Hallöchen! Tom Evans writes:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Torsten Bronger > <bron...@physik.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: > >> I think Django should store the fully qualified class name of >> each row in the parent table. For example, the "Person" table >> would have a column with entries like "myapp.Author" or >> "myapp.Translator". Then, a find_actual_instance method could be >> implemented both reliably and efficiently. > > This is effectively what contenttypes and generic foreign keys > do. A GFK has two parts, an item id, and a foreign key to the > content type model, which is a register of all django models, > allowing you to easily construct a Derived from a Base > reference. See the end of my reply to Tim and the docs: > > http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.1/ref/contrib/contenttypes/#id1 Right, and I said that contenttypes are the way to go in my first posting. But I think that it's not too expensive if by default Django stored both the PK and the actual model name in the parent table. Additionally, find_actual_instance should be built-in based on this additional column. After all, I've read about this problem for the forth time on this list (and I don't read it regularly), plus a private email conversion with someone who found old postings of me on Google Groups. Tschö, Torsten. -- Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus Jabber ID: torsten.bron...@jabber.rwth-aachen.de or http://bronger-jmp.appspot.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
