Re: Memory usage depends on number of fields in model, in a strange way
""" class U(models.Model): name = models.TextField(max_length = 255, blank = False) name2 = models.TextField(max_length = 255, blank = False) name3 = models.TextField(max_length = 255, blank = False) ... data = [U() for x in xrange(10)] """ What is this actually trying to test? If Python allocation works? Yes, you'll start getting all sort of weird memory usage patterns from the Python VM if you hold references to 10 bogus objects without garbage collecting in-between. On 30 jul, 21:04, OverKrik wrote: > Thx Alex, should I post minimal testapp just to make sure? I really > tried triggering this with my own classes, but had no luck even with > pretty complex ones. > > On Jul 31, 3:50 am, Alex Gaynor wrote: > > > > > This isn't something django can help, it has to do with the overallocation > > patterns for python dicts. You would see this for any pytho obj with the > > right number of fields. > > > Alex > > > On Jul 30, 2010 7:17 PM, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 5:59 PM, OverKrik wrote: > > > Hi, I've been profiling Djan... > > > Hm, in a quick test I can't seem to reproduce this, and I can't see > > how it'd be happening. Can you post more details -- your model, how > > you're measuring the memory usage, which database you're using, etc? > > > Thanks! > > > Jacob > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Django developers" g... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Memory usage depends on number of fields in model, in a strange way
Thx Alex, should I post minimal testapp just to make sure? I really tried triggering this with my own classes, but had no luck even with pretty complex ones. On Jul 31, 3:50 am, Alex Gaynor wrote: > This isn't something django can help, it has to do with the overallocation > patterns for python dicts. You would see this for any pytho obj with the > right number of fields. > > Alex > > On Jul 30, 2010 7:17 PM, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 5:59 PM, OverKrik wrote: > > Hi, I've been profiling Djan... > > Hm, in a quick test I can't seem to reproduce this, and I can't see > how it'd be happening. Can you post more details -- your model, how > you're measuring the memory usage, which database you're using, etc? > > Thanks! > > Jacob > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers" g... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Memory usage depends on number of fields in model, in a strange way
Hi, I am using "mysql Ver 14.14 Distrib 5.1.41, for debian-linux-gnu (i486) using readline 6.1" on Ubuntu 10.04 but I am not using database for this tests and not syncdb'ing my models (I know, this sounds wrong, but after syncdb nothing changes and I was making sure it's not because of database). My test code look's like this: class U(models.Model): name = models.TextField(max_length = 255, blank = False) name2 = models.TextField(max_length = 255, blank = False) name3 = models.TextField(max_length = 255, blank = False) ... data = [U() for x in xrange(10)] and I am using "ps -eo cmd,pcpu,rss" to check memory usage and running this code from manage.py command. As soon as I add name4 memory usage became 2X. On Jul 31, 3:17 am, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 5:59 PM, OverKrik wrote: > > Hi, I've been profiling Django to see how much overhead is being added > > by ORM, and found a very strange case of memory usage(which is either > > some kind of bug or me misunderstanding low level stuff) - as long as > > I have 0 to 3 fields of any type - memory usage is around 45MB ( I > > create list of 100 000 empty instances ), if one more field is > > added(of any type) memory usage goes to ~82mb and doesn't change until > > 20+ fields, when it goes to 195mb(and stays at this level for any > > reasonable amount of fields). Can someone please explain what can be > > the reason of such behavior? > > Hm, in a quick test I can't seem to reproduce this, and I can't see > how it'd be happening. Can you post more details -- your model, how > you're measuring the memory usage, which database you're using, etc? > > Thanks! > > Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Memory usage depends on number of fields in model, in a strange way
This isn't something django can help, it has to do with the overallocation patterns for python dicts. You would see this for any pytho obj with the right number of fields. Alex On Jul 30, 2010 7:17 PM, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" wrote: On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 5:59 PM, OverKrik wrote: > Hi, I've been profiling Djan... Hm, in a quick test I can't seem to reproduce this, and I can't see how it'd be happening. Can you post more details -- your model, how you're measuring the memory usage, which database you're using, etc? Thanks! Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" g... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Memory usage depends on number of fields in model, in a strange way
Oh, and I am using latest Django svn but can reproduce this with 1.1 too On Jul 31, 3:17 am, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 5:59 PM, OverKrik wrote: > > Hi, I've been profiling Django to see how much overhead is being added > > by ORM, and found a very strange case of memory usage(which is either > > some kind of bug or me misunderstanding low level stuff) - as long as > > I have 0 to 3 fields of any type - memory usage is around 45MB ( I > > create list of 100 000 empty instances ), if one more field is > > added(of any type) memory usage goes to ~82mb and doesn't change until > > 20+ fields, when it goes to 195mb(and stays at this level for any > > reasonable amount of fields). Can someone please explain what can be > > the reason of such behavior? > > Hm, in a quick test I can't seem to reproduce this, and I can't see > how it'd be happening. Can you post more details -- your model, how > you're measuring the memory usage, which database you're using, etc? > > Thanks! > > Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Memory usage depends on number of fields in model, in a strange way
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 5:59 PM, OverKrik wrote: > Hi, I've been profiling Django to see how much overhead is being added > by ORM, and found a very strange case of memory usage(which is either > some kind of bug or me misunderstanding low level stuff) - as long as > I have 0 to 3 fields of any type - memory usage is around 45MB ( I > create list of 100 000 empty instances ), if one more field is > added(of any type) memory usage goes to ~82mb and doesn't change until > 20+ fields, when it goes to 195mb(and stays at this level for any > reasonable amount of fields). Can someone please explain what can be > the reason of such behavior? Hm, in a quick test I can't seem to reproduce this, and I can't see how it'd be happening. Can you post more details -- your model, how you're measuring the memory usage, which database you're using, etc? Thanks! Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Memory usage depends on number of fields in model, in a strange way
Just to clarify, I am talking about model fields :) class U(models.Model): name = models.TextField(max_length = 255, blank = False) name2 = models.TextField(max_length = 255, blank = False) name3 = models.TextField(max_length = 255, blank = False) #name4 = models.TextField(max_length = 255, blank = False) uncommenting this doubles used memory On Jul 31, 2:59 am, OverKrik wrote: > Hi, I've been profiling Django to see how much overhead is being added > by ORM, and found a very strange case of memory usage(which is either > some kind of bug or me misunderstanding low level stuff) - as long as > I have 0 to 3 fields of any type - memory usage is around 45MB ( I > create list of 100 000 empty instances ), if one more field is > added(of any type) memory usage goes to ~82mb and doesn't change until > 20+ fields, when it goes to 195mb(and stays at this level for any > reasonable amount of fields). Can someone please explain what can be > the reason of such behavior? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Memory usage depends on number of fields in model, in a strange way
Hi, I've been profiling Django to see how much overhead is being added by ORM, and found a very strange case of memory usage(which is either some kind of bug or me misunderstanding low level stuff) - as long as I have 0 to 3 fields of any type - memory usage is around 45MB ( I create list of 100 000 empty instances ), if one more field is added(of any type) memory usage goes to ~82mb and doesn't change until 20+ fields, when it goes to 195mb(and stays at this level for any reasonable amount of fields). Can someone please explain what can be the reason of such behavior? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
> Ignoring language and newbie barriers, it was not a django-dev post, > and clearly had no spark of idea. I think jacob and others are > extremely fair and tolerant in moderating this list. > I agree, it should have been posted on django-users. But (this subject came up before) it could just as well be answered on this list. What happened here was, someone who loves django wonders why x is not supported and asks on the developer list. People take it personally, things heat up, poster apologizes and explains himself, people are still annoyed. I can see where this went wrong -- can't you? J. Leclanche -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
You were not, but most of the followup answers were definitely hostile, especially after the guy apologized and explained his situation. I've no beef with the developers, but the general tone of this mailing list has turned extremely sore over the months. J. Leclanche On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Jerome Leclanche wrote: >> Nice job scaring that poor guy who was just trying to be helpful. His >> first post is met with so much hostility and elitism, I can't imagine >> being him right now. > > Could you please quote where you felt I was "hostile" or "elitist"? > Privately is fine, or publicly -- whatever you'd like. > > I'm serious: my goal wasn't to be hostile or elitist, so if that's how > I can across I need to know about it. > > Thanks. > > Jacob > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Jerome Leclanche wrote: > [2] People who do have ideas and do write code, but still get rejected > because their ideas don't conform to whatever the core devs need in > their websites. I don't think that's a fair criticism at all. > ... > Nice job scaring that poor guy who was just trying to be helpful. His > first post is met with so much hostility and elitism, I can't imagine > being him right now. Ignoring language and newbie barriers, it was not a django-dev post, and clearly had no spark of idea. I think jacob and others are extremely fair and tolerant in moderating this list. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Jerome Leclanche wrote: > Nice job scaring that poor guy who was just trying to be helpful. His > first post is met with so much hostility and elitism, I can't imagine > being him right now. Could you please quote where you felt I was "hostile" or "elitist"? Privately is fine, or publicly -- whatever you'd like. I'm serious: my goal wasn't to be hostile or elitist, so if that's how I can across I need to know about it. Thanks. Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Mark Bucciarelli wrote: > The devs here _extremely_ patient with whiners [1]. > > m > > [1] People with lots of ideas about how you should > spend your free time, and spend hours writing emails > trying to convince you how smart they are, but can't > be bothered to contribute a single line of code to the > project. That's pretty harsh, and not exactly right. There are plenty of ways to contribute to open source that don't involving writing code -- bug reports, documentation, evangelism, blogging, twittering, speaking at conferences, starting companies around the project, ... There's even room for people who have good ideas but don't have the time to implement them. The key is knowing how to make suggestions in a way that doesn't sound like your entitling yourself to a bunch of volunteers' time. There is *ABSOLUTELY* nothing wrong with new community members -- or old ones, or anyone -- making suggestions and advocating for a particular direction or feature. But it needs to be done in a respectful, concrete, and polite manner. As long as you remember that everyone's a volunteer, and that you don't have any right to tell anyone how to spend their time [1], then it's just fine. Jacob [1] Unless you'd like to send sacks of money to developers. If you have sacks of cash, we'll probably do what you want. Depending on the size of the sacks and the denomination of the bills, of course. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
[2] People who do have ideas and do write code, but still get rejected because their ideas don't conform to whatever the core devs need in their websites. See? It works both ways. Nice job scaring that poor guy who was just trying to be helpful. His first post is met with so much hostility and elitism, I can't imagine being him right now. J. Leclanche On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Mark Bucciarelli wrote: > The devs here _extremely_ patient with whiners [1]. > > [1] People with lots of ideas about how you should > spend your free time, and spend hours writing emails > trying to convince you how smart they are, but can't > be bothered to contribute a single line of code to the > project. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Hooshyar Naraghi wrote: > > anyone who wishes to take _this_ Django and fork > it into a _new_ Dmango, can do it any time? > The devs here _extremely_ patient with whiners [1]. m [1] People with lots of ideas about how you should spend your free time, and spend hours writing emails trying to convince you how smart they are, but can't be bothered to contribute a single line of code to the project. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Vito wrote: > > Google since the beginning of the app engine gave support to Django, > > today, after about two years, Django still does not support GAE. > > Vito, I know you're trying to help, but at this point your coming > across with a strong tone of entitlement, and you're chastising us > without actually having contributed anything concrete. If you really > want to help, then contribute. > > I agree with the above observation. I am a Django user (4.5 years and tens of my developers developing apps) and we all love it as is. But this is not my place to say anything, because I have not contributed NOTHING to the core. I read this forum to stay on top of current affairs and Mr. Vito's comments gave me the same feeling as shared in the above comment. By the way, isn't it true, anyone who wishes to take _this_ Django and fork it into a _new_ Dmango, can do it any time? Why chasing hard workers here? Regards, Hooshyar F. Naraghi -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
Sorry for changing the title and starting new threads, remember that I am a beginner. I do not speak English, the translation is done by a software, so please interpret the best way. Do not mean to annoy anyone, on the contrary, I am very happy to be exchanging words with some major developers of my favorite framework. Technically I'm not ready to contribute, so I thought, I can help expressing my ideas. In no way am demanding anything. I just want to say. I know it is good advice for all are within the philosophy of Django. If philosophy remains the community continue to grow and therefore receive the greatest number of contributions. I'm not saying that they did, but, again, do not forget: with batteries included, for perfectionists with deadlines, and please never stop supporting the latest technology, which I imagine is not easy, but you are many and are good. do not let stop growing community that would be the end. Sorry for the translation, I say goodbye to everyone. soon hear from me when you know English and be prepared technically to help. I'll be back. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > Django has a bunch of part time engineers and no budget. That should have read *volunteers* -- the point is that not a single person gets paid to work on Django. Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
> > Vito, I know you're trying to help, but at this point your coming > across with a strong tone of entitlement, and you're chastising us > without actually having contributed anything concrete. If you really > want to help, then contribute. > I have to agree with Jacob here (not that my opinion counts for much). The last few threads have just been a vague "Django should support new technologies", but the only concrete example was Bigtable on GAE. First, Django was included in GAE so that developers could use the templating language and views. It was never a push by Google to get Django to develop their ORM to meet the needs of their Bigtable design. Secondly, I use app-engine-patch pretty heavily now, and I think it's great. Sure, it's not in the core, and it's not the most ideal solution, but it definitely works, and I have to consider GAE a pretty niche market, to be honest. Not to mention that, from what I understand, the creators of AEP are working on some new stuff that will make the integration even more seamless. That being said, I think if you want to see a "new feature" that you must have in the Django core, going about it with the tone of "how could this not already be in the core" probably won't buy you much. Proposing potential solutions and starting relevant, well articulated discussions on the topic might get the ball rolling in that direction though. Just my $0.02. -- Brian O'Connor -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
Hi Vito -- First, can you please do us all a favor and stop starting new threads? If you'll just reply to the existing threads it's much easier for everyone to track what's going on. On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Vito wrote: > Google since the beginning of the app engine gave support to Django, > today, after about two years, Django still does not support GAE. Google has over 20,000 employees and makes $6 billion each quarter. Django has a bunch of part time engineers and no budget. Vito, I know you're trying to help, but at this point your coming across with a strong tone of entitlement, and you're chastising us without actually having contributed anything concrete. If you really want to help, then contribute. Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries.
On 29 jul, 20:29, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > ... > Russ Magee %-) Just a tip from an absolute beginner: Google since the beginning of the app engine gave support to Django, today, after about two years, Django still does not support GAE. How is it possible that after so long even the Django ORM does not support native Bigtable?, How it is possible that even so long after Django can not run in the GAE? Adrian Holovaty and Jacob Kaplan-Moss taught me in his book that: Django follows the same philosophy as Python: "batteries included." I think if it is so conservative, you run the risk that the "battery exhausted" and having to seek an "external power" (third-party development). I do not want you to think I'm exaggerating, it is obvious that if a technology has just come out, will be third-party solutions, but soon the solution must be given either on the basis of their experience or selecting the best solution and integrate it Django as the official way of attacking the problem. Django, The Web Framework for perfectionists and innovative with rechargeable batteries. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Filebrowser functionality in contrib?
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 1:54 AM, shacker wrote: > ... except that it's not working just fine (because of this dependency > on Grappelli). That sounds like a problem with the 3rd party app, not something that would be resolved by incorporating it in Django proper. That said, as Russell suggests, it may be possible to enhance the admin in ways that make writing third party apps like this easier. Cheers, Tobias -- Tobias McNulty Caktus Consulting Group, LLC P.O. Box 1454 Carrboro, NC 27510 USA: +1 (919) 951-0052 http://www.caktusgroup.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Ticket #14007: Automatically discover models within a package without using the app_label Meta attribute
Hi Jacob, Rajeev pinpointed the use case. The company I work for has a large bit of infrastructure built around Django. Our main project consists of 6 apps, each of which has a defined role (with respect to the other apps). One of our apps has quite a few models and quite a bit a logic around those models. The source is over 3000 lines. This amount of code is obviously difficult to manage in one file; one file per model and supporting models (gerunds, etc) would be ideal. In certain cases I believe developers would find this patch very useful, and very little is added to achieve this additional functionality. Looking at the issue from a broader perspective, I believe people expect to be able to convert Python modules into packages. This was certainly my expectation the first time I tried to factor a models module. - Mark On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Rajeev J Sebastian < rajeev.sebast...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss > wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Rajeev J Sebastian > > wrote: > >> I think it might be useful for people refactoring their ever-growing > models.py > > > > That's maybe part of what I don't understand: I can't ever say I've > > seen a models.py so big that I felt the need to split it up. Or > > rather, I have, but in each case it was better design to break up the > > entire app into a few smaller ones. > > > > I just don't see a problem that, in the very rare case you *do* have a > > models.py that needs to be broken up, you have to manually specify > > app_label. > > I guess thats a different way of working, where you have a lot of smaller > apps. > > It's just boring to repeat the same thing all over the code :D > > Regards > Rajeev J Sebastian > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
