Since multi-table-inheritance is the only kind of inheritance (apart
from abstract/proxy) supported by Django's ORM, I don't know what
other type of inheritance django_polymorphic would be referring to...
As per my original post, I want to store everything in one table (all
subclasses have t
Hi Carl,
> FWIW, django-model-utils [1] includes an InheritanceManager that
> implements polymorphic queries in a single query via select_related.
Ah, there goes my theory that I thought of it first :) And of course
introspection of subclasses via the reverse OneToOne descriptors is
perfect.
--
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Viktor Kojouharov wrote:
>
> I'm testing my software with the new rc1 release of django 1.3, and I came
> onto a particularly nasty problem.
> I have a model which uses a Postgresql 'point' type, for which I've defined
> a field as:
> http://dpaste.com/472467/
>
>
Hi Simon,
On Mar 4, 3:27 am, Simon Meers wrote:
> +1 for better polymorphic support in Django core; it is a very common
> problem which could do with an efficient and elegant solution.
> Regarding efficiency, if you can keep track of your subclasses
> effectively (potentially using a registry if
Hi Craig,
On Mar 4, 1:03 am, Craig de Stigter wrote:
> It looks like django_polymorphic does what I want. I'm not yet sure why it
> says it takes one query per type of model in a queryset. Unless it is
> talking about multi-table inheritance, in which each type would require a
> different join. B
On Mar 4, 5:55 am, Rahul wrote:
> When i ran test cases of multiple_databases model of regressiontests
> then "test_generic_key_deletion" test case gave Error at the point
> where it was trying to create Review object using "other" db,
> but when i ran "test_generic_key_deletion" test case only
On 03/04/2011 11:56 PM, Rohit Sethi wrote:
Hi all, I wanted to revisit a key security discussion. Brute force
attacks are the 7th most prevalent attack by number of incidents in
the Web Hacking Incidents Database (http://projects.webappsec.org/w/
page/13246995/Web-Hacking-Incident-Database), whi
On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 17:22 -0500, Shawn Milochik wrote:
> the thread referred to above discusses throttling, whereas the
> "recommendation" provided to us by the auditors was user lockout
> requiring administrator activity (human intervention) to unlock.
This *creates* a denial of service vulnera
do you guys know about django-axes? (http://code.google.com/p/django-axes/)
it allows you to lock out IP or IP/User Agent combo on a given number of
failures.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Shawn Milochik wrote:
> I have an immediate interest in this discussion. One of my company's
> Django a
I have an immediate interest in this discussion. One of my company's
Django apps was recently subjected to an external risk assessment team
audit. They found the fact that three invalid password attempts didn't
lock out the user to be completely unacceptable.
Granted, this is something that I shou
Hi all, I wanted to revisit a key security discussion. Brute force
attacks are the 7th most prevalent attack by number of incidents in
the Web Hacking Incidents Database (http://projects.webappsec.org/w/
page/13246995/Web-Hacking-Incident-Database), which tracks publicly
disclosed breaches in web a
2011/3/4 Mikołaj S. :
> I know, but it just seems so obvious to me that I can't believe no one have
> ever encountered this problem before - I felt like I should ask ;)
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this
I know, but it just seems so obvious to me that I can't believe no one have
ever encountered this problem before - I felt like I should ask ;)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-deve
I'm not familiar with that subsystem, but if what you say is correct,
you should open a ticket. That sounds like a definite issue to me.
-Paul
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-deve
Hello,
I'm testing my software with the new rc1 release of django 1.3, and I came
onto a particularly nasty problem.
I have a model which uses a Postgresql 'point' type, for which I've defined
a field as:
http://dpaste.com/472467/
I also have another model, which references this one with a fore
Hi,
I'd like to make a proposal of changing the way that current language is
stored, at least, making this changeable by settings.
The problem is that even for non-logged users their language is stored in
session (if it's supported or in the cookie otherwise).
That creates a session for every cl
When i ran test cases of multiple_databases model of regressiontests
then "test_generic_key_deletion" test case gave Error at the point
where it was trying to create Review object using "other" db,
but when i ran "test_generic_key_deletion" test case only then it
passed perfectly.
When i narrowed
On 4 March 2011 17:03, Craig de Stigter wrote:
> Hi guys
>
> Thanks for pointing those out. I knew I couldn't have been the first to want
> this. I guess I just didn't know the right words to search for here.
> It looks like django_polymorphic does what I want. I'm not yet sure why it
> says it ta
18 matches
Mail list logo