ignore database specific names. (invalid) https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24680 - In testing, warnings appear when loading database-specific fixtures. (

Net can ignore this RFC and it's up to > > Django to decide what to do with this RFC. > > > > By the way, my name in Hebrew is אורי and there is no such problem in > >

qs.filter(age__gt=18)` scattered around everywhere and a separate `can_drink` function of property. Without the `can_drink` function returning the correct result when the model

a warnings filter >> so that the warning is only emited once. An example of that already exists >> in the migrations: django.db.migrations.state.ModelState.render

around/ignore it. As I step through the code, it really looks like the _save_table() method in Model is trying to insert a row even though the object has already been restored/inserted

can probably ignore everything I say about savepoints.) > On 07 Mar 2016, at 12:55, Tore Lundqvist wrote: > > an example of when it happens is when: > > Starting with auto

objects.filter().update(**fields) we should not include so called *auto fields* in the update statement but we should never leave out a field explicitly specified, (we already

as they ignore > pre-save? As the stripping happens (or used to happen) at the sql query > compile level. > > This is really a bummer, because it seems like the only option

" template filter (wontfix) https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25669 - Adding postgresql publish/subscribe mechanism to django postgres contrib module (needsinfo

Hello, I'm trying to make the lives of maintainers of third-party database backends a bit easier.

).filter(...) > > Adding the select_related causes countries to be locked too -- which > unnecessarily limits concurrency and increases risk of deadlocks. The > number

examples conveniently ignore relations, which is where both > relational databases and Django's ORM shine. That's where I disagree. > Here's an interesting

the time filter doesn't support the use of the T format >> specifier. >> >> > Where is this default usage established? By the filter name? > Well, it's

Hello! I'm really happy that I've been accepted as a Google Summer of Code student. I will

Hi, first of all, sorry for chiming in so late. It seems like this has been discussed in May, already

safe to ignore the rest of the mail. If I cannot access models from startup.py, I have two concerns: 1. It seems fairly limiting. We currently have a hacked together startup system for

easy to filter >> out. However, IMHO, unilaterally ignoring 404s would be just as bad as >> having too many. On top of that, any halfway decent log analysis tool >>

For those of us using MySQL, having large tables, whilst also wanting queryset goodness -- http://

On 6 Jul 2010, at 04:45, django-developers+noreply@googlegroups.com wrote: Today's Topic Summary

I've looked at the users and devel mailing list but didn't find any information on HTML 5. I

Hi all, Next on my pony list for v1.2: #7052 - fixing the serializers to work around the problem of

I've run into a bit of an odd problem with the ORM. I have a model without an order_by in its

would say ignore triggers on the DB level, until they've been > > written in the framework. > > > > Yes, this was essentially my point earlier; triggers would