On Monday, August 5, 2013 8:02:52 AM UTC+3, Jani Tiainen wrote: > > Hi, > > You seem to found kind of an issue which happens with GeoDjango part as > well. Most of the geodjango operations require quite heavy to/from data > mangling while reading and/or writing data. > > Currently there isn't clean solution to tell (per field) how data should > be treated per backend. Django ORM works pretty well for a primitives like > numbers, strings and such but when it goes to complex datatypes (like your > encrypted field). > > It would be really useful to have something to allow data mangling on a > when reading/writing data from/to database per backend basis. Unfortunately > such a feature isn't easy to implement due the current way how ORM works. > > If you require such a functionality now, you should take a look how > different GeoDjango backends deal with the similiar problem. >
I agree that there is room for improvement in how data conversions in the ORM work. If I recall correctly different backends work slightly differently, and when to_python() is called isn't consistent. Improvements in this area are welcome. For the original use case I think it would be better to do the encryption already in the original SELECT. I am not sure if there is any easy way to do that currently... - Anssi -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
