Is there a way to tell django not to follow a foreign key relationship when you instantiate a model instance? Something to put on the model itself? Something to pass to a queryset? I'd like to have a queryset that only returns instances with the foreign key id -- I don't want the instances to go off making queries to find its relatives. Something like the opposite of select_related?
The default behaviour of Django is to wait until a foreign key relationship is accessed before performing a database queries to populate the related model instance.
To side-step the automatic querying for related instances, rather than accessing the ForeignKey field attribute directly, access attribute_id, e.g.
class Person(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=200)
user = models.ForeignKey('auth.User')
# access the user id via user_id
person = Person.objects.all()[0]
print person.user_id
Try defer
Related
I have a table called user_info. I want to get names of all the users. So the table has a field called name. So in sql I do something like
SELECT distinct(name) from user_info
But I am not able to figure out how to do the same in django. Usually if I already have certain value known, then I can do something like below.
user_info.objects.filter(name='Alex')
And then get the information for that particular user.
But in this case for the given table, I want to get all the name values using django ORM just like I do in sql.
Here is my django model
class user_info(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=255)
priority = models.CharField(max_length=1)
org = models.CharField(max_length=20)
How can I do this in django?
You can use values_list.
user_info.objects.values_list('name', flat=True).distinct()
Note, in Python classes are usually defined in InitialCaps: your model should be UserInfo.
You can use values_list() as given in Daniel's answer, which will provide you your data in a list containing the values in the field. Or you can also use, values() like this:
user_info.object.values('name')
which will return you a queryset containing a dictionary. values_list() and values() are used to select the columns in a table.
Adding on to the accepted answer, if the field is a foreign key the id values(numerical) are returned in the queryset. Hence if you are expecting other kinds of values defined in the model of which the foreign key is part then you have to modify the query like this:
`Post.objects.values_list('author__username')`
Post is a model class having author as a foreign key field which in turn has its username field:
Here, "author" field was appended with double undersocre followed by the field "name", otherwise primary key of the model will be returned in queryset. I assume this was #Carlo's doubt in accepted answer.
Which one would be optimal for creating the followers-following system in Django.
1.Foreign Key
class Follower(models.Model):
current_user = models.ForeignKey(User,on_delete=models.CASCADE,related_name='following')
following_id = models.ForeignKey(User,on_delete=models.CASCADE,related_name='followers')
2.Many-To-Many
class Follower(models.Model):
current_user = models.ForeignKey(User,on_delete=models.CASCADE,related_name='following')
followers = models.ManyToManyField(User)
So, for instance, if we want to retrive the following list of the user:
1.Foreign Key
Follower.objects.get(following_id=1).following.all()
2 Many-To-Many
User.object.get(user=1).follower_set.all().values('current_user')
If you want to add metadata about someone following you don't have much choice but to use a M2M with a through table. Otherwise, you might as well use option 1.
Is Django or maybe POSTGRESQL losing information about primary keys and foreign keys when you create a view which relates to a view which relates to a table, which has primary and foreign keys?
I have a View-A (all 3 fields are Foreign Keys) and that view gets 2 fields from a View-B. The View-B gets its fields from a table-C. table-C has primary key and foreign key.
So when i access View-A with my django model, how do i treat those fields? I know they are foreign keys, but any kind of filter results in a empty Queryset.
if i use something like
myview = viewA.objects.using(db).all() # getting all the data
myview2= viewA.objects.using(db).all()[:5] # getting 5 objects
.
class viewA(models.Model):
class Meta:
db_table = "viewA"
x = models.ForeignKey(x, primary_key=True)
y = models.ForeignKey(y)
z = models.ForeignKey(z)
The problem is that i can not filter!
response=viewA.objects.using(db).filter(y_id=1) ERROR:= FieldError
Behind all those FK, there are integer/bigint fields.
Edit:
Since this are INNER JOINS i would like to access not only the fields from ViewA, but also from ViewB. x,y,z are from type ViewB. Maybe use select_related()?
So any clues if Django or postgres lose information about keys in views which relate to other views?
See my two comments; however, to answer your specific "query".
If you go to the docs, and see this paragraph:
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/models/fields/#database-representation
You will note that foreign keys, by default, have the _id appended to their names. Now, there are occasions in which you need to access the column name directly and it's a good idea to be aware of the column as a "bigger picture" sort of thing, but at as far as Model API is concerned, you should, when doing something against a foreign key, use the attribute name given in the model instance.
Edit from your comment:
If you want to drill down and filter against some field in the foreignkey object, you just do y__fieldname = somevalue
Note that fieldname must be in the y object.
If you are getting back and empty queryset, this is because nothing in that column matched the value you gave it.
To test this, create a queryset directly on the "y" object and then try to do y.objects.fitler(fieldname=somevalue)
if you still get back and empty queryset, you know that value doesn't exist. Furthermore, you can look into the database and try a raw query in pgadminIII if you have that set up.
I have two models: UserProfile (extended from user) and Cv. I created another model that have two foreign key that come from theses models.
class cv(models.Model):
user = models.ForeignKey(User, unique=True)
cv_d= models.TextField(max_length=1100)
...
class cvv(models.Model):
user = models.ForeignKey(User)
cv= models.ForeignKey(cv)
date = models.DateTimeField(auto_now=True)
In my view, I am trying to insert value on cvv:
...
obj = cv.objects.get(pk=id,active=True)
add=cvv(user=request.user, cv=obj)
add.save()
But, I am getting the following error:
(1452, 'Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails
How can I insert theses 2 foreign key on my model?
Welcome to one of the many reasons why you shouldn't use MySQL. This happens most often when you have one table that is MyISAM and one table that is InnoDB. Since myISAM doesn't support FK constraints all hell breaks loose when django creates a FK between the tables.
The fix is to either make both tables InnoDB or MyISAM and not to mix them. Or even better drop the bad RDMS for something not MySQL.
I wanted a Django model with 2 foreign keys from the same table. It's an event table which has 2 columns for employees: the 'actor' and the 'receiver'. But I get this error:
Error: One or more models did not validate: tasks.task: Intermediary
model TaskEvent has more than one foreign key to Employee, which is
ambiguous and is not permitted.
Is there a better way to model this?
I think I'm going to add a TaskEvent_to_Employee table. There will be two records in it, one for each of the two employees related to each TaskEvent. Does anyone know an easier workaround?
I haven't done this yet, but I used inspectdb to generate the models.py file from an existing DB that does exactly that - this is what inspectdb threw back, so it should work:
creator = models.ForeignKey(Users, null=True, related_name='creator')
assignee = models.ForeignKey(Users, null=True, related_name='assignee')
Hope that works for you - if it doesn't I am going to have a problem too.
I think what you're looking for is the related_name property on ForeignKeyFields. This will allow you to reference the same table, but give django special names for the relationship.
More Info:
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/models/fields/#django.db.models.ForeignKey.related_name
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/topics/db/queries/#backwards-related-objects
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/topics/db/examples/many_to_one/
From the error message, it sounds like you're trying to put two foreign keys to the same object on an intermediary table used via the through argument to ManyToManyField, the documentation for which states:
When you set up the intermediary
model, you explicitly specify foreign
keys to the models that are involved
in the ManyToMany relation. This
explicit declaration defines how the
two models are related.
There are a few restrictions on the
intermediate model:
Your intermediate model must contain one - and only one - foreign key to
the target model (this would be Person
in our example). If you have more than
one foreign key, a validation error
will be raised.
Your intermediate model must contain one - and only one - foreign key to
the source model (this would be Group
in our example). If you have more than
one foreign key, a validation error
will be raised.
Using related_name was my solution:
class Sample(models.model):
...
class Mymodel(models.model):
example1 = models.ForeignKey(Sample, related_name='sample1')
example2 = models.ForeignKey(Sample, related_name='sample2')
The fact that two columns are part of one table implies that the two fields are related, therefor to reference them individually is not ideal. The ForeignKey of your model should be the primary key of the table you are referencing:
event = models.ForeignKey('event')
You would then reference the columns as such:
foo.event.actor
foo.event.receiver
If you wish you could also change the way your class/model references the foreign attributes with properties. In your class you would do the following:
#property
def actor(self):
return self.event.actor
#property
def receiver(self):
return self.event.receiver
This would allow you to then call foo.actor and foo.receiver but I believe the longer, foo.event.actor would be more pythonic