Subclassed ForeignKey field not created for model - django

I've been looking at Marty Alchin's Apress book 'ProDjango' and I've run into an issue with the last chapter (chapter 11). I'm a relative noob at Python and Django, and although I've tried searching around I can't put my finger on something similar through this and other forums. I have seen Is Pro Django book still relevant? on this site but doesn't answer any specific questions.
The problem revolves around the trying to create a mechanism to track changes - a history of additions, changes and deletions. The first step is creating a user field on models you want to track. In the example project he has created a specialised ForeignKey field hard-coded to relate to Django's built-in 'User' model:
from django.db import models
from django.contrib.auth.models import User
class CurrentUserField(models.ForeignKey):
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
super(CurrentUserField, self).__init__(User, null=True, **kwargs)
There is also a 'contrib_to_class() method later. The class is in a seperate models.py file from the models to which is to be applied.
The use, as I understand, is to add a new field referencing this new field class in your model:
e.g.
class SimpleModel(models.Model):
a_user = CurrentUserField()
But the problem is that when I syncdb the field is nowhere to be found, a 'FieldError' is the usual result trying to access it.
There are many other elements in the book's solution that I haven't tried to copy here, but this is the first and fundamental part.
I'm guessng that changes in Django and/or Python itself are responsible here. Has anyone any pointers?
Thanks.
EDIT: Given the class below in registration.py which is the current_user folder. This is also where you find the models.py holding the CurrentUserField class. The InformationRequest models has:
user = CurrentUserField()
as its last field. All imports are present and appear correct.
class FieldRegistry(object):
_registry = {}
def add_field(self, model, field):
reg = self.__class__._registry.setdefault(model, [])
reg.append(field)
def get_fields(self, model):
return self.__class__._registry.get(model, [])
def __contains__(self, model):
return model in self.__class__._registry
In [1]: from current_user.registration import FieldRegistry
In [2]: from inforequest.models import InformationRequest
In [3]: registry = FieldRegistry()
In [4]: registry.add_field(InformationRequest, InformationRequest._meta.get_field('user'))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FieldDoesNotExist Traceback (most recent call last)
<ipython-input-4-6fcbbdcae066> in <module>()
----> 1 registry.add_field(InformationRequest, InformationRequest._meta.get_field('user'))
/usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/django/db/models/options.pyc in get_field(self, name, many_to_many)
353 if f.name == name:
354 return f
--> 355 raise FieldDoesNotExist('%s has no field named %r' % (self.object_name, name))
356
357 def get_field_by_name(self, name):
FieldDoesNotExist: InformationRequest has no field named 'user'
Trying to look at the admin generates "Unknown field(s)..."

I think I've found an answer to my question: django-simple-history (https://django-simple-history.readthedocs.org/en/latest/), inasmuch it provides part of solution I was trying to achieve and apparently it was built on Marty Alchin's code in Pro Django.

Related

Django custom validation before the data is saved (Enforce at the database level)

This is an extension from my post here preventing crud operations on django model
A short into to the problem , im currently using a package called django-river to implement a workflow system in my application. The issue is that they do not have a predefined 'start' , 'dropped' , 'completed' state. Their states are stored as a django model instance. This would mean that my application is unable to programmatically differentiate between the states. Therefore , the labels of these states has to be hardcoded into my program (Or does it? Maybe someone has a solution to this?)
Suppose that there is no solution to the issue other than hardcoding the states into my application , this would mean that i would have to prevent users from updating , or deleting these states that i have pre created initially.
My idea is to have a form of validation check within the django model's save method . This check would check that the first 3 instances of the State model is always start , deactivated and completed and in the same order. This would prevent the check from passing through whenever a user trys to change items at the ORM level.
However , it would seem that there is 2 issues with this:
I believe django admin doesn't run the model class save method
Someone is still able to change the states as long as the way they changed it does not pass through the save() method. AKA from the DB SQL commands
Although it is unlikely to happen , changing the name would 'break' my application and therefore i wish to be very sure that no one can edit and change these 3 predefined states.
Is there a fool proof way to do this?
My idea is to have a form of validation check within the django model's save method.
if i understand your description, maybe you can just override the save() function of your model like so:
class MyModel(models.Model):
[..]
def save(self, *args, **kwargs):
# Put your logic here ..
super(MyModel, self).save(*args, **kwargs)
I got the answer from django documentation
from django.core.exceptions import ValidationError
from django.utils.translation import gettext_lazy as _
def validate_even(value):
if value % 2 != 0:
raise ValidationError(
_('%(value)s is not an even number'),
params={'value': value},
)
You can add this to a model field via the field’s validators argument:
from django.db import models
class MyModel(models.Model):
even_field = models.IntegerField(validators=[validate_even])
FYI: It is not really mandatory to use gettext_lazy and you can use just message as follows
from django.core.exceptions import ValidationError
def validate_even(value):
if value % 2 != 0:
raise ValidationError(
('%(value)s is not an even number'),
params={'value': value},
)

How to pass a value from one class of django models to another?

I'm trying to get the name of the table that I have to download and get the fields from that table in my next form. In order to get the fields I have to first pass the name of the table that I want to download then it loads the data from that field. But I don't know how that works.
from django.db import models
from multiselectfield import MultiSelectField
from survey_a0 import details, analysis
#Backend coding module
import ast
class HomeForm3(models.Model):
Survey= models.CharField(choices=[('A','A'), ('B','B')],default='A')
def __str__(self):
return self.title
class HomeForm1(models.Model):
details.loadData(Survey)#<===== *** I need to pass the variable from above here ***
global f1
f1=analysis.getQuestion(in_json=False)
d=list(f1.keys())
for k in d:
q=list(f1[k].keys())
q.sort()
choices=tuple(map(lambda f: (f,f),q))
locals()[k]=MultiSelectField(max_length=1000,choices=choices,blank=True)
def __str__(self):
return self.title
I think you need to study Django a bit more.
The usual approach is to pass an ID or other unique identification though the URL, and to use relationships in the database to tie tables together. So for example, you might have one table of Surveys, each of which has Questions linked to it as Foreign Keys (so any Survey can access its questions as question_set by default). In turn each question will have Answer items linked to it, and the Answer items might also link to a logged-in User who supplied them.
Anyway, you might have as URL something like surveys/analyze/329 and the URLconf for the analyze view would parse out 329, which would be the id of a Survey object. You coould then iterate over all of its questions, and within each iteration retrieve all Answers for that question.
Hope this helps.

Indexing Taggit tags with Algolia for Django: '_TaggableManager' object has no attribute 'name'

I'm having some issues using the Algolia Django integration with one of my models which contains a TaggitManager() field. I'm currently being thrown back the following error when running this command:
$ python manage.py algolia_reindex
AttributeError: '_TaggableManager' object has no attribute 'name'
I've had a look at the Taggit documentation, but I'm just not sure exactly how I would marry the method outlined with the Algolia search index method.
index.py:
import django
django.setup()
from algoliasearch_django import AlgoliaIndex
class BlogPostIndex(AlgoliaIndex):
fields = ('title')
settings = {'searchableAttributes': ['title']}
index_name = 'blog_post_index'
models.py:
from taggit.managers import TaggableManager
class Post(models.Model):
...some model fields...
tags = TaggableManager()
To index the taggit tags with your Post fields, you will need to expose a callable that returns a Blog Post's tags as a list of strings.
The best option is to store them as _tags, which will let you filter on tags at query time.
Your PostIndex would look like this:
class PostIndex(AlgoliaIndex):
fields = ('title', '_tags')
settings = {'searchableAttributes': ['title']}
index_name = 'Blog Posts Index'
should_index = 'is_published'
As for Post:
class Post(models.Model):
# ...some model fields...
tags = TaggableManager()
def _tags(self):
return [t.name for t in self.tags.all()]
Following these instructions, your records will be indexed with their respective tags:
You can check the taggit branch of our Django demo, which demonstrates these steps.
To answer my own question. I have now passed in both the model and the model index so Algolia now knows what to index and what not to index. Although I would like a method to allow Algolia to index taggit tags, alas, it is probably not possible.
My apps.py file:
import algoliasearch_django as algoliasearch
from django.apps import AppConfig
from .index import PostIndex
class BlogConfig(AppConfig):
name = 'blog'
def ready(self):
Post = self.get_model('Post')
algoliasearch.register(Post, PostIndex)
My index.py file:
from algoliasearch_django import AlgoliaIndex
class PostIndex(AlgoliaIndex):
fields = ('title')
settings = {'searchableAttributes': ['title']}
index_name = 'Blog Posts Index'
should_index = 'is_published'
And that should pretty much work! Simple when you know how, or after trying about 10 different options!
So since nobody is answering I tell you how I solved this issue but I have to say that it is not a nice Way and not a "clean" Solution at all. So what I did is went into "taggit managers" in the site-packages (env->lib->python2.x/3.x-> site_packages->taggit->managers.py) In the managers.py file you will find at line 394 this beautiful piece of code:
def __get__(self, instance, model):
if instance is not None and instance.pk is None:
raise ValueError("%s objects need to have a primary key value "
"before you can access their tags." % model.__name__)
manager = self.manager(
through=self.through,
model=model,
instance=instance,
prefetch_cache_name=self.name, # this is the line I comment out when building the index,
name=self.name #this is the line I added and needs to be commented out after the index is build.
)
return manager
So what I do when I want to rebuild the search index is comment out (putting"#" infront of the line) prefetch_cache_name=self.name, and replace it with name=self.name. So building the index will work. After the Index is finished building, you have to bring everything back as it was before (switch the "#" to name=self.name again and leave prefetch_cache_name=self.name, visible again).
As already mentioned this is probably not the best way but I had the same pain and this is working for me. It takes one minute when you have the routine. Since I have to rebuild the Index maybe once every two weeks, that isn't such a deal for me but if you have to do it very often this might be annoying...
Anyway I hope that helps you.
It can help you if you using django==2+
The problem is in get_queryset() method of TaggableManager
Open file with it (my path was: Pipenv(project_name)/lib/site-packages/taggit/manager.py)
Find _TaggableManager class and change method name get_queryset to get_query_set
Done. I wish taggit's developers will fixed this in future updates

Foreign keys in django admin list display

If a django model contains a foreign key field, and if that field is shown in list mode, then it shows up as text, instead of displaying a link to the foreign object.
Is it possible to automatically display all foreign keys as links instead of flat text?
(of course it is possible to do that on a field by field basis, but is there a general method?)
Example:
class Author(models.Model):
...
class Post(models.Model):
author = models.ForeignKey(Author)
Now I choose a ModelAdmin such that the author shows up in list mode:
class PostAdmin(admin.ModelAdmin):
list_display = [..., 'author',...]
Now in list mode, the author field will just use the __unicode__ method of the Author class to display the author. On the top of that I would like a link pointing to the url of the corresponding author in the admin site. Is that possible?
Manual method:
For the sake of completeness, I add the manual method. It would be to add a method author_link in the PostAdmin class:
def author_link(self, item):
return '%s' % (item.id, unicode(item))
author_link.allow_tags = True
That will work for that particular field but that is not what I want. I want a general method to achieve the same effect. (One of the problems is how to figure out automatically the path to an object in the django admin site.)
I was looking for a solution to the same problem and ran across this question... ended up solving it myself. The OP might not be interested anymore but this could still be useful to someone.
from functools import partial
from django.forms import MediaDefiningClass
class ModelAdminWithForeignKeyLinksMetaclass(MediaDefiningClass):
def __getattr__(cls, name):
def foreign_key_link(instance, field):
target = getattr(instance, field)
return u'%s' % (
target._meta.app_label, target._meta.module_name, target.id, unicode(target))
if name[:8] == 'link_to_':
method = partial(foreign_key_link, field=name[8:])
method.__name__ = name[8:]
method.allow_tags = True
setattr(cls, name, method)
return getattr(cls, name)
raise AttributeError
class Book(models.Model):
title = models.CharField()
author = models.ForeignKey(Author)
class BookAdmin(admin.ModelAdmin):
__metaclass__ = ModelAdminWithForeignKeyLinksMetaclass
list_display = ('title', 'link_to_author')
Replace 'partial' with Django's 'curry' if not using python >= 2.5.
I don't think there is a mechanism to do what you want automatically out of the box.
But as far as determining the path to an admin edit page based on the id of an object, all you need are two pieces of information:
a) self.model._meta.app_label
b) self.model._meta.module_name
Then, for instance, to go to the edit page for that model you would do:
'../%s_%s_change/%d' % (self.model._meta.app_label, self.model._meta.module_name, item.id)
Take a look at django.contrib.admin.options.ModelAdmin.get_urls to see how they do it.
I suppose you could have a callable that takes a model name and an id, creates a model of the specified type just to get the label and name (no need to hit the database) and generates the URL a above.
But are you sure you can't get by using inlines? It would make for a better user interface to have all the related components in one page...
Edit:
Inlines (linked to docs) allow an admin interface to display a parent-child relationship in one page instead of breaking it into two.
In the Post/Author example you provided, using inlines would mean that the page for editing Posts would also display an inline form for adding/editing/removing Authors. Much more natural to the end user.
What you can do in your admin list view is create a callable in the Post model that will render a comma separated list of Authors. So you will have your Post list view showing the proper Authors, and you edit the Authors associated to a Post directly in the Post admin interface.
See https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/stable/ref/contrib/admin/#admin-reverse-urls
Example:
from django.utils.html import format_html
def get_admin_change_link(app_label, model_name, obj_id, name):
url = reverse('admin:%s_%s_change' % (app_label, model_name),
args=(obj_id,))
return format_html('%s' % (
url, unicode(name)
))

Django: Querying read-only view with no primary key

class dbview(models.Model):
# field definitions omitted for brevity
class Meta:
db_table = 'read_only_view'
def main(request):
result = dbview.objects.all()
Caught an exception while rendering: (1054, "Unknown column 'read_only_view.id' in 'field list'")
There is no primary key I can see in the view. Is there a workaround?
Comment:
I have no control over the view I am accessing with Django. MySQL browser shows columns there but no primary key.
When you say 'I have no control over the view I am accessing with Django. MySQL browser shows columns there but no primary key.'
I assume you mean that this is a legacy table and you are not allowed to add or change columns?
If so and there really isn't a primary key (even a string or non-int column*) then the table hasn't been set up very well and performance might well stink.
It doesn't matter to you though. All you need is a column that is guaranteed to be unique for every row. Set that to be 'primary_key = True in your model and Django will be happy.
There is one other possibility that would be problemmatic. If there is no column that is guaranteed to be unique then the table might be using composite primary keys. That is - it is specifying that two columns taken together will provide a unique primary key. This is perfectly valid relational modelling but unfortunatly unsupported by Django. In that case you can't do much besides raw SQL unless you can get another column added.
I have this issue all the time. I have a view that I can't or don't want to change, but I want to have a page to display composite information (maybe in the admin section). I just override the save and raise a NotImplementedError:
def save(self, **kwargs):
raise NotImplementedError()
(although this is probably not needed in most cases, but it makes me feel a bit better)
I also set managed to False in the Meta class.
class Meta:
managed = False
Then I just pick any field and tag it as the primary key. It doesn't matter if it's really unique with you are just doing filters for displaying information on a page, etc.
Seems to work fine for me. Please commment if there are any problems with this technique that I'm overlooking.
If there really is no primary key in the view, then there is no workaround.
Django requires each model to have exactly one field primary_key=True.
There should have been an auto-generated id field when you ran syncdb (if there is no primary key defined in your model, then Django will insert an AutoField for you).
This error means that Django is asking your database for the id field, but none exists. Can you run django manage.py dbshell and then DESCRIBE read_only_view; and post the result? This will show all of the columns that are in the database.
Alternatively, can you include the model definition you excluded? (and confirm that you haven't altered the model definition since you ran syncdb?)
I know this post is over a decade old, but I ran into this recently and came to SO looking for a good answer. I had to come up with a solution that addresses the OP's original question, and, additionally, allows for us to add new objects to the model for unit testing purposes, which is a problem I still had with all of the provided solutions.
main.py
from django.db import models
def in_unit_test_mode():
"""some code to detect if you're running unit tests with a temp SQLite DB, like..."""
import sys
return "test" in sys.argv
"""You wouldn't want to actually implement it with the import inside here. We have a setting in our django.conf.settings that tests to see if we're running unit tests when the project starts."""
class AbstractReadOnlyModel(models.Model):
class Meta(object):
abstract = True
managed = in_unit_test_mode()
"""This is just to help you fail fast in case a new developer, or future you, doesn't realize this is a database view and not an actual table and tries to update it."""
def save(self, *args, **kwargs):
if not in_unit_test_mode():
raise NotImplementedError(
"This is a read only model. We shouldn't be writing "
"to the {0} table.".format(self.__class__.__name__)
)
else:
super(AbstractReadOnlyModel, self).save(*args, **kwargs)
class DbViewBaseModel(AbstractReadOnlyModel):
not_actually_unique_field = IntegerField(primary_key=True)
# the rest of your field definitions
class Meta:
db_table = 'read_only_view'
if in_unit_test_mode():
class DbView(DbViewBaseModel):
not_actually_unique_field = IntegerField()
"""This line removes the primary key property from the 'not_actually_unique_field' when running unit tests, so Django will create an AutoField named 'id' on the table it creates in the temp DB that it creates for running unit tests."""
else:
class DbView(DbViewBaseModel):
pass
class MainClass(object):
#staticmethod
def main_method(request):
return DbView.objects.all()
test.py
from django.test import TestCase
from main import DbView
from main import MainClass
class TestMain(TestCase):
#classmethod
def setUpTestData(cls):
cls.object_in_view = DbView.objects.create(
"""Enter fields here to create test data you expect to be returned from your method."""
)
def testMain(self):
objects_from_view = MainClass.main_method()
returned_ids = [object.id for object in objects_from_view]
self.assertIn(self.object_in_view.id, returned_ids)