In my Django application, I am using bulk_create(). For one of the fields in a target model I have assigned a set of validators to restrict the allowed value to uppercase letters (alphabets) and to a fixed length of "3", as shown below:
class Plant(models.Model):
plant = models.CharField(primary_key=True, max_length=4, ...
plant_name = models.CharField(max_length=75, ...
plant_short_name = models.CharField(max_length=3, validators=[...
# rest of the fields ...
I am restricting field plant_short_name to something like CHT for say, Plant Charlotte.
Using the source file (.csv) I am able to successfully create new instances using bulk_create, however I find that the data get saved even with field plant_short_name's value being different.
For example, if I use the source as:
plant,plant_name,plant_short_name
9999,XYZ Plant,XY
the new instance still gets created although the length of (string) value of field plant_short_name is only 2 (instead of 3 as defined in the validators).
If I am to use an online create function (say, Django CreateView), the validators work as expected.
How do I control / rstrict the creation of model instance when a field value of incorrect length is used in the source file?
bulk_create():
This method inserts the provided list of objects into the database in
an efficient manner (generally only 1 query, no matter how many
objects there are). Also, does not call save() on each of the
instances, do not send any pre/post_save signals.
By efficient manner it means there is no validation. You can explore more of the function code in django/models/db/query.py inside the environment.
Related
Assuming the following example model:
# models.py
class event(models.Model):
location = models.CharField(max_length=10)
type = models.CharField(max_length=10)
date = models.DateTimeField()
attendance = models.IntegerField()
I want to get the attendance number for the latest date of each event location and type combination, using Django ORM. According to the Django Aggregation documentation, we can achieve something close to this, using values preceding the annotation.
... the original results are grouped according to the unique combinations of the fields specified in the values() clause. An annotation is then provided for each unique group; the annotation is computed over all members of the group.
So using the example model, we can write:
event.objects.values('location', 'type').annotate(latest_date=Max('date'))
which does indeed group events by location and type, but does not return the attendance field, which is the desired behavior.
Another approach I tried was to use distinct i.e.:
event.objects.distinct('location', 'type').annotate(latest_date=Max('date'))
but I get an error
NotImplementedError: annotate() + distinct(fields) is not implemented.
I found some answers which rely on database specific features of Django, but I would like to find a solution which is agnostic to the underlying relational database.
Alright, I think this one might actually work for you. It is based upon an assumption, which I think is correct.
When you create your model object, they should all be unique. It seems highly unlikely that that you would have two events on the same date, in the same location of the same type. So with that assumption, let's begin: (as a formatting note, class Names tend to start with capital letters to differentiate between classes and variables or instances.)
# First you get your desired events with your criteria.
results = Event.objects.values('location', 'type').annotate(latest_date=Max('date'))
# Make an empty 'list' to store the values you want.
results_list = []
# Then iterate through your 'results' looking up objects
# you want and populating the list.
for r in results:
result = Event.objects.get(location=r['location'], type=r['type'], date=r['latest_date'])
results_list.append(result)
# Now you have a list of objects that you can do whatever you want with.
You might have to look up the exact output of the Max(Date), but this should get you on the right path.
I have to store data, a part of them is predefined but the user can chose to custom it.
What is the best way to store these data in the database?
2 fields, 1 will be an integer field for predefined option and the second will be a string for the custom user input
1 string field, which will contains a json like {predefined: 2, custom: ''}
1 string field which will contains custom string or predefined option id (converted during the request process)
1 string field which will contains the fulltext option even if it is a predefined (some of these predefined options can be long text)
I tried the 1) but double the number of fields for each "custom ready" data doesn't seem to be perfect...
Any idea ?
Considering you might need the following (it's not very clear from your question):
a form where there is an input field for the customizable part of the string
an easy way to refer to the complete string
a way to administer/manage/validate the non-customizable string
=> use two fields:
class TheModel(Model):
# if you have a certain constant number of choices, use ChoiceField
# otherwise use a ForeingKey and create a different model for those
non_customizable_prefix = ChoiceField(null=False, blank=False, ...)
# unique? validators? max/min length? null/blank?
customizable_part = CharField(...)
#property
def complete_string(self):
return '{}{}'.format(self. non_customizable_prefix, self. customizable_part)
This model will provide you with two separate input fields in Django forms or the Django admin, offering easy ways to make the non_customizable_prefix read only or only modifiable with certain privileges.
I have a database schema similar to this:
class User(models.Model):
… (Some fields irrelevant for this query)
class UserNotifiy(models.Model):
user = models.ForeignKey(User)
target = models.ForeignKey(<Some other Model>)
notification_level = models.SmallPositivIntegerField(choices=(1,2,3))
Now I want to query for all Users that have a UserNotify object for a specific target and at least a specific notification level (e.g. 2).
If I do something like this:
User.objects.filter(usernotify__target=desired_target,
usernotify__notification_level__gte=2)
I get all Users that have a UserNotify object for the specified target and at least one UserNotify object with a notification_level greater or equal to 2. These two UserNotify objects, however, do not have to be identical.
I am aware that I can do something like this:
user_ids = UserNotify.objects.filter(target=desired_target,
notification_level__gte=2).values_list('user_id', flat=True)
users = User.objects.filter(id__in=user_ids).distinct()
But this seems a step too much for me and I believe it executes two queries.
Is there a way to solve my problem with a single query?
Actually I don't see how you can run the first query, given that usernotify is not a valid field name for User.
You should start from UserNotify as you did in your second example:
UserNotify.objects.filter(
target=desired_target,
notification_level__gte=2
).select_related('user').values('user').distinct()
I've been looking for this behaviour but I've never found a better way than the one you describe (creating a query for user ids and inject it in a User query). Note this is not bad since if your database support subqueries, your code should fire only one request composed by a query and a subquery.
However, if you just need a particular field from the User objects (for example first_name), you may try
qs = (UserNotify.objects
.filter(target=desired_target, notification_level__gte=2)
.values_list('user_id', 'user__first_name')
.order_by('user_id')
.distinct('user_id')
)
I am not sure if I understood your question, but:
class User(models.Model):
… (Some fields irrelevant for this query)
class UserNotifiy(models.Model):
user = models.ForeignKey(User, related_name="notifications")
target = models.ForeignKey(<Some other Model>)
notification_level = models.SmallPositivIntegerField(choices=(1,2,3))
Then
users = User.objects.select_related('notifications').filter(notifications__target=desired_target,
notifications__notification_level__gte=2).distinct('id')
for user in users:
notifications = [x for x in user.notifications.all()]
I don't have my vagrant box handy now, but I believe this should work.
I have trouble to make these kind of queries with lots of joins. I didn't found examples, but I guess they are not so complicated to write. It's just there are several FKs.
Here is the models.py (not complicated)
class User(AbstractBaseUser, PermissionsMixin): # Django custom user model
# Some stuff
class CliProfile(models.Model):
user = models.OneToOneField(settings.AUTH_USER_MODEL)
class BizProfile(models.Model):
user = models.OneToOneField(settings.AUTH_USER_MODEL)
class Card(models.Model):
linked_client = models.ForeignKey(CliProfile, blank=True, null=True)
class Points(models.Model):
benef_card = models.ForeignKey(Card)
at_owner = models.ForeignKey(BizProfile)
creation_date = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True)
Quick description of the model
a user can be a client (using CliProfile) or a business (using BizProfile)
each card is linked to a client
each card contains a [points - business] association
This way: a client has a card and can has 3 points at Pizza Hut, and 5 points at McDonalds with the same card)
The request I'm trying to write
Functionally speaking, the purpose is a owner (like PizzaHut) can see all his clients (client who have cards which has points at Pizza Hut)
Technically speaking, I'm trying to write a query to get all clients (ie. a CliProfile queryset) whose cards (at least 1 of all) whose points (at least 1 of all) whose owner (there is only 1) whose user (there is only 1) = request.user ?
Do you have any idea how to write such a query? Thanks a lot.
To match fields within models in filter() you need to use two underscores. The following worked for me
CliProfile.objects.filter(card__points__at_owner=request.user)
But #Alex's suggestion makes the most sense unless this was just an example of what you are trying to do.
If you wanted profiles that are associated with one of several cards you can use the __in field lookup:
CliProfile.objects.filter(card__in=IterableOfCards)
Also you don't use == in filter(). That would return True or False and then pass that value in the filter() call effectively making the call filter(True or False) which won't do anything useful. you have to use = because you are passing a named parameter into the filter function.
Why card instead of card_set()?
cart_set only exists within an instance of a CliProfile. You are not in an instance of a CliProfile, you are trying to get a list of them.
You can try it in the terminal and it will tell you the valid choices.
#Note that it doesn't matter what you put after=, since it fails before that is checked.
>>> CliProfile.objects.filter(card_set=True)
FieldError: Cannot resolve keyword 'card_set' into field. Choices are: card, id, user
a CliProfile can be referenced by multiple cards, which is why card_set exists in it but you are trying to match one card. The card whose points at_owner field is request.user.
You would use a_cliprofile_instance.card_set.filter() to get a subset of their cards or a_cliprofile_instance.card_set.all() to display all of their cards
I have a small Django project to learn with (it's a web UI for the RANCID backup software) and I've run into a problem.
The model for the app defines Devices, and DeviceGroups. Each Device is a member of a group and has a couple of state flags - Enabled, Successful - to indicate if they are operating correctly. Here's the relevant bits.
class DeviceGroup(models.Model):
group_name = models.CharField(max_length=60,unique=True)
class Device(models.Model):
hostname = models.CharField(max_length=60,unique=True)
enabled = models.BooleanField(default=True)
device_group = models.ForeignKey(DeviceGroup)
last_was_success = models.BooleanField(default=False,editable=False)
I have a summary table on the front 'dashboard' page, that shows a list of all the groups, and for each group, how many devices are in it. I'd like to also show the number of Active devices, and the number of failing (i.e. Not last_was_success) devices per-group. The plain device count is already available through the ForeignKey field.
This seems like the kind of thing that annotate is for, but not quite. And actually, I'm not sure how I'd do it with raw SQL either. Most likely as three queries and some lookup afterwards, or subqueries.
So - is it possible 'nicely' in Django? Or alternatively, how do you do the joining up again in the Template or View? The object passed into the template is simply:
device_groups = DeviceGroup.objects.order_by('group_name')
currently, and I don't think I can just add extra fields onto the queryset results "manually", can I? i.e. it's not a dict or similar.
i think you must use
device_groups = DeviceGroup.objects.all().order_by('group_name')
or
device_groups = DeviceGroup.objects.filter(condition).order_by('group_name')