On Feb 27, 6:38 pm, "Ramiro Morales" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2/27/07, Geert Vanderkelen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Because the other Databases have 'limitations' or 'features' or > > 'defects' that MySQL might not have or whatever. Django is, as I have > > been told, database independent. And Django is working fine with > > MySQL, lets keep it that way. > > As Russell has said: > > > Reverting [4610] only serves to break Postgres; it > > won't return MySQL to working status. MySQL has never allowed forward > > references. We just didn't have a test that revealed the problem. > > Also, as Daniel pointed, MySQL is not following the SQL standard in > this specific issue. And considering Oracle now owns InnoDB I wouldn´t > hold my breath waiting for this being implemented anytime soon.
InnoDB is not dead, and it's not the only game in town for transactional backends for MySQL: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/storage-engines-other.html http://dev.mysql.com/doc/falcon/en/index.html Also, MySQL with MyISAM does pass the unit test for the same reason sqlite does: No foreign keys. Not that I'm advising anyone to use MyISAM in general. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
