On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 07:33 -0700, TheShark wrote: [...]
> assert Widget.objects.all().count()==1 > assert Sprocket.objects.all().count()==1 > > #print w.sprocket > s.w=None > s.save() > w.delete() > > assert Widget.objects.all().count()==0 > assert Sprocket.objects.all().count()==1 > > The assert's pass as long as the print statement is commented out. If > I include the print, then my Sprocket s gets deleted along with w > despite the fact that I removed the reference between the two. This is > problematic because it makes it really hard to override the cascading > delete() feature. I tried having a pre_delete() method on my Model > which would reset the references, but the mere act of accessing the > reverse reference (w.sprocket in the example above) seems to cause the > reference to get cached somehow. There are other ways to view similar > behavior, but the test case above is about the most succinct. Is there > any reason to think this is the correct behavior, or should I open a > bug? If the two behaviours are different it's a bug. The cached reference is confusing things here. Fortunately, this isn't a particularly common usage pattern for delete(), but we should fix it. Regards, Malcolm --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
