I have two models
Job Position: It's the first object I create and represent a position in a company. `
Job offer: It is related to Job Position through a foreign key and represent a job offer sent out for a specific Job Position
Each job position can have multiple job offers associated as you can send multiple job offers out.
Now, the Job Position model has some data such as "Salary" that I would like each Job Offer instance to inherit automatically BUT I would also like to be able to change at the Job Offer level (after negotiations).
For example:
A jobposition is open with salary=50k
10 joboffers are sent out, each with salary 50k
After some negotiations, some joboffers are changed to salary 80k
Should joboffers have a salary field that I simply set equal to the salary jobposition when I create the object, or should I find a way to tie it initially within the model definition through some sort of foreign key but then make it flexibile?
class JobPosition(models.Model):
..
salary=models.Integer()
class JobOffer(models.Model):
position=models.ForeignKey(JobPosition, on_delete=models.CASCADE)
...
Your JobOffer models should have another field named salary as you said sometimes salary value can be different from JobPosition`
or you can some something like this:
class JobPosition(models.Model):
..
salary=models.Integer()
class JobOffer(models.Model):
position=models.ForeignKey(JobPosition, on_delete=models.CASCADE)
salary=models.Integer()
def job_position_salary(self):
return self.position.salary
...
Related
Been searching the web for a couple hours now looking for a solution but nothing quite fits what I am looking for.
I have one model (simplified):
class SimpleModel(Model):
name = CharField('Name', unique=True)
date = DateField()
amount = FloatField()
I have two dates; date_one and date_two.
I would like a single queryset with a row for each name in the Model, with each row showing:
{'name': name, 'date_one': date_one, 'date_two': date_two, 'amount_one': amount_one, 'amount_two': amount_two, 'change': amount_two - amount_one}
Reason being I would like to be able to find the rank of amount_one, amount_two, and change, using sort or filters on that single queryset.
I know I could create a list of dictionaries from two separate querysets then sort on that and get the ranks from the index values ...
but perhaps nievely I feel like there should be a DB solution using one queryset that would be faster.
union seemed promising but you cannot perform some simple operations like filter after that
I think I could perhaps split name into its own Model and generate queryset with related fields, but I'd prefer not to change the schema at this stage. Also, I only have access to sqlite.
appreciate any help!
Your current model forces you to have ONE name associated with ONE date and ONE amount. Because name is unique=True, you literally cannot have two dates associated with the same name
So if you want to be able to have several dates/amounts associated with a name, there are several ways to proceed
Idea 1: If there will only be 2 dates and 2 amounts, simply add a second date field and a second amount field
Idea 2: If there can be an infinite number of days and amounts, you'll have to change your model to reflect it, by having :
A model for your names
A model for your days and amounts, with a foreign key to your names
Idea 3: You could keep the same model and simply remove the unique constraint, but that's a recipe for mistakes
Based on your choice, you'll then have several ways of querying what you need. It depends on your final model structure. The best way to go would be to create custom model methods that query the 2 dates/amount, format an array and return it
I'm attempting to use Django to build a simple website. I have a set of blog posts that have a date field attached to indicate the day they were published. I have a table that contains a list of dates and temperatures. On each post, I would like to display the temperature on the day it was published.
The two models are as follows:
class Post(models.Model):
title = models.CharField(max_length=200)
text = models.TextField()
date = models.DateField()
class Temperature(models.Model):
date = models.DateField()
temperature = models.IntegerField()
I would like to be able to reference the temperature field from the second table using the date field from the first. Is this possible?
In SQL, this is a simple query. I would do the following:
Select temperature from Temperature t join Post p on t.date = p.date
I think I really have two questions:
Is it possible to brute force this, even if it's not best practice? I've googled a lot and tried using raw sql and objects.extra, but can't get them to do what I want. I'm also wary of relying on them for the long haul.
Since this seems to be a simple task, it seems likely that I'm overcomplicating it by having my models set up sub-optimally. Is there something I'm missing about how I should design my models? That is, what's the best practice for doing something like this? (I've successfully pulled the temperature into my blog post by using a foreign key in the Temperature model. But if I go that route, I don't see how I could easily make sure that my temperature dates get the correct foreign key assigned to them so that the temperature date maps to the correct post date.)
There will likely be better answers than this one, but I'll throw in my 2ยข anyway.
You could try a property inside the Post model that returns the temperature:
#property
def temperature(self):
try:
return Temperature.objects.values_list('temperature',flat=True).get(date=self.date)
except:
return None
(code not tested)
About your Models:
If you will be displaying the temperature in a Post list (a list of Posts with their temperatures), then maybe it will be simpler to code and a faster query to just add a temperature field to your Post model.
You can keep the Temperature model. Then:
Assuming you have the temperature data already present in you Temperature model at the time of Post instance creation, you can fill that new field in a custom save method.
If you get temperature data after Post creation, you cann fill in that new temperature field through a background job (maybe triggered by crontab or similar).
Sometimes database orthogonality (not repeating info in many tables) is not the best strategy. Just something to think about, depending on how often you will be querying the Post models and how simple you want to keep that query code.
I think this might be a basic approach to solve the problem
post_dates = Post.objects.all().values('date')
result_temprature = Temperature.objects.filter(date__in = post_dates).values('temperature')
Subqueries could be your friend here. Something like the following should work:
from django.db.models import OuterRef, Subquery
temps = Temperature.objects.filter(date=OuterRef('date'))
posts = Post.objects.annotate(temperature=Subquery(temps.values('temperature')[:1]))
for post in posts:
temperature = post.temperature
Then you can just iterate through posts and access the temperature off each post instance
I have these models:
class Customer(models.Model):
....
class Job(models.Model):
customer = models.ForeignKey('Customer')
payment_status = models.ForeignKey('PaymentStatus')
cleaner = models.ForeignKey(settings.AUTH_USER_MODEL,...)
class PaymentStatus(models.Model):
is_owing = models.NullBooleanField()
I need to find out, for each job, how many total owed jobs the parent customer has, but only display those jobs belonging to the current user. The queryset should be something like this:
user = self.request.user
queryset = Job.objects.select_related('customer'
).filter(payment_status__is_owing=True).annotate(
num_owings=RawSQL('count(jobs_job.id) over (partition by customer_id)', ())
).filter(cleaner=user)
I am using 'select_related' to display fields from the customer related to the job.
Firstly I haven't found a way to do this without the windowing function/raw SQL.
Secondly, regardless of where I place the .filter(window_cleaner=user) (before or afer the annotate()), the final result is always to exclude the jobs that do not belong to the current user in the total count. I need to exclude the jobs from displaying, but not from the count in the windowing function.
I could do the whole thing as raw SQL, but I was hoping there was a nicer way of doing it in Django.
Thanks!
I don't know if this helps and it really depends on how you are wanting to display the results to your user. However if it were me with a free hand to the design aspect I would probably split my window. Perhaps having the total of owed jobs for the parent customer at the top and a separate list for the jobs that belong to the current user below. Then I would split the construction of the data doing a normal query, as you have, for the jobs relating to the current user but then use a custom template tag to calculate the total number of jobs for the parent customer.
I use custom template tags quite a bit. I find they are very cool for those quick snapshot totals that we all want to display to our users. For example....the total number of points accumulated, the number of outstanding tasks, etc etc.
If you've not looked at them previously check out the docs at https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.11/howto/custom-template-tags/
They are really easy to use.
I have these models :
class Package(models.Model):
title = CharField(...)
class Item(models.Model)
package = ForeignKey(Package)
price = FloatField(...)
class UserItem(models.Model)
user = ForeignKey(User)
item = ForeignKey(Item)
purchased = BooleanField()
I am trying to achieve 2 functionality with the best performance possible :
In my templete I would like to calculate each package price sum of all its items. (Aggregate I assume ?)
More complicated : I wish that for each user I can sum up the price of all item purchased. so the purchased = True.
Assume I have 10 items in one package which each of them cost 10$ the package sum should be 100$. assume the user purchase 5 items the second sum should be 50$.
I can easily do simple queries with templetetags but I believe it can be done better ? (Hopefully)
To total the price for a specific package a_package you can use this code
Item.objects.filter(package=a_package).aggregate(Sum('price'))
There is a a guide on how to do these kind of queries, and the aggregate documentation with all the different functions described.
This kind of query can also solve your second problem.
UserItem.objects.filter(user=a_user).filter(purchased=True).aggregate(sum('price'))
You can also use annotate() to attach the count to each object, see the first link above.
The most elegant way in my opinion would be to define a method total on the Model class and decorate it as a property. This will return the total (using Django ORM's Sum aggregate) for either Package or User.
Example for class Package:
from django.db.models import Sum
...
class Package(models.Model):
...
#property
def total(self):
return self.item_set.aggregate(Sum('price'))
In your template code you would use total as any other model attribute. E.g.:
{{ package_instance.total }}
#Vic Smith got the solution.
But I would add a price attribute on the package model if you wish
the best performance possible
You would add a on_save signal to Item, and if created, you update the related package object.
This way you can get the package price very quickly, and even make quick sorting, comparing, etc.
Plus, I don't really get the purpose of the purchased attribute. But you probably want to make a ManyToMany relationship between Item and User, and define UserItem as the connection with the trhough parameter.
Anyway, my experience is that you usually want to make a relationship between Item and a Purchasse objet, which is linked to User, and not a direct link (unless you start to get performances issues...). Having Purchasse as a record of the event "the user bough this and that" make things easier to handle.
I have a models in Django that are something like this:
class Classification(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(choices=class_choices)
...
class Activity(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=300)
fee = models.ManyToManyField(Classification, through='Fee')
...
class Fee(models.Model):
activity = models.ForeignKey(Activity)
class = models.ForeignKey(Classification)
early_fee = models.IntegerField(decimal_places=2, max_digits=10)
regular_fee = models.IntegerField(decimal_places=2, max_digits=10)
The idea being that there will be a set of fees associated with each Activity and Classification pair. Classification is like Student, Staff, etc.
I know that part works right.
Then in my application, I query for a set of Activities with:
activities = Activity.objects.filter(...)
Which returns a list of activities. I need to display in my template that list of Activities with their Fees. Something like this:
Activity Name
Student Early Price - $4
Student Regular Price - $5
Staff Early Price - $6
Staff Regular Price - $8
But I don't know of an easy way to get this info without a specific get query of the Fees object for each activity/class pair.
I hoped this would work:
activity.fee.all()
But that just returns the Classification Object. Is there a way to get the Fee Object Data for the Pair via the Activities I already queried?
Or am I doing this completely wrong?
Considering michuk's tip to rename "fee" to "classification":
Default name for Fee objects on Activity model will be fee_set. So in order to get your prices, do this:
for a in Activity.objects.all():
a.fee_set.all() #gets you all fees for activity
There's one thing though, as you can see you'll end up doing 1 SELECT on each activity object for fees, there are some apps that can help with that, for example, django-batch-select does only 2 queries in this case.
First of all I think you named your field wrong. This:
fee = models.ManyToManyField(Classification, through='Fee')
should be rather that:
classifications = models.ManyToManyField(Classification, through='Fee')
as ManyToManyField refers to a list of related objects.
In general ManyToManyField, AFAIK, is only a django shortcut to enable easy fetching of all related objects (Classification in your case), with the association table being transparent to the model. What you want is the association table (Fee in your case) not being transparent.
So what I would do is to remove the ManyToManyField field from Activity and simply get all the fees related with the activity. And thenm if you need a Classification for each fee, get the Classification separately.