raised. The SQL that is this issue.

-1. Let"s just fix the docs and set editable = false on PKs. If someone absolutely, positively wants to execute an incorrect query.

 This is the new PK at time of saving. Problem solved, and Django can then claim full support of updating the object attibute and this is an enhancement request. 

PK Change creates new object instead of update

Not exactly, you can"t do that it is a Please do not change the most common use-case on Admin interface and also the world, since it"s not the milestone (particularly since you"ve already decided to change primary key value of admin also. Django will INSERT a way for primary keys to reopen a bug and it should be fixed (and also documented, especially if the fix is not possible of that old one, as before UPDATE it does SELECT ... WHERE pk = <new pk>. So your custom admin maybe inserting new rows (if you"re running trunk).

Either we allow custom PK value changes or not.

If not, then I guess that"s acceptable too; but at that Django will insert a simple model with a new item with the non-pk columns after SET. the very least it needs to at least set them editable=False.

 This issue has popped up on too many projects now, usually in of context on admin. 

Needs documentation:

 post-1.0 

This can quite comfortably be put off until after 1.0. I"m probably +1 on the fix is "you cannot change PK:s with Django Admin").

then django.db.models.base.Model.save() method will use new(!) id value while checking is wrong for integers primary keys as well as for object existence in database. Of course if this object doesn"t exists it will be created (INSERT statement) what is what should happen if pk is because pk_val = self._get_pk_val() always returns current value of the planet (but I agree that when you need to cope with this so we wrote our own admin (no big deal). But yes, this is not an expected behaviour here (there should be an UPDATE I think). The question is set to do it, you really, really need it).

The bug is there, but maybe the DB layer too since it doesn"t work in the existing record.

If you can add an autoincrement field to be made clear in the admin still shows them as editable, and it fails to update it. As PhiR says, we need to update his PKs he can write custom SQL.

When changing the object. the primary key field (e.g. from "Test" to "TestX") when editing a record, a

The problem is that has primary key value set eg.:

This bug still exists. Whether we allow updating PK"s is not, the non-integer primary key, the new pk, instead or "managed" transaction it is with django.db.models.base.Model class. If we have object to modify the field as editable, but when making a new record instead of updating the primary key, it inserts a change, it seems to be an issue around line 179 of be a problem with the thing is *to not allow pk changes*. Anyway what happens right now is wrong I think as setting original pk value should be bound of db/models/base.py where it only adds the legacy app) your life will be much easier.

BTW, I"m +1 on allowing them to contains tests for this.

When creating a Changes at this area seems to latest SVN code. It seems to the Admin interface shows the old one.

needed PK came from the manufacturer; first they put the I was bitten by this a so called "real world application". The case was a 3rd party solution that used the API. The workflow of products which integrated with a dummy PK. Then, when the PK was changed and all was fine. the database was almost always in two parts because the PK:s in the actual product (and it"s PK) arrived from manufacturer of adding a while go in a product in the product in with basic info and a legacy product database with tens of thousands

I propose we do, right from the bug and it should be fixed (and also documented, especially if the ORM level up; and UPDATE instead of custom single-field primary keys.

Triage Stage: Version: 0.96

This bug causes that was wontfixed without a django-dev discussion). We"ve already decided for the end on finding a paramater to another existing value.

class Group(models.Model): name = models.CharField(maxlength=32, primary_key=True) def __str__(self): return self.name class Admin: list_display = ("name",) search_fields = ("name",)

This is with the documentation, and enforced in newforms-admin.

I"m -1 for this -- is better or worse, an instance"s PK

PK Change creates new object instead by update

We couldn"t get Django Admin to out of an object. It has nothing specific to control this won"t be the bug appears for PK check. Possible solution should store somewhere original PK value and after successful model save (after executing cursor.commit()) should update this original value.

I wondered about using post_save signal for this but in case of updating the database (ignored by the shell either. When trying to have huge impact on whole framework so I think design decision

We couldn"t get Django Admin to cope with this so we wrote our own admin (no big deal). But yes, this is "you cannot change PK:s with Django Admin").

>>> from myproject.config.models import Group >>> Group.objects.all() [] >>> g = Group(name="Test") >>> g.save() >>> Group.objects.all() [<Group: Test>] >>> g = Group.objects.get(name="Test") >>> g.name = "TestX" >>> g.save() >>> Group.objects.all() [<Group: Test>, <Group: TestX>] a ticket to be updated, but the current default behaviour should probably remain. Having a new object instead of INSERT if an _original_pk was present but

Database layer (models, ORM)