Skip to content

Fixed #36430 -- Removed artificially low limit on single field bulk operations on SQLite. #19522

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jacobtylerwalls
Copy link
Member

Trac ticket number

ticket-36430

Branch description

Thanks @laymonage for analysis on the ticket about why this limit should no longer be relevant.

Checklist

  • This PR targets the main branch.
  • The commit message is written in past tense, mentions the ticket number, and ends with a period.
  • I have checked the "Has patch" ticket flag in the Trac system.
  • I have added or updated relevant tests.
  • I have added or updated relevant docs, including release notes if applicable.
  • I have attached screenshots in both light and dark modes for any UI changes.

@jacobtylerwalls jacobtylerwalls force-pushed the sqlite-bulk-single-field branch 2 times, most recently from 208e3a9 to e1bb0bf Compare June 4, 2025 03:37
@jacobtylerwalls
Copy link
Member Author

buildbot, test on oracle.

@sarahboyce sarahboyce force-pushed the sqlite-bulk-single-field branch from 26cbf1d to 17dce75 Compare August 11, 2025 13:33
@sarahboyce
Copy link
Contributor

buildbot, test on oracle.

Copy link
Contributor

@sarahboyce sarahboyce left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you, this looks good to me 👍

qs.in_bulk([self.au1.id, self.au2.id], field_name="author_id"),
{self.au1.id: self.a4, self.au2.id: self.a5},
list(qs.in_bulk([self.a5.id, self.a4.id, self.a3.id, self.a2.id])),
[5, 4, 2, 3],
Copy link
Member Author

@jacobtylerwalls jacobtylerwalls Aug 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It might be nice to adjust the other test to remove distinct() at the same time. I should also see if I can use articles 1, 2, 3, 4 instead. There's also a postgres & mysql failure, so I need to adjust the expected result or skip the test. I can find a minute in the next few days to get that in.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants