#18100: Deleting model instances with deferred fields don't trigger deletion
signals
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: charettes | Owner: charettes
Type: Bug | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: 1.4
(models, ORM) | Resolution:
Severity: Normal | Triage Stage: Accepted
Keywords: deferred delete | Needs documentation: 0
signals | Patch needs improvement: 0
Has patch: 1 | UI/UX: 0
Needs tests: 0 |
Easy pickings: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by carljm):
Hmm, I'm still not convinced that this fix makes sense. The fact that
deferred/only use a proxy model is something that can't be made
transparent to the user (a simple check of the class of the returned model
instances will reveal it), so I'm not sure there's any point to adding
extra complexity to the code just to try to hide it in this one case. (I'm
not sure that proxy models should have been used for deferred/only, but
that's water under the bridge now.)
The real problem here is that receivers registered for the superclass
currently won't run, but IMO the right fix for that is to fix #9318.
Contrary to akaariai, if we do decide to implement this special-case fix,
I don't think there's any compelling reason not to fix it for all the
model signals at once.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/18100#comment:4>
Django <https://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
django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-updates?hl=en.
