On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 11:27 PM, Russell Keith-Magee <freakboy3...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 10:48 PM, Russell Keith-Magee > <freakboy3...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Brett Hoerner <br...@bretthoerner.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> I would think read-slaves would be a pretty common application of >>> multidb, but I can only speak to our use case. I know it's a bit late >>> in the game, but we'll have to work up our own local fix or go with a >>> proper one before we can deploy 1.2. And to think I was so happy >>> about how many local Django patches I was able to remove going from >>> 1.0->1.2. ;) >> >> You're right - read slaves are an intended common use case, and the >> cross-database checks will get in the way for that case. > > Hi Brett, > > FYI - I've just uploaded a patch to #12540 that implements something > similar to what you proposed, along with a few other fixes. I'd be > interested in hearing any feedback you may have.
Oh - and one more thing - I haven't forgotten about the TEST_NAME issue - I just wanted to get the foreign key and read-slave stuff working first. multi-db testing is next on my list. Russ %-)
-- 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.
