Django model validate a ManyToMany field before adding - django

I have a model that looks somewhat like this:
class Passenger(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=50)
surname = models.CharField(max_length=50)
class Flight(models.Model):
capacity = models.IntegerField()
passengers = models.ManyToManyField(Passenger)
Before adding a new passenger to the flight I would like to validate whether the number of passengers is not going to exceed the capacity. I was wondering what would be the best way to go about this.
Obviously I could manually check the number of passengers before adding a new one, but maybe there is some support in django? I tried writing a validator, but wasn't sure how to do it.

According to Django docs you can listen to the m2m_changed signal, which will trigger pre_add and post_add actions.
Using add() with a many-to-many relationship, however, will not call
any save() methods (the bulk argument doesn’t exist), but rather
create the relationships using QuerySet.bulk_create(). If you need to
execute some custom logic when a relationship is created, listen to
the m2m_changed signal, which will trigger pre_add and post_add
actions.

According to #M.Void answer – Code Example:
from django.db import models
from django.db.models.signals import m2m_changed
from django.core.exceptions import ValidationError
class MyModel(models.Model):
m2mField = models.ManyToManyField('self')
m2mFieldLimit = 2
def m2mField_changed(sender,**kwargs):
instance = kwargs['instance']
if len(instance.m2mField.all()) >= instance.m2mFieldLimit :
raise ValidationError(f'Max number of records is {instance.m2mFieldLimi}')
m2m_changed.connect(commonobjects_changed,sender=MyModel.m2mField.through)

Override the clean method on the model to do the check you want:
class Passenger(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=50)
surname = models.CharField(max_length=50)
def clean(self, *args, **kwargs):
# clean gets called automatically by other things, so we can't always
# expect flight_id to be provided
if 'flight_id' in kwargs:
flight = Flight.objects.get(pk=kwargs['flight_id'])
if flight.passengers.all().count() >= flight.capacity:
# flight is full!
raise ValidationError
super(Passenger, self).clean()
class Flight(models.Model):
capacity = models.IntegerField()
passengers = models.ManyToManyField(Passenger)
Note that to do this, you will have to pass in the flight ID when validating the passenger:
f = Flight.objects.get(...)
p = Passenger(name='First', surname='Last')
try:
p.clean(flight_id=f.id) # full_clean calls clean, among other validations
p.save()
except ValidationError as e:
# do something to handle the error
Note that it is possible in multi-threaded applications for something to get validated successfully, but still fail to save in a race condition. You would need to add additional code to handle that.
See here for details on model validation.

Related

Django why model foreign key cascade will not trigger delete?

there two basic ways to do something when an instance gets deleted:
Overwrite Model.delete
Signal
I used to reckon both of them serve the same purpose, just provides different ways of writing, but works exactly.
However, in this occasion, I realise I was wrong:
class Human(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=20)
class Pet(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=20)
owner = models.ForeignKey(Human, related_name="pet", on_delete=models.CASCADE)
def delete(self, *args, **kwargs):
print('------- Pet.delete is called')
return super().delete(*args, **kwargs)
h = Human(name='jason')
h.save()
p = Pet(name="dog", owner=h)
p.save()
h.delete()
# nothing is shown
Why Pet.delete Is not firing at Human.delete By the foreign cascade? Does I have to apply a signal on this? If so, would it cost more performance?
I am building something very heavy, comment system, filter decent records and delete when the commented target get deleted, the comment model has many null-able foreign key fields, with models.CASCADE Set, only one of them is assigned with value. But in product delete view, I call product.delete Then triggers cascade, but comment.delete Is not firing.
Currently, the project has delete Defined on many models, with assumption that it is always triggered when the instance get removed from database, and it is tremendous work to rewrite it in signal. Is there a way to call delete When at cascading? (I know it is likely impossible since it is a database field specification)
I implement a mix-in for Commendable models with extra methods defined, therefore, I decided to modify delete method to signal to something like this:
from django.db import models
from django.dispatch import receiver
from django.db.models.signals import pre_delete
# Create your models here.
class Base:
def __init_subclass__(cls):
#receiver(pre_delete, sender=cls)
def pet_pre_delete1(sender, instance, **kwargs):
print('pet pre delete 1 is called')
#receiver(pre_delete, sender=cls)
def pet_pre_delete2(sender, instance, **kwargs):
print('pet pre delete 2 is called')
class Human(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=20)
def __str__(self):
return f'<human>{self.name}'
class Pet(Base, models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=20)
owner = models.ForeignKey(Human, related_name="pet", on_delete=models.CASCADE)
def __str__(self):
return f'<pet>{self.name}'
# ------- Pet.delete is called
# pet pre delete 1 is called
# pet pre delete 2 is called
it works fine in testing, I wonder if there is any risk using this, would it be garbage collected?

Using signals for two models both inheriting from User in Django

Suppose we have two models that have signal to the User model:
from django.db import models
from django.contrib.auth.models import User
from django.db.models import signals
class Company(User):
name = models.CharField(null=True, blank=True, max_length=30)
if created:
Company.objects.create(
user_ptr_id=instance.id,
username=instance.username,
password=instance.password,
email=instance.email,
first_name=instance.first_name,
last_name=instance.last_name,
is_active=instance.is_active,
is_superuser=instance.is_superuser,
is_staff=instance.is_staff,
date_joined=instance.date_joined,
)
signals.post_save.connect(
create_company, sender=User, weak=False, dispatch_uid="create_companies"
)
class Individual(User):
name = models.CharField(null=True, blank=True, max_length=30)
def create_job_seeker(sender, instance, created, **kwargs):
"""
:param instance: Current context User instance
:param created: Boolean value for User creation
:param kwargs: Any
:return: New Seeker instance
"""
if created:
'''
we should add a condition on whether the Company uses the same username
if true, then, we must not create a JobSeeker and we would disable the account using
Firebase Admin
'''
JobSeeker.objects.create(
user_ptr_id=instance.id,
username=instance.username,
password=instance.password,
email=instance.email,
first_name=instance.first_name,
last_name=instance.last_name,
is_active=instance.is_active,
is_superuser=instance.is_superuser,
is_staff=instance.is_staff,
date_joined=instance.date_joined,
)
signals.post_save.connect(
create_job_seeker, sender=User, weak=False, dispatch_uid="create_job_seekers"
)
Now, each time a User is created we should be allowed to extend it through both Individual and Company models. But, I want to prohibit the usage of both objects. User can either have a Company or an Individual object to be edited not both. Should I override the save method such as this:
def save(self, *args, **kwargs):
if not Company.objects.filter(username=self.username).exists():
super(Model, self).save(*args, **kwargs)
else:
raise 'Some error'
Or should I add a condition on the created method such as this:
...
if created and Company.objects.filter(username, self.username).exists() == False:
Company.objects.create(
...
Which approach is better? And is there another approach that you might suggest?
Signals, for most cases, I believe are the best way to handle sharing data between models assuming the CRUD for each related model isn't done together. So post_save, pre_save, post_delete, pre_delete and so are typically the best way to go about handling data that any given model instance relies on. This can be true about manipulating model data after a save. Signals were designed specifically for this reason. The other great thing about signals is you can connect them throughout your project and not necessarily just where the Model is defined. Just import the model and the signal you want to connect to it and bam!
How to use signals? follow django's documentation here. it's very simple
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/4.0/topics/signals/

Django, How to enforce model Foreinkeys to have same value

In Django I want to enforce that a model which has two foreinkeys of differents models which has the same type of field to be the same, in example:
class Model1(models.Model):
f1 = models.CharField(max_length=48)
class Model2(models.Model):
f1 = models.CharField(max_length=48)
class Model3(models.Model):
field1 = models.ForeignKey(Model1)
field2 = models.ForeignKey(Model2)
I want that creation of objects of Model3 would be made only if f1 field of Model1 and Model2 are the same. (Edit: please note that each model has other fields that are not relavant to the question)
I'm fairly certain this isn't possible at a db level. However, you could enforce it at the code level fairly easily through a pre-save signal. pre-save signals in django allow you to perform an operation/check before a model is actually saved to the database.
See the below example for a potential solution.
from django.db.models.signals import pre_save
#receiver(pre_save)
def pre_save_handler(sender, instance, *args, **kwargs):
if instance.field1.f1 != instance.field2.f2:
raise Exception('Cannot save models, because their values do not match!')
Here we are checking if the fields have the same value, and if they don't an exception is thrown, keeping the record from saving.

Django "Enter a list of values" form error when rendering a ManyToManyField as a Textarea

I'm trying to learn Django and I've ran into some confusing points. I'm currently having trouble creating a movie using a form. The idea of the form is to give the user any field he'd like to fill out. Any field that the user fills out will be updated in its respective sql table (empty fields will be ignored). But, the form keeps giving me the error "Enter a list of values" when I submit the form. To address this, I thought stuffing the data from the form into a list and then returning that list would solve this.
The first idea was to override the clean() in my ModelForm. However, because the form fails the is_valid() check in my views, the cleaned_data variable in clean() doesn't contain anything. Next, I tried to override the to_python(). However, to_python() doesn't seem to be called.
If I put __metaclass__ = models.SubfieldBase in the respective model, I receive the runtime error
"TypeError: Error when calling the
metaclass bases
metaclass conflict: the metaclass of a derived class must be a
(non-strict) subclass of the
metaclasses of all its bases"
My approach doesn't seem to work. I'm not sure how to get around the 'Enter a list of values" error! Any advice?
Here is the relevant code (updated):
models.py
""" Idea:
A movie consists of many equipments, actors, and lighting techniques. It also has a rank for the particular movie, as well as a title.
A Theater consists of many movies.
A nation consists of many theaters.
"""
from django.db import models
from django.contrib.auth.models import User
class EquipmentModel(models.Model):
equip = models.CharField(max_length=20)
# user = models.ForeignKey(User)
class ActorModel(models.Model):
actor = models.CharField(max_length=20)
# user = models.ForeignKey(User)
class LightModel(models.Model):
light = models.CharField(max_length=20)
# user = models.ForeignKey(User)
class MovieModel(models.Model):
# __metaclass__ = models.SubfieldBase
rank = models.DecimalField(max_digits=5000, decimal_places=3)
title = models.CharField(max_length=20)
equipments = models.ManyToManyField(EquipmentModel, blank=True, null=True)
actors = models.ManyToManyField(ActorModel, blank=True, null=True)
lights = models.ManyToManyField(LightModel, blank=True, null=True)
class TheaterModel(models.Model):
movies = models.ForeignKey(MovieModel)
class NationModel(models.Model):
theaters = models.ForeignKey(TheaterModel)
=====================================
forms.py
"""
These Modelforms tie in the models from models.py
Users will be able to write to any of the fields in MovieModel when creating a movie.
Users may leave any field blank (empty fields should be ignored, ie: no updates to database).
"""
from django import forms
from models import MovieModel
from django.forms.widgets import Textarea
class MovieModelForm(forms.ModelForm):
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
super(MovieModelForm, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)
self.fields["actors"].widget = Textarea()
self.fields["equipments"].widget = Textarea()
self.fields["lights"].widget = Textarea()
def clean_actors(self):
data = self.cleaned_data.get('actors')
print 'cleaning actors'
return [data]
class Meta:
model = MovieModel
=============================================
views.py
""" This will display the form used to create a MovieModel """
from django.shortcuts import render_to_response
from django.template import RequestContext
from forms import MovieModelForm
def add_movie(request):
if request.method == "POST":
form = MovieModelForm(request.POST)
if form.is_valid():
new_moviemodel = form.save()
return HttpResponseRedirect('/data/')
else:
form = MovieModelForm()
return render_to_response('add_movie_form.html', {form:form,}, context_instance=RequestContext(request))
The probable problem is that the list of values provided in the text area can not be normalized into a list of Models.
See the ModelMultipleChoiceField documentation.
The field is expecting a list of valid IDs, but is probably receiving a list of text values, which django has no way of converting to the actual model instances. The to_python will be failing within the form field, not within the form itself. Therefore, the values never even reach the form.
Is there something wrong with using the built in ModelMultipleChoiceField? It will provide the easiest approach, but will require your users to scan a list of available actors (I'm using the actors field as the example here).
Before I show an example of how I'd attempt to do what you want, I must ask; how do you want to handle actors that have been entered that don't yet exist in your database? You can either create them if they exist, or you can fail. You need to make a decision on this.
# only showing the actor example, you can use something like this for other fields too
class MovieModelForm(forms.ModelForm):
actors_list = fields.CharField(required=False, widget=forms.Textarea())
class Meta:
model = MovieModel
exclude = ('actors',)
def clean_actors_list(self):
data = self.cleaned_data
actors_list = data.get('actors_list', None)
if actors_list is not None:
for actor_name in actors_list.split(','):
try:
actor = Actor.objects.get(actor=actor_name)
except Actor.DoesNotExist:
if FAIL_ON_NOT_EXIST: # decide if you want this behaviour or to create it
raise forms.ValidationError('Actor %s does not exist' % actor_name)
else: # create it if it doesnt exist
Actor(actor=actor_name).save()
return actors_list
def save(self, commit=True):
mminstance = super(MovieModelForm, self).save(commit=commit)
actors_list = self.cleaned_data.get('actors_list', None)
if actors_list is not None:
for actor_name in actors_list.split(","):
actor = Actor.objects.get(actor=actor_name)
mminstance.actors.add(actor)
mminstance.save()
return mminstance
The above is all untested code, but something approaching this should work if you really want to use a Textarea for a ModelMultipleChoiceField. If you do go down this route, and you discover errors in my code above, please either edit my answer, or provide a comment so I can. Good luck.
Edit:
The other option is to create a field that understands a comma separated list of values, but behaves in a similar way to ModelMultipleChoiceField. Looking at the source code for ModelMultipleChoiceField, it inhertis from ModelChoiceField, which DOES allow you to define which value on the model is used to normalize.
## removed code because it's no longer relevant. See Last Edit ##
Edit:
Wow, I really should have checked the django trac to see if this was already fixed. It is. See the following ticket for information. Essentially, they've done the same thing I have. They've made ModelMutipleChoiceField respect the to_field_name argument. This is only applicable for django 1.3!
The problem is, the regular ModelMultipleChoiceField will see the comma separated string, and fail because it isn't a List or Tuple. So, our job becomes a little more difficult, because we have to change the string to a list or tuple, before the regular clean method can run.
class ModelCommaSeparatedChoiceField(ModelMultipleChoiceField):
widget = Textarea
def clean(self, value):
if value is not None:
value = [item.strip() for item in value.split(",")] # remove padding
return super(ModelCommaSeparatedChoiceField, self).clean(value)
So, now your form should look like this:
class MovieModelForm(forms.ModelForm):
actors = ModelCommaSeparatedChoiceField(
required=False,
queryset=Actor.objects.filter(),
to_field_name='actor')
equipments = ModelCommaSeparatedChoiceField(
required=False,
queryset=Equipment.objects.filter(),
to_field_name='equip')
lights = ModelCommaSeparatedChoiceField(
required=False,
queryset=Light.objects.filter(),
to_field_name='light')
class Meta:
model = MovieModel
to_python AFAIK is a method for fields, not forms.
clean() occurs after individual field cleaning, so your ModelMultipleChoiceFields clean() methods are raising validation errors and thus cleaned_data does not contain anything.
You haven't provided examples for what kind of data is being input, but the answer lies in form field cleaning.
http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/forms/validation/#cleaning-a-specific-field-attribute
You need to write validation specific to that field that either returns the correct data in the format your field is expecting, or raises a ValidationError so your view can re-render the form with error messages.
update: You're probably missing the ModelForm __init__ -- see if that fixes it.
class MovieModelForm(forms.ModelForm):
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
super(MovieModelForm, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)
self.fields["actors"].widget = Textarea()
def clean_actors(self):
data = self.cleaned_data.get('actors')
# validate incoming data. Convert the raw incoming string
# to a list of ids this field is expecting.
# if invalid, raise forms.ValidationError("Error MSG")
return data.split(',') # just an example if data was '1,3,4'

Define an attribute in a model, like an object of the other model in Django

Is posible to define an attribute in a data model like an object of other data model in Django?
This is the scenary:
models.py
class Inmueble(models.Model):
calle = models.CharField(max_length=20, verbose_name="Calle")
numero = models.CharField(max_length=6, verbose_name="Numero")
piso = models.IntegerField(verbose_name="Piso", blank=True, null=True)
galeria_id = models.OneToOneField(Galeria, verbose_name="Galería del Inmueble")
class Galeria(Gallery):
nombre = models.CharField(max_length=30, verbose_name="Nombre")
The point is: I need to create a new Galeria object automatically every time an Inmueble object is created. Thanks in advance!
Analía.
There are two ways to handle this:
Override the save() method for the Inmueble model.
Create a signal handler on Galeria that receives signals emitted by Inmueble
Both methods would work and are acceptable, however I recommend using a signal for a couple reasons:
It's a bit more de-coupled. If later you change or remove Galeria, your code doesn't break
The signal handler for postsave includes a boolean value to indicate whether the model is being created or not. You could technically implement the same functionality in model save() by checking if the model has a .id set or not, but IMO the signal is a cleaner solution.
Here's an idea of the code for both of these...
Using a Signal (recommended)
from django.db.models.signals import post_save
from wherever.models import Inmueble
class Galeria(Gallery):
# ...
def inmueble_postsave(sender, instance, created, **kwargs):
if created:
instance.galeria_id = Galeria.objects.create()
instance.save()
post_save.connect(inmueble_postsave, sender=Inmueble, dispatch_uid='galeria.inmueble_postsave')
Overriding Model save() Method
from wherever.models import Galeria
class Inmueble(models.Model):
# ...
def save(self, force_insert=False, force_update=False):
# No Id = newly created model
if not self.id:
self.galeria_id = Galeria.objects.create()
super(Inmueble, self).save()
Maybe
AutoOneToOneField is the answer.
Finally, I did:
from django.db.models.signals import post_save
class Galeria(Gallery):
inmueble_id = models.ForeignKey(Inmueble)
def inmueble_postsave(sender, instance, created, **kwargs):
if created:
instance = Galeria.objects.create(inmueble_id=instance, title=instance.calle+' '+instance.numero, title_slug=instance.calle+' '+instance.numero)
instance.save()
post_save.connect(inmueble_postsave, sender=Inmueble, dispatch_uid='galeria.inmueble_postsave')