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

When py_check() returns False, Pony should truncate too large values in resulting ValueError message #169

Closed
socketpair opened this Issue Mar 2, 2016 · 1 comment

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@socketpair

socketpair commented Mar 2, 2016

Suppose, value was a big BLOB....

In other words, we should truncate value (say, up to 100 symbols) if that value is str or bytes

@kozlovsky kozlovsky closed this in 225e3c5 Apr 1, 2016

@kozlovsky

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kozlovsky

kozlovsky Apr 1, 2016

Member

Done

Member

kozlovsky commented Apr 1, 2016

Done

@kozlovsky kozlovsky added this to the 0.6.5 milestone Apr 1, 2016

@kozlovsky kozlovsky self-assigned this Apr 1, 2016

@kozlovsky kozlovsky changed the title from when py_check() returns False, Pony should not include whole value in resulting ValueError message to When py_check() returns False, Pony should truncate too large values in resulting ValueError message Apr 4, 2016

kozlovsky added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 4, 2016

Pony ORM Release 0.6.5 (2016-04-04)
# Improvements

* Fixes #172: Query prefetch() method should load specified lazy attributes right in the main query if possible

# Bugfixes

* Fixes #168: Incorrect caching when slicing the same query multiple times
* Fixes #169: When py_check() returns False, Pony should truncate too large values in resulting ValueError message
* Fixes #171: AssertionError when saving changes of multiple objects
* Fixes #176: Autostripped strings are not validated correctly for Required attributes

See blog post for more detailed information: https://blog.ponyorm.com/2016/04/04/pony-orm-release-0-6-5/
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment