On 12 Feb., 03:51, Malcolm Tredinnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > Is the plan somewhere on the wiki? > > No, because it's only something I'm pulling together slowly in my head.
I hope you've read my wiki page, so that in the end Django is flexible enough to work even with App Engine's limitations (e.g., it's practically impossible to implement a TransactionMiddleware): http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/AppEngine SimpleDB is even worse because of "eventual consistency" which means there are no transactions and absolutely no integrity guarantees. > > App Engine support requires at least that Model and probably a few > > other classes can be overridden (maybe partially) > > For example, > > save_base() makes a few queries to check if the row already exists, > > but this would have to be done differently on App Engine (hopefully > > with a transaction). > > No. Backends should require piecemeal futzing around at that level --the > Model level should be reasonably abstracted from backend specifics. We > should, instead, fix the problem more generically by moving those tests > into the django/db/models/sql/ level in some fashion. Yes, that's better, of course. > That's one of those "we'll do it when we need it" tasks. Since this is > the first time anybody's mentioned, we now have a reason to look at it. I really hope that you'll make this possible in version 1.2. I'd like help with implementing the actual App Engine backend. Bye, Waldemar Kornewald --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
