#32577: Add support for `UUIDAutoField` `DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD`
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: Tomasz Wójcik | Owner: nobody
Type: Uncategorized | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: 3.2
(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
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Description changed by Tomasz Wójcik:
Old description:
> Default auto field introduced in #31007,
> [https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.2/releases/3.2/#customizing-type-of-
> auto-created-primary-keys as seen in the docs], is `BigAutoField`.
>
> {{{
>
> class BigAutoField(AutoFieldMixin, BigIntegerField):
> def get_internal_type(self):
> return 'BigAutoField'
>
> def rel_db_type(self, connection):
> return BigIntegerField().db_type(connection=connection)
>
> }}}
>
> Many projects prefer UUID field over big int for pk. So far we had to use
> a mixin for that but I am under the impression `DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD`
> exists to lift this burden.
>
> I'd expect something like this to work (additional adjustments might be
> needed)
>
> {{{
>
> from django.db import models
> from django.db.models.fields import AutoFieldMixin
>
> class UUIDAutoField(AutoFieldMixin, models.UUIDField):
> def get_internal_type(self):
> return 'UUIDAutoField'
>
> def rel_db_type(self, connection):
> return models.UUIDField().db_type(connection=connection)
> }}}
>
> But if I use this for `DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD` I get the error
>
> {{{
> ValueError: Primary key 'common.fields.UUIDAutoField' referred by
> DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD must subclass AutoField.
> }}}
>
> I noticed two things I want to share.
>
> First, the default auto field `BigAutoField` is not subclassing
> `AutoField` so it's not consistent with the error message.
>
> Second, `AutoField` is subclassing `IntegerField`. If I understand this
> correctly, users are limited to subclass `IntegerField` for
> `DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD`. If so, there's no way to implement `UUIDAutoField`
> as `DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD`.
>
> I understand auto fields need to share a common interface but having to
> subclass `IntegerField` is a big constraint.
>
> I'm happy to open a PR once I know what's the desired functionality.
> Possible solutions I see:
> - enforce subclassing from `AutoFieldMixin` instead of `AutoField`
> - I don't think this field has to be very generic because DB pk types are
> very limited. As far as I know, only ints and UUIDs make sense for pk.
> Maybe adding `UUIDAutoField` to django fields would make sense. That way
> it'd have to enforce subclass of `AutoField` or `UUIDAutoField`
>
> Mentioned also in [https://groups.google.com/g/django-
> developers/c/MBPEPKlibGQ/m/uJVZbMpqBAAJ here],
> [https://groups.google.com/g/django-
> developers/c/MBPEPKlibGQ/m/ntEoLCCMBAAJ here] and
> [https://github.com/django/django/pull/13179#issuecomment-742473840
> here].
>
> {{{
> Django==3.2rc1
> }}}
New description:
Default auto field introduced in #31007,
[https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.2/releases/3.2/#customizing-type-of-
auto-created-primary-keys as seen in the docs], is `BigAutoField`.
{{{
class BigAutoField(AutoFieldMixin, BigIntegerField):
def get_internal_type(self):
return 'BigAutoField'
def rel_db_type(self, connection):
return BigIntegerField().db_type(connection=connection)
}}}
Many projects prefer UUID field over big int for pk. So far we had to use
a mixin for that but I am under the impression `DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD` exists
to lift this burden.
I'd expect something like this to work (additional adjustments might be
needed)
{{{
from django.db import models
from django.db.models.fields import AutoFieldMixin
class UUIDAutoField(AutoFieldMixin, models.UUIDField):
def get_internal_type(self):
return 'UUIDAutoField'
def rel_db_type(self, connection):
return models.UUIDField().db_type(connection=connection)
}}}
But if I use this for `DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD` I get the error
{{{
ValueError: Primary key 'common.fields.UUIDAutoField' referred by
DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD must subclass AutoField.
}}}
I noticed two things I want to share.
First, the default auto field `BigAutoField` is not subclassing
`AutoField` so it's not consistent with the error message.
Second, `AutoField` is subclassing `IntegerField`. If I understand this
correctly, users are limited to subclass `IntegerField` for
`DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD`. If so, there's no way to implement `UUIDAutoField`
as `DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD`.
I understand auto fields need to share a common interface but having to
subclass `IntegerField` is a big constraint.
I'm happy to open a PR once I know what's the desired functionality.
Possible solutions I see:
- enforce subclassing of `AutoFieldMixin` instead `AutoField`
- I don't think this field has to be very generic because DBs pk types are
very limited. As far as I know, only ints and UUIDs make sense for pk.
Maybe adding `UUIDAutoField` to django fields would make sense. That way
it'd have to enforce subclass of `AutoField` or `UUIDAutoField`
Mentioned also in [https://groups.google.com/g/django-
developers/c/MBPEPKlibGQ/m/uJVZbMpqBAAJ here],
[https://groups.google.com/g/django-
developers/c/MBPEPKlibGQ/m/ntEoLCCMBAAJ here] and
[https://github.com/django/django/pull/13179#issuecomment-742473840 here].
{{{
Django==3.2rc1
}}}
--
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/32577#comment:2>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/067.af95e47b2408fd1520a5380fb0101ec4%40djangoproject.com.
