Oh, I see from a later message by Alex that Meta.using was removed. -1!
-S On Dec 5, 3:12 pm, "subs...@gmail.com" <subs...@gmail.com> wrote: > Isn't 'database' going to be an option in a model's Meta? In this > situation, is admin going to attempt to do something different? > > -S > > On Dec 4, 9:18 am, Nan <ringe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 1) Ignore the problem. Admin works on the default database, but > > > nowhere else. This is certainly less than ideal, but it would be > > > sufficient for master/slave setups. > > > > 2) Use a separate admin deployment for each database. We add a 'using' > > > argument to admin.Site(), and append .using() the queries that the > > > admin site issues. > > > > 3) Modify the admin list views so that they take a ?using=db GET > > > argument; also add a pulldown to make it easy to switch to a different > > > database. > > > > (2) should be a fairly minor change; (3) would be a little more > > > effort, but shouldn't be impossible. There is also the need for some > > > mechanics to check whether a table is actually present on a database - > > > just because auth is in INSTALLED_APPS doesn't mean it's been > > > synchronized to a particular database. > > > > I'm open to any other suggestions - and for any offers to help out :-) > > > Just thinking of one more option for this -- what about specifying the > > DB on the ModelAdmin level rather than the admin.Site level? -- 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.
