On 5/17/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 5/16/06, Elver Loho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Let's take the poll sample. We've got the vote() view going on. > > > > choice.votes += 1 > > choice.save() > > > > Suppose we've got thread1 and thread2 going on (high-load website): > > > > choice.votes is originally 16 > > > > thread1.choice.votes += 1 > > thread2.choice.votes += 1 > > thread1.choice.save() > > thread2.choice.save() > > > > choice.votes _should_ be 18 now, but is it 18 or 17? > > You're right to point this out -- it'll probably be 17. That > particular example is a bad example; it'd be better to do "UPDATE > choices SET votes=votes+1 WHERE id=X", which would always increment > rather than setting the value directly.
So the best practices workaround would be to write raw SQL instead? Hm. I can do that. I was already planning on swapping the templating engine for Kid. I like how Django's really loosely coupled :) Elver --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
