Hallöchen! Steve Holden writes:
> On 7/27/2010 12:38 PM, Torsten Bronger wrote: >> Hallöchen! >> >> bruno desthuilliers writes: >> >>> On 27 juil, 07:19, Torsten Bronger <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Currently, our Django app relies on the stability of various auto >>>> ID fields which are implicitly generated by Django/database >>>> backend. >>> >>> [...] From a practical POV, starting from a mint empty DB and >>> inserting records in the same order without any other client app >>> accessing to the DB, you should probably get the same IDs, but >>> there's absolutely no garantee. >> >> At least, they are explicitly mentioned in a "manage.py dumpdata" >> fixture, and probably in a SQL dump, too. But the DB may ignore >> autofields when loading that data, right? > > It couldn't do that without ruining the relationships, could it? A > dump includes the numerical values for the foreign keys, so the > related primary keys have to stay the same to maintain relational > integrity. Well, it could map them possibly ... granted that there would be no reason for it. Okay, then I must be more precise: If I have a model with an implicit primary key, and values of this key are used to identify associated files on disk, is this safe? Safe as far as restoring SQL backups, re-loading fixtures, and south migrations are concerned? Tschö, Torsten. -- Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus Jabber ID: [email protected] 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 [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-users?hl=en.
