Re: 1.5, update_fields and PostgreSQL (or other MVCC style database) - request for documentation note

2012/11/3 Christian Jensen > I was just writing some code against 1.5 and thought I might use the new > .save(update_fields=['xyz']) then I realized I was using PostgreSQL - which > is an MVCC... which re-writes the entire row as far as I know even when one > column is

Re: 1.5, update_fields and PostgreSQL (or other MVCC style database) - request for documentation note

Exactly... I guess I was just asking for someone to say 'Don't use this if you think it will make the update any faster on Postgres' in the docs... in addition to what you just said :) On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > The major help is preventing

Re: 1.5, update_fields and PostgreSQL (or other MVCC style database) - request for documentation note

The major help is preventing clobbering a value for concurrency. Prior to this when you loaded an object from SQL into a django model, it would fetch all the values as they were at that time, and store them in the model instance. Then when you saved it it would write all those values back out

1.5, update_fields and PostgreSQL (or other MVCC style database) - request for documentation note

I was just writing some code against 1.5 and thought I might use the new .save(update_fields=['xyz']) then I realized I was using PostgreSQL - which is an MVCC... which re-writes the entire row as far as I know even when one column is being updated. I popped into the release notes and it does