Re: #21978 include production-ready web server

I put together a first stab at this at https://github.com/lincolnloop/django-production. Feedback is appreciated! On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 1:34 PM pe...@lincolnloop.com wrote: > I hadn't seen django-simple-deploy. At first glance, it looks interesting, > but more platform-specific than what I

Re: Proposal: Add An in-memory data storage backend in Django

Yes, exactly. Paolo On Fri, Oct 21, 2022, 10:59 Joshua Thomas wrote: > Not to speak for Paulo, but I believe he meant using in-memory storage as > a file storage backend, not data/database backend. > > On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 4:50:49 PM UTC-7 shang.xia...@gmail.com > wrote: > >> Hi,

Adding relevant field name information to django.core.serializers.base.DeserializationError for importing fixtures Inbox

Hey, When we import fixtures and the input data is wrong (ValueError), we get something along the following lines. Say the field is supposed to be an int and contains instead an empty string as opposed to null/None: *ErrorTraceback (most recent call last): File

Re: Proposal: Add An in-memory data storage backend in Django

Not to speak for Paulo, but I believe he meant using in-memory storage as a file storage backend, not data/database backend. On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 4:50:49 PM UTC-7 shang.xia...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > > I may be missing some context here but is this something distinctly >

Changing the role of the Technical Board

Hi everyone, I want to start a conversation about the Technical Board and its role in Django, and how I'd like to change it, including its name. Since its inception, the Technical Board has effectively only functioned as a backstop vote for large features that require DEPs, of which there have

Re: Intention behind `adelete` being a queryset method, and not available on a model instance?

I opened a ticket to add async methods to Model: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/34112 This would be released in Django 4.2, at minimum. Using async to perform model updates is not likely to be performant, since the queries end up being processed synchronously on a thread anyway. This is

Re: Intention behind `adelete` being a queryset method, and not available on a model instance?

If you have a suggestion, sure. But from my perspective the docs are clear. There's an adelete() method doc'd for QuerySet, and not for Model, and the release note says “QuerySet now provides an asynchronous

Re: Intention behind `adelete` being a queryset method, and not available on a model instance?

gotcha, then perhaps a documentation tweak would be in order, on both queryset and model pages? because as is, its unclear this is expected. On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 9:57:33 AM UTC-4 Adam Johnson wrote: > This is intentional, as it stands. Django 4.1 only added async QuerySet > methods,

Re: Intention behind `adelete` being a queryset method, and not available on a model instance?

This is intentional, as it stands. Django 4.1 only added async QuerySet methods, not async Model methods. Async model methods like adelete(), and perhaps asave(), would be the next logical step. On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 1:47 PM Jason Johns wrote: > I came across a reddit post yesterday >

Intention behind `adelete` being a queryset method, and not available on a model instance?

I came across a reddit post yesterday about `adelete` raising an attribute error r = await mymodel.objects.aget(some_name=myname) await r.adelete() would throw an `AttributeError`, whereas r = await

Re: Proposal: Add An in-memory data storage backend in Django

Big +1 from my side. (Would indeed help me to write more portable unit tests.) – Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,