Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 13:25 +0200, Gábor Farkas wrote: >> Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: >>> On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 11:34 +0100, David Reynolds wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I seem to remember reading either on the mailing list or IRC channel >>>> that sub-classing doesn't work at the moment, is that correct? It >>>> seems to work to some extent but I can't recreate the behaviour that >>>> replaces_model='modelname' used to do. Is this going to be readded, >>>> or a better way of doing it added and what sort of timescales are on >>>> this? >>> So nobody's pointed out that this was discussed here within the last >>> couple of weeks. The latest status is this: >>> http://groups.google.com/group/django-users/browse_frm/thread/827c7ba291a319e0/c9038b1e540deec4#c9038b1e540deec4 >>> >>> It's not part of Summer of Code or anything, but it is being worked on. >>> >> hi Malcolm, >> >> great to hear that things are progressing also there... >> >> if i may ask... are you doing it with table-joins? > > Yes. > >> if yes... won't be there a performance penalty every time i want to >> access a field defined in the parent model? > < snip /> > I am choosing to do things > in the most natural (to me) fashion initially and trust the database to > do its bit and only then, if it turns out to be unacceptable, should > somebody look at where trade-offs can be made.
i'm fine with this approach, thanks a lot for the explanation. gabor --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@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-users -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
