I build an app in django, but since I found out that google app engine doesn't support Django out of the box (free,cloud sql can't be used for free right?).
I decided to move to Django-nonrel, so there are few datebase Field that need converting, and I don't know how:
class Cate(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length = 100)
description = models.TextField()
create_by = models.ForeignKey(User)
create_date = models.DateTimeField('cate created date')
def __unicode__(self):
return self.name
class Product(models.Model):
product_name = models.CharField(max_length = 200)
owner = models.ForeignKey(User)
cate = models.ManyToManyField(Cate)
timestamp = models.DateTimeField('product added date')
view = models.IntegerField(default = 0)
def __unicode__(self):
return self.product_name
here is the user_profile model which extends from user model
class UserProfile(models.Model):
user = models.OneToOneField(User)
cates = models.ManyToManyField('shop.Cate')
the Cate model is created by admin, UserProfile can have many cates, and same cate can belong to many users, same as product.
please help to construct these models and maybe some tips on how to use Django-nonrel
I am really new to database
There's two ways to do this. The cheaper version is to use ListFields
from djangotoolbox.fields import ListField
class UserProfile(models.Model):
user = models.OneToOneField(User)
cates = ListField(models.ForeignKey(shop.Cate))
The ListField simply stores a list of Cate ids. There's some important limitations to this.
Your entity is limited to 1MB, so this limits the number of entities in your list. In this case, it'll still be a fairly large number, especially since there's nothing else in your entity.
You can do dataastore queries against the cates field if it's indexed. However, each entity has a limit of 5000 indexes. You'll use one for the user attribute, so in this case, your cates list will be limited to have 5000 entries. I haven't hit this before so I don't know how it would fail, I presume you'd get an exception on writing your entity.
The more expensive option is to use an intermediate mapping entity. This gives you unlimited relations for the extra expense of creating/querying the mapping entities.
class UserCateMapping(models.Model)
user = models.ForeignKey(UserProfile)
cate = models.ForeignKey(Cate)
In this case, you'll need to create a new entity for each relation, and query for the UserCateMapping entities before fetching the actual Cate or UserProfile entity you actually want to use. It's going to be more costly than the first option, but you'll have unlimited mappings.
Related
I'm making an inventory app to control the existence of tools in my workshop. Besides knowing how many things I have, I want to know where things are (what tool cart the tool is in ) and who owns the tool cart (Employee). I also need to keep a record of all damaged tools. I've been going about this in the following way:
1.- I have a model called Item that has all common filed for all tools, then I create a new model per tool type with specific field for each tool type i.e.(end-mill-cutters, drill-bits, screws, etc ). these tool Type models all inherit from Item as Multi-table inheritance.
2.- I made the models for my tools carts and its called Carritos( in spanish) this table has a One To One relation ship to Employees( since a carrito can be owned by one person only). It also has a Many To Many relationship to my Item table trough a secondary model called Transaccion, this model handles make the relation between Carrito and Items
this is the Carritos model
class Carritos(models.Model):
no_carrito = models.CharField(max_length=3, unique=True)
empleado = models.OneToOneField(Empleados, on_delete=models.CASCADE)
# empleado = models.ManyToManyField(Empleados, through='Transaccion')
items = models.ManyToManyField(Item, through='Transaccion', related_name='carritos')
f_creacion = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True)
f_actualizacion = models.DateTimeField(auto_now=True)
activo = models.BooleanField(default=True)
def get_absolute_url(self):
return reverse('inventario:carrito')#, kwargs={'pk': self.pk})
class Meta:
verbose_name_plural = "Carritos"
def __str__(self):
return self.no_carrito
class Transaccion(models.Model):
carrito = models.ForeignKey(Carritos, on_delete=models.CASCADE, related_name='items_carrito')
herramienta = models.ForeignKey(Item, on_delete=models.CASCADE, related_name='items_carrito')
cantidad = models.PositiveSmallIntegerField(default=1)
activo = models.BooleanField(default=True)
tipo = models.CharField(max_length=10, choices=CONSUMIBLE, blank=True, null=True)
motivo = models.CharField(max_length=10, blank=True, null=True)
def get_absolute_url(self):
return reverse('inventario:carrito')#, kwargs={'pk': self.pk})
3.- The idea I had to get the carritos logic is to get a list of existing carts in the carts main page and have a button bind to a CreateView CBV to create a new carrito if needed.
This list would also have a button bind to an UpdateView CBV in order to be able to change the employee in case the employee quits and an other button bind to a function that in theory would work as a DetailView to see all data assigned to carrito like (employee assigned to it, carrito number, and all Items in the carrito).
My intention was to be able to add an Item inside this view and have all items listed, I managed to be able to add Items and also managed to display all Items and the amount of those Items the carrito has. I had some issues on how to go about when multiple items of the same kind needed to be added to the carrito (let's say I needed to add 2 cutters exactly the same). But I figured that since I all ready had the Transaccion table, and this table tied Item to Carritos. I could use this to record every items as 1 of each and have an active field as Boolean, this way I could display and aggregate all distinct items and sum totals of every item in my view. It works for displaying the quantities.
The problem I'm currently are having, is if I want to edit a tool type and deactivate one of the items in the transaction model I always get the firs items on the list no matter how I choose to filter it.
My views for carritos creation
# =========================================================================== #
# LOGICA PARA CREAR CARRITOS
# =========================================================================== #
# ===================> Logica relacinado con Cortadores <=====================#
def home_carrito(request):
template_name = 'inventario/carrito/createcarrito.html'
model = Carritos
carritos = Carritos.objects.all()
if carritos:
return render(request, template_name, {'carritos':carritos})
else:
return render(request,template_name)
class CarritoCreate(CreateView):
model = Carritos
fields = [
'no_carrito',
'empleado',
'activo',
]
class ItemCreate(CreateView):
model = Transaccion
fields = [
'carrito',
'herramienta',
]
def detalle_carrito(request, pk):
model = Carritos, Transaccion
template_name = 'inventario/carrito/detalles_carrito.html'
carritos = Carritos.objects.filter(pk=pk)
# GEST ALL TOOLS ASSIGNE TO CARRITO'S PK THAT ARE ACTIVE
# TRY TO GET ALL ACTIVE ITEMS THAT BELONG TO CARRITO = PK AND AGREGATE TOTAL ITEMS PER TYPE
cantidades = Transaccion.objects.values('herramienta__description').annotate(Sum('cantidad')).filter(activo=True, carrito_id=pk)
# GEST ALL TOOLS ASSIGNE TO CARRITO'S PK THAT ARE NOT ACTIVE
eliminados = Transaccion.objects.filter(activo=False,carrito_id=pk)
return render(request,template_name, {'carrito':carritos, 'trans':cantidades, 'eliminados':eliminados})
class CarritoUpdate(UpdateView):
model = Carritos
fields = [
'no_carrito',
'empleado',
'activo',
]
template_name_suffix = '_update_form'
def ItemUpdate(UpdateView):
model = Transaccion
fields = [
'carrito',
'herramienta',
'cantidad',
'tipo',
'motivo',
'activo',
]
template_name_suffix = '_update_form'
def detalle_Items(request, pk):
model = Transaccion
template_name = 'inventario/carrito/test-template.html'
try:
items_update = Transaccion.objects.filter(activo=True, carrito_id=pk, herramienta_id=pk)
except Transaccion.DoesNotExist:
raise Http404()
return render(request, template_name, {'items_update':items_update})
So what I need in the first place is to know if what I'm doing is logical? or make sense. Scond thing I need is to know if there a better way and how?
and finally I need help resolving my issue: I need to get into an updateview for every Item in my Transaccion model and be able to disable or enable that record.
Different people would take different approaches. So far I think what you have built would absolutely work, but what becomes complicated is building the realtime inventories, which looks like its built from the transaction log. What I see as missing from the model is the snapshot of real time inventories available. Because we aren't talking about a data model that changes so frequently - like ad impressions - you can store that upon transaction vice computing it as needed.
For instance, your global inventory of hammers is 5 hammers. One employee adds a hammer to a cart. From here you articulated a couple of different use cases. One is that you need to know that employee XYZ (which implies a specific cart based on the 1-to-1) has that specific hammer. What you'd also like to know is how many hammers you have available? You may also want to understand the turnover of specific assets. Does employee XYZ maintain items in his cart longer than the average employee?
To do this I think you'd need to talk about the API layer which orchestrates that logic and the addition of another object which snapshots actual inventory instead of computing that from the transaction log. Why I bring up the API layer is that it may be a cleaner abstraction to place the logic for orchestrating multiple model changes in that than having the model itself house that logic.
So in short, I think what you've built works - but the logical expression of the use cases you've articulated are handled at the viewset/ modelviewset layer in an API. Because thats where you'll need to prep the data to be loaded into a specific format for visualization. And thats where what is easily serializable becomes the dominant force in model complexity.
Yes, this is an assignment, and yes, I've spent some time on it and now I need help.
My task has two models, Server and Client and they are in 1-N relationship. as noted below
# models.py
class Server(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=255, unique=True, null=False, blank=False)
maximum_clients = models.IntegerField(default=1,null=False, blank=False)
class Client(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=255, unique=True, null=False, blank=False)
active = models.BooleanField(default=True)
server = models.ForeignKey(Server)
I have created a form with ModelForm which allows me to create a new client on a given server, but the prerequisite of the task is to only offer servers which have free capacity (their maximum_clients is less than actual clients) so this is what I did
#forms.py
from django.db.models import Count
qs = Server.objects.annotate(Count('client'))
server_choices = []
for server in qs:
if server.client__count < server.maximum_clients:
server_choices.append((server,server))
class ClientForm(forms.ModelForm):
name = forms.CharField(label='Client name')
server = forms.ChoiceField(choices=server_choices)
class Meta:
model = Client
fields = ('name','server',)
This approach populates the select with the right servers based on a precondition that I mentioned. However, saving this form produces an error like Cannot assign "u'fifty'": "Client.server" must be a "Server" instance. Fifty is the name of the server with maximum_clients = 50
There is a similar form on admin screens which I also modified to show only available servers and saving there produces the same error.
This is not the right approach. Apart from the error you are seeing, you will also find that your server_choices only update when you restart the webserver, rather than doing so whenever the Server objects themselves change.
You have a foreign key, and need to select from a subset of the related objects. The correct field for that is a ModelChoiceField; this takes a queryset which you can filter in the definition. Since your filter depends on a field in the same model, you need to use an F object.
class ClientForm(forms.ModelForm):
name = forms.CharField(label='Client name')
server = forms.ModelChoiceField(
queryset=Server.objects.annotate(client_count=Count('client')).filter(client_count__lt=F('maximum_clients')
)
I hope this is not a duplicate question. I am trying to setup models in django.
In model 1 I have one kind items (parts), these can together form item type 2 (car).
I get the prices for all of these from outside interface to a model prices.
How can I setup the relationship between price - > part and price - > car.
I do not know when I get the prices if the ident belongs to car och part.
class parts(models.Model):
ident = models.CharField("IDENT", max_length = 12, unique = True, primary_key = True)
name = models.CharField(max_length=30)
class car(models.Model):
ident = models.CharField("IDENT", max_length = 12, unique = True)
start_date = models.DateField()
end_date = models.DateField()
parts= models.ManyToManyField(parts)
class Prices(models.Model):
ident= models.CharField(max_length=12)
price = models.DecimalField(max_digits=10, decimal_places= 4)
date = models.DateField()
def __unicode__(self):
return self.ident
class Meta:
unique_together = (("ident", "date"),)
I would imagine you would not store price in your model since you need this to be 100% real time. So you have;
car models.py
from parts.models import parts
name = models.CharField(max_length=100)
parts = models.ManyToManyField(parts)
Hopefully you're not trying to develop like a full scale autozone type deal, but if it's simply a car model object that is comprised of many parts than this is the basic setup you would want. having the many to many relationship to parts allows one car to have many parts. parts can belong to many cars. You don't have to specify a manytomany relationship in the parts model as the two way communication will already be handled in your cars model.
As far as price is concerned you could have a price database field in your parts model, but once again if this needs to be real time, you probably want to request that price via an api and display it directly in your webpage.
I'm new in using GenericForeignKey, and I couldn't make it to work in a query statement. The tables are roughly like the following:
class Ticket(models.Model):
issue_ct = models.ForeignKey(ContentType, related_name='issue_content_type')
issue_id = models.PositiveIntegerField(null=True, blank=True)
issue = generic.GenericForeignKey('issue_ct', 'issue_id')
class Issue(models.Model):
scan = models.ForeignKey(Scan)
A scan creates one issue, an issue generates some tickets, and I made Issue as a foreign key to Ticket table. Now I have a Scan object, and I want to query for all the tickets that related to this scan. I tried this first:
tickets = Tickets.objects.filter(issue__scan=scan_obj)
which doesn't work. Then I tried this:
issue = Issue.objects.get(scan=scan_obj)
content_type = ContentType.objects.get_for_model(Issue)
tickets = Tickets.objects.filter(content_type=content_type, issue=issue)
Still doesn't work. I need to know how to do these kind of queries in django? Thanks.
The Ticket.issue field you've defined will help you go from a Ticket instance to the Issue it's attached to, but it won't let you go backwards. You're close with your second example, but you need to use the issue_id field - you can't query on the GenericForeignKey (it just helps you retrieve the object when you have a Ticket instance). Try this:
from django.contrib.contenttypes.models import ContentType
issue = Issue.objects.get(scan=scan_obj)
tickets = Ticket.objects.filter(
issue_id=issue.id,
issue_ct=ContentType.objects.get_for_model(issue).id
)
Filtering across a GenericForeignKey can by creating a second model that shares the db_table with Ticket. First split up Ticket into an abstract model and concrete model.
class TicketBase(models.Model):
issue_ct = models.ForeignKey(ContentType, related_name='issue_content_type')
issue_id = models.PositiveIntegerField(null=True, blank=True)
class Meta:
abstract = True
class Ticket(TicketBase):
issue = generic.GenericForeignKey('issue_ct', 'issue_id')
Then create a model that also subclasses TicketBase. This subclass will have all the same fields except issue which is instead defined as a ForeignKey. Adding a custom Manager allows it to be filtered to just a single ContentType.
Since this subclass does not need to be synced or migrated it can be created dynamically using type().
def subclass_for_content_type(content_type):
class Meta:
db_table = Ticket._meta.db_table
class Manager(models.Manager):
""" constrain queries to a single content type """
def get_query_set(self):
return super(Manager, self).get_query_set().filter(issue_ct=content_type)
attrs = {
'related_to': models.ForeignKey(content_type.model_class()),
'__module__': 'myapp.models',
'Meta': Meta,
'objects': Manager()
}
return type("Ticket_%s" % content_type.name, (TicketBase,), attrs)
I am working with an existing database that I can not modify and having some trouble trying to deal with presenting forms for modifying the database in Django. The structure in question is as follows and all models are unmanaged.
class Persons(models.Model):
personid = models.BigIntegerField(primary_key=True, db_column='PersonID')
....
class Phones(models.Model):
phoneid = models.BigIntegerField(primary_key=True, db_column='PhoneID')
number = models.CharField(max_length=60, db_column='Number', blank=True)
type = models.CharField(max_length=15, db_column='Type', blank=True)
...
class Personsphones(models.Model):
personphoneid = models.BigIntegerField(primary_key=True, db_column='PersonPhoneID')
personid = models.ForeignKey(Persons, db_column='PersonID')
phoneid = models.ForeignKey(Phones, db_column='PhoneID')
...
I want to create a form to display all of the 'Phones' associated with a particular 'Persons' and in addition be able to modify/add/remove 'Phones' belonging to a 'Persons'. Right now the only thing I can think of is to display the 'Phones' in a modelformset and then if one is added or removed manually set the 'Personsphones' relation. Any ideas on how to best deal with this model setup?
For making changes to your models you may want to use django-south http://south.aeracode.org/docs/
As far as displaying your 'Phone' under your forms.py you may want to set up class meta like so. With this any changes made to models will reflect on change
class Meta:
model = Persons
exclude = ('user')
In models you may want to use Foreignkey fore relationships between phones and Persons. Better seen in action here https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/models/fields/#foreignkey