Yes I am.
On Jul 15, 11:51 am, "Ramiro Morales" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:09 PM, bob84123 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > (It also seems order_by is recently broken, I'm going to have a look
> > into that now.)
>
> Are you using SQL server 2000?
>
> Regards,
>
> --
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:09 PM, bob84123 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> (It also seems order_by is recently broken, I'm going to have a look
> into that now.)
Are you using SQL server 2000?
Regards,
--
Ramiro Morales
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this
I've fixed a couple of little issues in the backend:
- Settings.DATABASE_ODBC_DRIVER never got included in the connection
string so I put it in at the start;
- I changed the way parameters with default values are checked from
"if not settings.PARAM" to "if 'PARAM' not in dir(settings)", because
th
I think Jacob is correct, both choices result in the entire result set
being read into memory, however #2 leaves the users code database
agnostic.
On Jul 14, 7:21 pm, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (2) For SQLite *only*, we go back to the pre-queryset-refactor
> behaviour: all results are read in immediately upon accessing the
> queryset.
I'd prefer this -- ``list(qs)`` essentially ties user code to their
choic
In essence, ticket #7411 says that for SQLite (only, amongst our core
back-ends), having a cursor that contains partially read results will
cause write-commit problems when saving something to the database. In
code, which might be easier to understand, something like this will be
problematic somet
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 5:25 AM, vcc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks Malcolm tredinick, your greate Queryset-refactor work make
> write a backend very clear, thanks again!
> Yes, make a external database backend is better now, I clean the code
> and get it done! I just upload source code to
Hi Everybody,
I need some assistance on django's OneToOne mapping implementation.
Several days ago I started a discussion in django-users but didn't get
too much of feedback :(
Here it is:
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users/browse_thread/thread/8b30b3bdc157e2ba/5102e779805b0510#5102e779
On Jul 13, 11:50 pm, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Looking at the failures you are getting, it looks like you might not
> have a completely clean checkout. At least some of the failures appear
> to be due to the recently added python 2.3 compatibility
> implementation of sorte
> If I'm not mistaken, in NFA, you can create a custom subclass of
> ModelAdmin that always sets list_display_links equal to list_display,
> and have all of your models inherit from that. This is the most
> flexible solution because people who don't want it to default to
> clickable get their way
EARN MONEY $2500-1 PER WEEK
SIMPLE ONLINE SURVEY
OTHER DETAILS LOGONTO
http://www.AWSurveys.com/HomeMain.cfm?RefID=sivaicici
http://www.AWSurveys.com/HomeMain.cfm?RefID=sivaicici
http://www.AWSurveys.com/HomeMain.cf
Online Shopping
Hello
http://www.shoeswholesalenet.com
Founded in 1998, Shoessuperstar Co., Ltd. has become a professional
and credible export company from china.
We can provide you DROPSHIP Service and ac
12 matches
Mail list logo
