How would I go about updating a many to many relationship in Django REST framework?
Here is my model.
class SchoolTeacher(AbstractBase):
school = models.ForeignKey(School, on_delete=models.CASCADE,
related_name='teachers')
user = models.ForeignKey(User, on_delete=models.CASCADE,
related_name='teacher_at',)
subjects = models.ManyToManyField(SchoolSubject,
related_name='teachers')
Here is my serializer:
class SchoolTeacherSerializer(serializers.ModelSerializer):
....
def create(self, validated_data):
school_class = validated_data.get('school_class', None)
stream = validated_data.get('stream', None)
school_teacher_model_fields = [
f.name for f in SchoolTeacher._meta.get_fields()]
valid_teacher_data = {
key: validated_data[key]
for key in school_teacher_model_fields
if key in validated_data.keys()
}
subjects = valid_teacher_data.pop('subjects')
teacher = SchoolTeacher.objects.create(**valid_teacher_data)
for subject in subjects:
teacher.subjects.add(subject)
self.add_class_teacher(stream, school_class, teacher)
return teacher
def update(self, instance, validated_data):
subjects = validated_data.pop('subjects')
school_class = validated_data.get('school_class', None)
stream = validated_data.get('stream', None)
teacher = instance
for (key, value) in validated_data.items():
setattr(teacher, key, value)
for subject in subjects:
teacher.subjects.add(subject)
teacher.save()
return teacher
How do I achieve updating subjects? Currently, I can only add and not delete existing subjects.
Here is a workaround. I wish however someone would post a better answer. The idea here is to delete all subjects first then add them. However, since of course we cannot do teacher.subjects.all().delete(), we can do
for existing_subject in teacher.subjects.all():
teacher.subjects.remove(existing_subject)
for subject in subjects:
teacher.subjects.add(subject)
As we are talking about many-to-many, both objects need to be persisted before you can assign them to each other.
Once you have that, you can simply add one to the regarding collection of the other, like this (source: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/2.1/topics/db/examples/many_to_many/):
a1 = Article(headline='Django lets you build Web apps easily')
a1.save()
p1 = Publication(title='The Python Journal')
p1.save()
a1.publications.add(p1)
Or, in one step:
new_publication = a1.publications.create(title='Highlights for Children')
I haven't found out how to express "contains" yet, but the next step is to remove the subjects that are not in the new list and add the ones that are in the new but not the old list. Probably more efficient with sorted lists or better hashes. But my python is not good enough for that yet.
Related
Basically, I have a catalog viewset. In the list view I want to make a few filtering and return accordingly.
Relevant Catalog model fields are:
class Catalog(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=191, null=True, blank=False)
...
team = models.ForeignKey(Team, on_delete=models.CASCADE, editable=False, related_name='catalogs')
whitelist_users = models.JSONField(null=True, blank=True, default=list) # If white list is null, it is open to whole team
Views.py
class CatalogViewSet(viewsets.ModelViewSet):
permission_classes = (IsOwnerAdminOrRestricted,)
def get_queryset(self):
result = []
user = self.request.user
catalogs = Catalog.objects.filter(team__in=self.request.user.team_set.all())
for catalog in catalogs:
if catalog.whitelist_users == [] or catalog.whitelist_users == None:
# catalog is open to whole team
result.append(catalog)
else:
# catalog is private
if user in catalog.whitelist_users:
result.append(catalog)
return result
So this is my logic;
1 - Get the catalog object if catalog's team is one of the current user' team.
2 - Check if the catalog.whitelist_users contains the current user. (There is also an exception that if it is none means it s open to whole team so I can show it in the list view.)
Now this worked but since I am returning an array, it doesn't find the detail objects correctly. I mean /catalog/ID doesn't work correctly.
I am new to DRF so I am guessing there is something wrong here. How would you implement this filtering better?
As the name of the method suggests, you need to return a queryset. Also, avoid iterating over a queryset if that's not necessary. It's better to do it in a single database hit. For complex queries, you can use the Q object.
from django.db.models import Q
# ...
def get_queryset(self):
user = self.request.user
catalogs = Catalog.objects.filter(
Q(whitelist_users__in=[None, []]) | Q(whitelist_users__contains=user),
team__in=user.team_set.all())
return catalogs
Now I am not 100% sure the whitelist_users__contains=user will work since it depends on how you construct your JSON, but the idea is there, you will just need to adapt what it contains.
This will be much more effective than looping in python and will respect what get_queryset is meant for.
A simple solution that comes to mind is just creating a list of PKs and filtering again, that way you return a Queryset. Not the most efficient solution, but should work:
def get_queryset(self):
pks = []
user = self.request.user
catalogs = Catalog.objects.filter(team__in=user.team_set.all())
for catalog in catalogs:
if catalog.whitelist_users == [] or catalog.whitelist_users == None:
# catalog is open to whole team
pks.append(catalog.pk)
else:
# catalog is private
if user in catalog.whitelist_users:
pks.append(catalog.pk)
return Catalog.objects.filter(id__in=pks)
In my site, the buyer search for a product and once he found it he can contact the seller by pressing on a contact button. If the conversation between the two concerning this product exists he should be redirected to the existing conversation, else, we create a new conversation.
The conversation is hence defined by two users and a listing.
When I try to implement the logic, I am not able to verify both conditions of the existance of the conversation, if the listing exists OR the users exists Django returns that the conversation exists. Here is my code:
def create_conversation(request, user_pk1, user_pk2, results_pk):
user1 = get_object_or_404(get_user_model(), pk=user_pk1)
user2 = get_object_or_404(get_user_model(), pk=user_pk2)
results= get_object_or_404(Listing, pk=results_pk)
existing_conversation = Conversation.objects.filter(users__in=[user1, user2]).filter(listing=results).values_list('id', flat=True)
if existing_conversation.exists():
return HttpResponseRedirect(reverse('conversation:conversation_update', kwargs={'pk':existing_conversation[0]}))
else:
conv=Conversation()
conv.save()
conv.listing = results
conv.save()
conv.users.add(*[user1,user2])
return HttpResponseRedirect(reverse('conversation:conversation_update', kwargs={'pk': conv.pk}))
Here is the model of the conversation:
class Conversation(models.Model):
"""
Model to contain different messages between one or more users.
:users: Users participating in this conversation.
:archived_by: List of participants, who archived this conversation.
:notified: List of participants, who have received an email notification.
:unread_by: List of participants, who haven't read this conversation.]\['
listing: the listing the conversation is about.
read_by_all: Date all participants have marked this conversation as read.
"""
users = models.ManyToManyField(
settings.AUTH_USER_MODEL,
verbose_name=_('Users'),
related_name='conversations',
)
# review the listing before going online, because it is necessary to have a conversation listing
listing = models.ForeignKey (
Listing,
verbose_name=_('Listing'),
related_name='listing',
default= 1,
)
and the model of the listing:
class Listing(models.Model):
seller = models.ForeignKey(Profile, related_name='seller_listing', verbose_name='sellr', limit_choices_to={'is_seller': True})
location_Country = models.CharField(max_length=45, verbose_name=_('from_Country'))
location_State = models.CharField(max_length=45, verbose_name=_('from_State'), null=True, blank=True)
location_City = models.CharField(max_length=45, verbose_name=_('from_City'))
I also tried an approach of divinding it into two conditions: a = conversation.objects.filter(users) and b= conversation.objects.filter(listing), then use if a and b then the conversation exists but got the same issue.
and existing_conversation = Conversation.objects.filter(Q(users__in=[user1, user2]) & Q(listing=results)).values_list('id', flat=True) but got the same issue. Thank you in advance for your help.
You can use intersection() method of django, added since Django 1.11, operator to return the shared elements of two or more QuerySets or the bitwise operation AND used with the sign `& to get the same behavior.
So in your case, check whether there's an intersection between the two users with & or intersection()
existing_conversation = (user1.conversations.all() & user2.conversations.all()).filter(listing=results)
# or with django intersection
existing_conversation = (user1.conversations.all().intersection(user2.conversations.all())).filter(listing=results)
if existing_conversation.exists():
return HttpResponseRedirect(reverse('conversation:conversation_update',
kwargs={'pk':existing_conversation.first().pk}))
else:
# rest of the code
BONUS, I see a typo in your code, you didn't send the pk as argument:
kwargs={'pk':existing_conversation[0]}
get the first instance with first() and get the pk
kwargs={'pk':existing_conversation.first().pk}
or
kwargs={'pk':existing_conversation[0].pk}
I have the following models:
def Order(models.Model):
receiver = models.ForeignKey(Receiver)
warehouse = models.ForeignKey(Warehouse)
def Receiver(models.Model):
user = models.ForeignKey(User) #this is not made one to one because user can have more than one receiver
name = ...
zipcode = ...
def Warehouse(models.Model):
city = ...
street = ...
I want to select all Warehouse entries related to request.User object. The only way i can do this now is:
orders = Order.objects.filter(receiver__user=request.User)
# here i set orders warehouse ids to list called ids
user_warehouses = Warehouse.objects.filter(pk__in=ids)
But i have a strong feeling that i am inventing the wheel. Is there a more simple Django-way of doing this?
Warehouse.objects.filter(order__receiver__user=request.user)
you can traverse relations backwards ("reverse lookup") and traverse multiple levels with the double-underscore syntax
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.8/topics/db/queries/#lookups-that-span-relationships
This is a hard question for me to describe, but I will do my best here.
I have a model that is for a calendar event:
class Event(models.Model):
account = models.ForeignKey(Account, related_name="event_account")
location = models.ForeignKey(Location, related_name="event_location")
patient = models.ManyToManyField(Patient)
datetime_start = models.DateTimeField()
datetime_end = models.DateTimeField()
last_update = models.DateTimeField(auto_now=False, auto_now_add=False, null=True, blank=True)
event_series = models.ForeignKey(EventSeries, related_name="event_series", null=True, blank=True)
is_original_event = models.BooleanField(default=True)
When this is saved I am overriding the save() method to check and see if the event_series (recurring events) is set. If it is, then I need to iteratively create another event object for each recurring date.
The following seems to work, though it may not be the best approach:
def save(self, *args, **kwargs):
if self.pk is None:
if self.event_series is not None and self.is_original_event is True :
recurrence_rules = EventSeries.objects.get(pk=self.event_series.pk)
rr_freq = DAILY
if recurrence_rules.frequency == "DAILY":
rr_freq = DAILY
elif recurrence_rules.frequency == "WEEKLY":
rr_freq = WEEKLY
elif recurrence_rules.frequency == "MONTHLY":
rr_freq = MONTHLY
elif recurrence_rules.frequency == "YEARLY":
rr_freq = YEARLY
rlist = list(rrule(rr_freq, count=recurrence_rules.recurrences, dtstart=self.datetime_start))
for revent in rlist:
evnt = Event.objects.create(account = self.account, location = self.location, datetime_start = revent, datetime_end = revent, is_original_event = False, event_series = self.event_series)
super(Event, evnt).save(*args, **kwargs)
super(Event, self).save(*args, **kwargs)
However, the real problem I am finding is that using this methodology and saving from the Admin forms, it is creating the recurring events, but if I try to get self.patient which is a M2M field, I keep getting this error:
'Event' instance needs to have a primary key value before a many-to-many relationship can be used
My main question is about this m2m error, but also if you have any feedback on the nested saving for recurring events, that would be great as well.
Thanks much!
If the code trying to access self.patient is in the save method and happens before the instance has been saved then it's clearly the expected behaviour. Remember that Model objects are just a thin (well...) wrapper over a SQL database... Also, even if you first save your new instance then try to access self.patient from the save method you'll still have an empty queryset since the m2m won't have been saved by the admin form yet.
IOW, if you have something to do that depends on m2m being set, you'll have to put it in a distinct method and ensure that method get called when appropriate
About your code snippet:
1/ the recurrence_rules = EventSeries.objects.get(pk=self.event_series.pk) is just redundant, since you alreay have the very same object under the name self.event_series
2/ there's no need to call save on the events you create with Event.objects.create - the ModelManager.create method really create an instance (that is: save it to the database).
EDIT:
It turns out the real question is - how do I get select_related to follow the m2m relationships I have defined? Those are the ones that are taxing my system. Any ideas?
I have two classes for my django app. The first (Item class) describes an item along with some functions that return information about the item. The second class (Itemlist class) takes a list of these items and then does some processing on them to return different values. The problem I'm having is that returning a list of items from Itemlist is taking a ton of queries, and I'm not sure where they're coming from.
class Item(models.Model):
# for archiving purposes
archive_id = models.IntegerField()
users = models.ManyToManyField(User, through='User_item_rel',
related_name='users_set')
# for many to one relationship (tags)
tag = models.ForeignKey(Tag)
sub_tag = models.CharField(default='',max_length=40)
name = models.CharField(max_length=40)
purch_date = models.DateField(default=datetime.datetime.now())
date_edited = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True)
price = models.DecimalField(max_digits=6, decimal_places=2)
buyer = models.ManyToManyField(User, through='Buyer_item_rel',
related_name='buyers_set')
comments = models.CharField(default='',max_length=400)
house_id = models.IntegerField()
class Meta:
ordering = ['-purch_date']
def shortDisplayBuyers(self):
if len(self.buyer_item_rel_set.all()) != 1:
return "multiple buyers"
else:
return self.buyer_item_rel_set.all()[0].buyer.name
def listBuyers(self):
return self.buyer_item_rel_set.all()
def listUsers(self):
return self.user_item_rel_set.all()
def tag_name(self):
return self.tag
def sub_tag_name(self):
return self.sub_tag
def __unicode__(self):
return self.name
and the second class:
class Item_list:
def __init__(self, list = None, house_id = None, user_id = None,
archive_id = None, houseMode = 0):
self.list = list
self.house_id = house_id
self.uid = int(user_id)
self.archive_id = archive_id
self.gen_balancing_transactions()
self.houseMode = houseMode
def ret_list(self):
return self.list
So after I construct Itemlist with a large list of items, Itemlist.ret_list() takes up to 800 queries for 25 items. What can I do to fix this?
Try using select_related
As per a question I asked here
Dan is right in telling you to use select_related.
select_related can be read about here.
What it does is return in the same query data for the main object in your queryset and the model or fields specified in the select_related clause.
So, instead of a query like:
select * from item
followed by several queries like this every time you access one of the item_list objects:
select * from item_list where item_id = <one of the items for the query above>
the ORM will generate a query like:
select item.*, item_list.*
from item a join item_list b
where item a.id = b.item_id
In other words: it will hit the database once for all the data.
You probably want to use prefetch_related
Works similarly to select_related, but can deal with relations selected_related cannot. The join happens in python, but I've found it to be more efficient for this kind of work than the large # of queries.
Related reading on the subject