I have a Feed model with the following field:
class Feed(models.Model)
authority=models.ForeignKey(Authority,blank=True,null=True)
I have a queryset of authority called followed_authority in which I want to get the corresponding feeds from each of the authority in followed_authority
The obvious thing for me is to use a for loop through followed_authority which I think its inefficient as the instanaces in following_authority and their corresponding feeds are very large.Kindly help me out
The correct thing to do is to always start from the model you want to get.
Feed.objects.filter(authority__in=followed_authority)
Related
So we've been using a DateTimeRangeField in a booking model to denote start and end. The rationale for this might not have been great —separate start and end fields might have been better in hindsight— but we're over a year into this now and there's no going back.
It's generally been fine except I need to annotate just the end datetime onto a related model's query. And I can't work out the syntax.
Here's a little toy example where I want a list of Employees with end of their last booking annotated on.
class Booking(models.Model):
timeframe = DateTimeRangeField()
employee = models.ForeignKey('Employee')
sq = Booking.objects.filter(employee=OuterRef('pk')).values('timeframe')
Employee.objects.annotate(last_on_site=Subquery(sq, output_field=DateTimeField()))
That doesn't work because the annotated value is the range, not the single value. I've tried a heap of modifiers (egs __1 .1 but nothing works).
Is there a way to get just the one value? I guess you could simulate this without the complication of the subquery just doing a simple values lookup. Booking.objects.values('timeframe__start') (or whatever). That's essentially what I'm trying to do here.
Thanks to some help in IRC, it turns out you can use the RangeStartsWith and RangeEndsWith model transform classes directly. These are the things that are normally just registered to provide you with a __startswith filter access to range values, but directly they can pull back the value.
In my example, that means just modifying the annotation slightly:
from django.contrib.postgres.fields.ranges import RangeEndsWith
sq = Booking.objects.filter(employee=OuterRef('pk')).values('timeframe')
Employee.objects.annotate(last_on_site=RangeEndsWith(Subquery(sq[:1])))
I want to attach a field value (id) to a QS like below, but Django throws a 'str' object has no attribute 'lookup' error.
Book.objects.all().annotate(some_id='somerelation__id')
It seems I can get my id value using Sum()
Book.objects.all().annotate(something=Sum('somerelation__id'))
I'm wondering is there not a way to simply annotate raw field values to a QS? Using sum() in this case doesn't feel right.
There are at least three methods of accessing related objects in a queryset.
using Django's double underscore join syntax:
If you just want to use the field of a related object as a condition in your SQL query you can refer to the field field on the related object related_object with related_object__field. All possible lookup types are listed in the Django documentation under Field lookups.
Book.objects.filter(related_object__field=True)
using annotate with F():
You can populate an annotated field in a queryset by refering to the field with the F() object. F() represents the field of a model or an annotated field.
Book.objects.annotate(added_field=F("related_object__field"))
accessing object attributes:
Once the queryset is evaluated, you can access related objects through attributes on that object.
book = Book.objects.get(pk=1)
author = book.author.name # just one author, or…
authors = book.author_set.values("name") # several authors
This triggers an additional query unless you're making use of select_related().
My advice is to go with solution #2 as you're already halfway down that road and I think it'll give you exactly what you're asking for. The problem you're facing right now is that you did not specify a lookup type but instead you're passing a string (somerelation_id) Django doesn't know what to do with.
Also, the Django documentation on annotate() is pretty straight forward. You should look into that (again).
You have <somerelation>_id "by default". For example comment.user_id. It works because User has many Comments. But if Book has many Authors, what author_id supposed to be in this case?
I am trying to display a map of my data based on a search. The easiest way to handle the map display would be to serialized the queryset generated by the search, and indeed this works just fine using . However, I'd really like to allow for multiple searches, with the displayed points being shown in a user chosen color. The user chosen color, obviously cannot come from the database, since it is not a property of these objects, so none of the aggregators make sense here.
I have tried simply making a utility class, since what I really need is a somewhat complex join between two model classes that then gets serialized into geojson. However, once I created that utility class, it became evident that I lost a lot of the benefits of having a queryset, especially the ability to easily serialize the data with django-geojson (or natively once I can get 1.8 to run smoothly).
Basically, I want to be able to do something like:
querySet = datumClass.objects.filter(...user submitted search parameters...).annotate(color='blue')
Is this possible at all? It seems like this would be more elegant and would work better than my current solution of a non-model utility class which has some serious serialization issues when I try to use python-geojson to serialize.
The problem is that extra comes with all sorts of warning about usefulness or deprecation... But this works:
.extra(select={'color': "'blue'"})
Notice the double quotes wrapping the string value.
This translates to:
SELECT ('blue') AS "color"
Not quite sure what you are trying to achieve, but you can add extra attributes to your objects iterating over the queryset in the view. These can be accessed from the template.
for object in queryset :
if object.contition = 'a'
object.color = 'blue'
else:
object.color = 'green'
if you have a dictionary that maps fields to values, you can do things like
filter_dictionary = {
'date__lte' : '2014-03-01'
}
qs = DatumClass.objects.filter(**filter_dictionary)
And qs would have all dates less than that date (if it has a date field). So, as a user, I could submit any key, value pairs that you could place in your dictionary.
I normally use something like this "Tag.object.annotate(num_post=Count('post')).filter(num_post__gt=2)" to get tags with more than 2 posts. I want to get number of posts with a field value (e.g post.published=True) and annote over them so that I get tags with number of published posts bigger than some value. How would I do that?
Edit:
What I want is not filter over annotated objects. What I want is something like this: Tag.objects.annotate(num_post=Count("posts that have published field set to true!")). What I am trying to learn is, how to put post that have published field set to true in Count function.
You can just replace the 2 in ..._gt=2 with some other variable - for example, a variable that gets passed into the view, or a request.GET value, or similar.
Is that what you're trying to do?
How can I retrieve the last record in a certain queryset?
Django Doc:
latest(field_name=None) returns the latest object in the table, by date, using the field_name provided as the date field.
This example returns the latest Entry in the table, according to the
pub_date field:
Entry.objects.latest('pub_date')
EDIT : You now have to use Entry.objects.latest('pub_date')
You could simply do something like this, using reverse():
queryset.reverse()[0]
Also, beware this warning from the Django documentation:
... note that reverse() should
generally only be called on a QuerySet
which has a defined ordering (e.g.,
when querying against a model which
defines a default ordering, or when
using order_by()). If no such ordering
is defined for a given QuerySet,
calling reverse() on it has no real
effect (the ordering was undefined
prior to calling reverse(), and will
remain undefined afterward).
The simplest way to do it is:
books.objects.all().last()
You also use this to get the first entry like so:
books.objects.all().first()
To get First object:
ModelName.objects.first()
To get last objects:
ModelName.objects.last()
You can use filter
ModelName.objects.filter(name='simple').first()
This works for me.
Django >= 1.6
Added QuerySet methods first() and last() which are convenience methods returning the first or last object matching the filters. Returns None if there are no objects matching.
When the queryset is already exhausted, you may do this to avoid another db hint -
last = queryset[len(queryset) - 1] if queryset else None
Don't use try...except....
Django doesn't throw IndexError in this case.
It throws AssertionError or ProgrammingError(when you run python with -O option)
You can use Model.objects.last() or Model.objects.first().
If no ordering is defined then the queryset is ordered based on the primary key. If you want ordering behaviour queryset then you can refer to the last two points.
If you are thinking to do this, Model.objects.all().last() to retrieve last and Model.objects.all().first() to retrieve first element in a queryset or using filters without a second thought. Then see some caveats below.
The important part to note here is that if you haven't included any ordering in your model the data can be in any order and you will have a random last or first element which was not expected.
Eg. Let's say you have a model named Model1 which has 2 columns id and item_count with 10 rows having id 1 to 10.[There's no ordering defined]
If you fetch Model.objects.all().last() like this, You can get any element from the list of 10 elements. Yes, It is random as there is no default ordering.
So what can be done?
You can define ordering based on any field or fields on your model. It has performance issues as well, Please check that also. Ref: Here
OR you can use order_by while fetching.
Like this: Model.objects.order_by('item_count').last()
If using django 1.6 and up, its much easier now as the new api been introduced -
Model.object.earliest()
It will give latest() with reverse direction.
p.s. - I know its old question, I posting as if going forward someone land on this question, they get to know this new feature and not end up using old method.
In a Django template I had to do something like this to get it to work with a reverse queryset:
thread.forumpost_set.all.last
Hope this helps someone looking around on this topic.
MyModel.objects.order_by('-id')[:1]
If you use ids with your models, this is the way to go to get the latest one from a qs.
obj = Foo.objects.latest('id')
You can try this:
MyModel.objects.order_by('-id')[:1]
The simplest way, without having to worry about the current ordering, is to convert the QuerySet to a list so that you can use Python's normal negative indexing. Like so:
list(User.objects.all())[-1]