Re: Relax system check on fields intermediary tables for db_table collision when database routers are installed

2020-02-13 Thread Anonymous Rabbit
Will do. Thanks. On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 17:13, Tim Graham wrote: > The change for that ticket is already released. Please open a new ticket. > > On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 9:00:35 AM UTC-5, Anonymous Rabbit wrote: >> >> Before I move forward I just to want clarify, my changes are for the

Re: Relax system check on fields intermediary tables for db_table collision when database routers are installed

2020-02-13 Thread Tim Graham
The change for that ticket is already released. Please open a new ticket. On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 9:00:35 AM UTC-5, Anonymous Rabbit wrote: > > Before I move forward I just to want clarify, my changes are for the same > check specified in ticket #29092. Should I still open a new ticket

Re: Improve migration conflict detection

2020-02-13 Thread Dave Vernon
If I had to guess, it would be that with more than one leaf node, you would end up a substantial challenge resolving dependancies which would create an Order(N) problem (i.e. there's a chance of excessive time to complete the resolution). I certainly worked on some migration logic that took a s

Re: Improve migration conflict detection

2020-02-13 Thread Adam Johnson
I don’t think many people can answer this off the top of their heads. I certainly can’t and I have contributed a couple things to migrations. It’s probably quite necessary there’s only one leaf node but I can’t say for sure. On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 13:58, caio wrote: > Cool. If I'm understanding

Re: Relax system check on fields intermediary tables for db_table collision when database routers are installed

2020-02-13 Thread Anonymous Rabbit
Before I move forward I just to want clarify, my changes are for the same check specified in ticket #29092. Should I still open a new ticket in lieu of re-opening #29092? On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 13:23, Adam Johnson wrote: > Please create a new ticket with a reference to the old one, and then a PR

Re: Improve migration conflict detection

2020-02-13 Thread caio
Cool. If I'm understanding this correctly, it auto-resolves during *makemigrations*? I'm looking for something that could handle conflicts during the *migrate* command, but I'm not sure if that's really possible. I guess it depends on how intrinsic the single-leaf-node restriction is to the who

Re: Relax system check on fields intermediary tables for db_table collision when database routers are installed

2020-02-13 Thread Adam Johnson
Please create a new ticket with a reference to the old one, and then a PR against that, since your change is for a different check. On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 12:15, Anonymous Rabbit wrote: > Hello there, > > This regards multi-database Django. > > On https://github.com/django/django/pull/11630, a c

Re: Adding support for SQL Server

2020-02-13 Thread Dave Clevenger
I would definitely get behind official support for SQL Server. The company I work for is all about SQL Server and not willing to consider other options. Right now we are using the django-mssql-backend: https://github.com/ESSolutions/django-mssql-backend which works pretty well for our use case, but

Relax system check on fields intermediary tables for db_table collision when database routers are installed

2020-02-13 Thread Anonymous Rabbit
Hello there, This regards multi-database Django. On https://github.com/django/django/pull/11630, a change was made to allow for multiple models with the same db_name, when a DATABASE_ROUTER is present. A ticket was open here for that issue: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/django-up