#9342: query optimization bug
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Reporter: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Owner: nobody
Status: closed | Milestone:
Component: Uncategorized | Version: 1.0
Resolution: duplicate | Keywords:
Stage: Unreviewed | Has_patch: 0
Needs_docs: 0 | Needs_tests: 0
Needs_better_patch: 0 |
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Changes (by mtredinnick):
* status: new => closed
* resolution: => duplicate
Comment:
This is a duplicate of #9188 (although I realise the title of that ticket
doesn't describe the problem in a way you could have spotted this). It's
not fixed yet because it's actually the tip of the iceberg for a slightly
bigger problem with joins in `exclude()`, so it's taking a bit more time
to work out the proper solution, but I'll get it finished soon.
Your patch is, as you note, really just hacking around the edges of the
problem attempting to hopefully recover lost information. However, since
only joining just the necessary tables is important, we really need to
make sure that the reference counts are correct in the first place, not
trying to ignore them in `get_from_clause()`.
--
Ticket URL: <http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/9342#comment:4>
Django <http://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-updates@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-updates?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
