Re: Non-atomic migrations in Django?

Thanks for your feedback and support. I've opened a ticket and pull request: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25833 Am Dienstag, 24. November 2015 21:05:04 UTC+1 schrieb Markus Holtermann: > > Hi Ludwig, > > the API looks clean and sensible to me. +1 for getting that into 1.10 > > /Markus

Re: Non-atomic migrations in Django?

Hi Ludwig, the API looks clean and sensible to me. +1 for getting that into 1.10 /Markus On November 25, 2015 12:00:59 AM GMT+10:00, "Ludwig Hähne" wrote: >Hi all, > >I'd like to get your feedback on supporting non-atomic migrations in >Django. > >Database transactions are

Re: Non-atomic migrations in Django?

I also agree this looks sensible - I think South even had an attribute like this on the migration class, it just never got ported over. +1 On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Marc Tamlyn wrote: > +1 to idea and API. I've wished I had this recently - even if it's just so > I

Re: Non-atomic migrations in Django?

+1 to idea and API. I've wished I had this recently - even if it's just so I can check up on the progress of a slow running data generation migration so it flushes the data every few 100 records. On 24 November 2015 at 16:07, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > I like

Re: Non-atomic migrations in Django?

I like the API as well. Surprisingly, I couldn't find a Trac ticket about this. -- Aymeric. 2015-11-24 16:39 GMT+01:00 Anssi Kääriäinen : > I don't see any problem with optional non-transactional migrations. So, +1 > for the idea and API. I haven't looked at the

Re: Non-atomic migrations in Django?

I don't see any problem with optional non-transactional migrations. So, +1 for the idea and API. I haven't looked at the implementation, so no comments about that. - Anssi On Tuesday, November 24, 2015, Ludwig Hähne wrote: > Hi all, > > I'd like to get your feedback on