I have 2 tables, simpleDB_all and simpleDB_some. The "all" table has an entry for every item I want, while the "some" table has entries only for some items that need additional information. The Django models for these are:
class all(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=40)
important_info = models.CharField(max_length=40)
class some(models.Model):
all_key = models.OneToOneField(all)
extra_info = models.CharField(max_length=40)
I'd like to create a view that shows every item in "all" with the extra info if it exists in "some". Since I'm using a 1-1 field I can do this with almost complete success:
allitems = all.objects.all()
for item in allitems:
print item.name, item.important_info, item.some.extra_info
but when I get to the item that doesn't have a corresponding entry in the "some" table I get a DoesNotExist exception.
Ideally I'd be doing this loop inside a template, so it's impossible to wrap it around a "try" clause. Any thoughts?
I can get the desired effect directly in SQL using a query like this:
SELECT all.name, all.important_info, some.extra_info
FROM all LEFT JOIN some ON all.id = some.all_key_id;
But I'd rather not use raw SQL.
You won't get a DoesNotExist exception in the template - they are hidden, by design, by the template system.
The SQL you give is what is generated, more or less, when you use select_related on your query (if you're using Django 1.2 or a checkout more recent than r12307, from February):
allitems = all.objects.select_related('some')
Related
Assuming the following example model:
# models.py
class event(models.Model):
location = models.CharField(max_length=10)
type = models.CharField(max_length=10)
date = models.DateTimeField()
attendance = models.IntegerField()
I want to get the attendance number for the latest date of each event location and type combination, using Django ORM. According to the Django Aggregation documentation, we can achieve something close to this, using values preceding the annotation.
... the original results are grouped according to the unique combinations of the fields specified in the values() clause. An annotation is then provided for each unique group; the annotation is computed over all members of the group.
So using the example model, we can write:
event.objects.values('location', 'type').annotate(latest_date=Max('date'))
which does indeed group events by location and type, but does not return the attendance field, which is the desired behavior.
Another approach I tried was to use distinct i.e.:
event.objects.distinct('location', 'type').annotate(latest_date=Max('date'))
but I get an error
NotImplementedError: annotate() + distinct(fields) is not implemented.
I found some answers which rely on database specific features of Django, but I would like to find a solution which is agnostic to the underlying relational database.
Alright, I think this one might actually work for you. It is based upon an assumption, which I think is correct.
When you create your model object, they should all be unique. It seems highly unlikely that that you would have two events on the same date, in the same location of the same type. So with that assumption, let's begin: (as a formatting note, class Names tend to start with capital letters to differentiate between classes and variables or instances.)
# First you get your desired events with your criteria.
results = Event.objects.values('location', 'type').annotate(latest_date=Max('date'))
# Make an empty 'list' to store the values you want.
results_list = []
# Then iterate through your 'results' looking up objects
# you want and populating the list.
for r in results:
result = Event.objects.get(location=r['location'], type=r['type'], date=r['latest_date'])
results_list.append(result)
# Now you have a list of objects that you can do whatever you want with.
You might have to look up the exact output of the Max(Date), but this should get you on the right path.
I've always found the Django orm's handling of subclassing models to be pretty spiffy. That's probably why I run into problems like this one.
Take three models:
class A(models.Model):
field1 = models.CharField(max_length=255)
class B(A):
fk_field = models.ForeignKey('C')
class C(models.Model):
field2 = models.CharField(max_length=255)
So now you can query the A model and get all the B models, where available:
the_as = A.objects.all()
for a in the_as:
print a.b.fk_field.field2 #Note that this throws an error if there is no B record
The problem with this is that you are looking at a huge number of database calls to retrieve all of the data.
Now suppose you wanted to retrieve a QuerySet of all A models in the database, but with all of the subclass records and the subclass's foreign key records as well, using select_related() to limit your app to a single database call. You would write a query like this:
the_as = A.objects.select_related("b", "b__fk_field").all()
One query returns all of the data needed! Awesome.
Except not. Because this version of the query is doing its own filtering, even though select_related is not supposed to filter any results at all:
set_1 = A.objects.select_related("b", "b__fk_field").all() #Only returns A objects with associated B objects
set_2 = A.objects.all() #Returns all A objects
len(set_1) > len(set_2) #Will always be False
I used the django-debug-toolbar to inspect the query and found the problem. The generated SQL query uses an INNER JOIN to join the C table to the query, instead of a LEFT OUTER JOIN like other subclassed fields:
SELECT "app_a"."field1", "app_b"."fk_field_id", "app_c"."field2"
FROM "app_a"
LEFT OUTER JOIN "app_b" ON ("app_a"."id" = "app_b"."a_ptr_id")
INNER JOIN "app_c" ON ("app_b"."fk_field_id" = "app_c"."id");
And it seems if I simply change the INNER JOIN to LEFT OUTER JOIN, then I get the records that I want, but that doesn't help me when using Django's ORM.
Is this a bug in select_related() in Django's ORM? Is there any work around for this, or am I simply going to have to do a direct query of the database and map the results myself? Should I be using something like Django-Polymorphic to do this?
It looks like a bug, specifically it seems to be ignoring the nullable nature of the A->B relationship, if for example you had a foreign key reference to B in A instead of the subclassing, that foreign key would of course be nullable and django would use a left join for it. You should probably raise this in the django issue tracker. You could also try using prefetch_related instead of select_related that might get around your issue.
I found a work around for this, but I will wait a while to accept it in hopes that I can get some better answers.
The INNER JOIN created by the select_related('b__fk_field') needs to be removed from the underlying SQL so that the results aren't filtered by the B records in the database. So the new query needs to leave the b__fk_field parameter in select_related out:
the_as = A.objects.select_related('b')
However, this forces us to call the database everytime a C object is accessed from the A object.
for a in the_as:
#Note that this throws an DoesNotExist error if a doesn't have an
#associated b
print a.b.fk_field.field2 #Hits the database everytime.
The hack to work around this is to get all of the C objects we need from the database from one query and then have each B object reference them manually. We can do this because the database call that accesses the B objects retrieved will have the fk_field_id that references their associated C object:
c_ids = [a.b.fk_field_id for a in the_as] #Get all the C ids
the_cs = C.objects.filter(pk__in=c_ids) #Run a query to get all of the needed C records
for c in the_cs:
for a in the_as:
if a.b.fk_field_id == c.pk: #Throws DoesNotExist if no b associated with a
a.b.fk_field = c
break
I'm sure there's a functional way to write that without the nested loop, but this illustrates what's happening. It's not ideal, but it provides all of the data with the absolute minimum number of database hits - which is what I wanted.
I have two tables like so:
class Collection(models.Model):
name = models.CharField()
class Image(models.Model):
name = models.CharField()
image = models.ImageField()
collection = models.ForeignKey(Collection)
I'd like to retrieve the first image out of every collection. I have attempted:
image_list = Image.objects.order_by('collection.id').distinct('collection.id')
but it didn't work out the way I expected :(
Any ideas?
Thanks.
Don't use dots to separate fields that span relations in Django; the double-underscore convention is used instead -- it means "follow this relation to get to this field"
this is more correct:
image_list = Image.objects.order_by('collection__id').distinct('collection__id')
However, it probably doesn't do what you want.
The concept of "first" doesn't always apply in relational databases the way you seem to be using it. For all of the records in the image table with the same collection id, there is no record which is 'first' or 'last' -- they're all just records. You could put another field on that table to define a specific order, or you could order by id, or alphabetically by name, but none of those will happen by default.
What will probably work best for you is to get the list of collections with one query, and then get a single item per collection, in separate queries:
collection_ids = Image.objects.values_list('collection', flat=True).distinct()
image_list = [
Image.objects.filter(collection__id=c)[0] for c in collection_ids
]
If you want to apply an order to the Images, to define which is 'first', then modify it like this:
collection_ids = Image.objects.values_list('collection', flat=True).distinct()
image_list = [
Image.objects.filter(collection__id=c).order_by('-id')[0] for c in collection_ids
]
You could also write raw SQL -- MySQL aggregation has the interesting property that fields which are not aggregated over can still appear in the final output, and essentially take a random value from the set of matching records. Something like this might work:
Image.objects.raw("SELECT image.* FROM app_image GROUP BY collection_id")
This query should get you one image from each collection, but you will have no control over which one is returned.
As written in my comment, you cannot use specific fields with distinct under MySQL. However, you can achieve the same result with the following:
from itertools import groupby
all_images = Image.objects.order_by('collection__id')
images_by_collection = groupby(all_images, lambda image: image.collection_id)
image_list = sum([group for key, group in images_by_collection], [])
Unfortunately, this results in a "bigger" query to the DB (all images are retrieved).
dict([(c.id, c.image_set.all()[0]) for c in Collection.objects.all()])
That will create a dictionary of the first image (by default ordering) in each collection, keyed by the collection's id. Be aware, though, that this will generate 1+N queries, where N is the total number of collection objects.
To get around that, you'll either need to wait for Django 1.4 and prefetch_related or use something like django-batch-select.
First get the distinct result, then do your filters.
I think you should try this one.
image_list = Image.objects.distinct()
image_list = image_list.order_by('collection__id')
Say I have a model:
class Foo(models.Model):
...
and another model that basically gives per-user information about Foo:
class UserFoo(models.Model):
user = models.ForeignKey(User)
foo = models.ForeignKey(Foo)
...
class Meta:
unique_together = ("user", "foo")
I'd like to generate a queryset of Foos but annotated with the (optional) related UserFoo based on user=request.user.
So it's effectively a LEFT OUTER JOIN on (foo.id = userfoo.foo_id AND userfoo.user_id = ...)
A solution with raw might look like
foos = Foo.objects.raw("SELECT foo.* FROM foo LEFT OUTER JOIN userfoo ON (foo.id = userfoo.foo_id AND foo.user_id = %s)", [request.user.id])
You'll need to modify the SELECT to include extra fields from userfoo which will be annotated to the resulting Foo instances in the queryset.
This answer might not be exactly what you are looking for but since its the first result in google when searching for "django annotate outer join" so I will post it here.
Note: tested on Djang 1.7
Suppose you have the following models
class User(models.Model):
name = models.CharField()
class EarnedPoints(models.Model):
points = models.PositiveIntegerField()
user = models.ForeignKey(User)
To get total user points you might do something like that
User.objects.annotate(points=Sum("earned_points__points"))
this will work but it will not return users who have no points, here we need outer join without any direct hacks or raw sql
You can achieve that by doing this
users_with_points = User.objects.annotate(points=Sum("earned_points__points"))
result = users_with_points | User.objects.exclude(pk__in=users_with_points)
This will be translated into OUTER LEFT JOIN and all users will be returned. users who has no points will have None value in their points attribute.
Hope that helps
Notice: This method does not work in Django 1.6+. As explained in tcarobruce's comment below, the promote argument was removed as part of ticket #19849: ORM Cleanup.
Django doesn't provide an entirely built-in way to do this, but it's not neccessary to construct an entirely raw query. (This method doesn't work for selecting * from UserFoo, so I'm using .comment as an example field to include from UserFoo.)
The QuerySet.extra() method allows us to add terms to the SELECT and WHERE clauses of our query. We use this to include the fields from UserFoo table in our results, and limit our UserFoo matches to the current user.
results = Foo.objects.extra(
select={"user_comment": "UserFoo.comment"},
where=["(UserFoo.user_id IS NULL OR UserFoo.user_id = %s)"],
params=[request.user.id]
)
This query still needs the UserFoo table. It would be possible to use .extras(tables=...) to get an implicit INNER JOIN, but for an OUTER JOIN we need to modify the internal query object ourself.
connection = (
UserFoo._meta.db_table, User._meta.db_table, # JOIN these tables
"user_id", "id", # on these fields
)
results.query.join( # modify the query
connection, # with this table connection
promote=True, # as LEFT OUTER JOIN
)
We can now evaluate the results. Each instance will have a .user_comment property containing the value from UserFoo, or None if it doesn't exist.
print results[0].user_comment
(Credit to this blog post by Colin Copeland for showing me how to do OUTER JOINs.)
I stumbled upon this problem I was unable to solve without resorting to raw SQL, but I did not want to rewrite the entire query.
Following is a description on how you can augment a queryset with an external raw sql, without having to care about the actual query that generates the queryset.
Here's a typical scenario: You have a reddit like site with a LinkPost model and a UserPostVote mode, like this:
class LinkPost(models.Model):
some fields....
class UserPostVote(models.Model):
user = models.ForeignKey(User,related_name="post_votes")
post = models.ForeignKey(LinkPost,related_name="user_votes")
value = models.IntegerField(null=False, default=0)
where the userpostvote table collect's the votes of users on posts.
Now you're trying to display the front page for a user with a pagination app, but you want the arrows to be red for posts the user has voted on.
First you get the posts for the page:
post_list = LinkPost.objects.all()
paginator = Paginator(post_list,25)
posts_page = paginator.page(request.GET.get('page'))
so now you have a QuerySet posts_page generated by the django paginator that selects the posts to display. How do we now add the annotation of the user's vote on each post before rendering it in a template?
Here's where it get's tricky and I was unable to find a clean ORM solution. select_related won't allow you to only get votes corresponding to the logged in user and looping over the posts would do bunch queries instead of one and doing it all raw mean's we can't use the queryset from the pagination app.
So here's how I do it:
q1 = posts_page.object_list.query # The query object of the queryset
q1_alias = q1.get_initial_alias() # This forces the query object to generate it's sql
(q1str, q1param) = q1.sql_with_params() #This gets the sql for the query along with
#parameters, which are none in this example
we now have the query for the queryset, and just wrap it, alias and left outer join to it:
q2_augment = "SELECT B.value as uservote, A.*
from ("+q1str+") A LEFT OUTER JOIN reddit_userpostvote B
ON A.id = B.post_id AND B.user_id = %s"
q2param = (request.user.id,)
posts_augmented = LinkPost.objects.raw(q2_augment,q1param+q2param)
voila! Now we can access post.uservote for a post in the augmented queryset.
And we just hit the database with a single query.
The two queries you suggest are as good as you're going to get (without using raw()), this type of query isn't representable in the ORM at present time.
You could do this using simonw's django-queryset-transform to avoid hard-coding a raw SQL query - the code would look something like this:
def userfoo_retriever(qs):
userfoos = dict((i.pk, i) for i in UserFoo.objects.filter(foo__in=qs))
for i in qs:
i.userfoo = userfoos.get(i.pk, None)
for foo in Foo.objects.filter(…).tranform(userfoo_retriever):
print foo.userfoo
This approach has been quite successful for this need and to efficiently retrieve M2M values; your query count won't be quite as low but on certain databases (cough MySQL cough) doing two simpler queries can often be faster than one with complex JOINs and many of the cases where I've most needed it had additional complexity which would have been even harder to hack into an ORM expression.
As for outerjoins:
Once you have a queryset qs from foo that includes a reference to columns from userfoo, you can promote the inner join to an outer join with
qs.query.promote_joins(["userfoo"])
You shouldn't have to resort to extra or raw for this.
The following should work.
Foo.objects.filter(
Q(userfoo_set__user=request.user) |
Q(userfoo_set=None) # This forces the use of LOUTER JOIN.
).annotate(
comment=F('userfoo_set__comment'),
# ... annotate all the fields you'd like to see added here.
)
The only way I see to do this without using raw etc. is something like this:
Foo.objects.filter(
Q(userfoo_set__isnull=True)|Q(userfoo_set__isnull=False)
).annotate(bar=Case(
When(userfoo_set__user_id=request.user, then='userfoo_set__bar')
))
The double Q trick ensures that you get your left outer join.
Unfortunately you can't set your request.user condition in the filter() since it may filter out successful joins on UserFoo instances with the wrong user, hence filtering out rows of Foo that you wanted to keep (which is why you ideally want the condition in the ON join clause instead of in the WHERE clause).
Because you can't filter out the rows that have an unwanted user value, you have to select rows from UserFoo with a CASE.
Note also that one Foo may join to many UserFoo records, so you may want to consider some way to retrieve distinct Foos from the output.
maparent's comment put me on the right way:
from django.db.models.sql.datastructures import Join
for alias in qs.query.alias_map.values():
if isinstance(alias, Join):
alias.nullable = True
qs.query.promote_joins(qs.query.tables)
In django 1.2:
I have a queryset with an extra parameter which refers to a table which is not currently included in the query django generates for this queryset.
If I add an order_by to the queryset which refers to the other table, django adds joins to the other table in the proper way and the extra works. But without the order_by, the extra parameter is failing. I could just add a useless secondary order_by to something in the other table, but I think there should be a better way to do it.
What is the django function to add joins in a sensible way? I know this must be getting called somewhere.
Here is some sample code. It selects all readings for a given user, and annotates the results with the rating (if any) given by another user stored in 'friend'.
class Book(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=200)
urlname = models.CharField(max_length=200)
entrydate=models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True)
class Reading(models.Model):
book=models.ForeignKey(Book,related_name='readings')
user=models.ForeignKey(User)
rating=models.IntegerField()
entrydate=models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True)
readings=Reading.objects.filter(user=user).order_by('entrydate')
friendrating='(select rating from proj_reading where user_id=%d and \
book_id=proj_book.id and rating in (1,2,3,4,5,6))'%friend.id
readings=readings.extra(select={'friendrating':friendrating})
at the moment, readings won't work because the join to readings is not set up correctly. however, if I add an order by such as:
.order_by('entrydate','reading__entrydate')
django magically knows to add an inner join through the foreign key and I get what I want.
additional information:
print readings.query ==>
select ((select rating from proj_reading where user_id=2 and book_id=proj_book.id and rating in (1,2,3,4,5,6)) as 'hisrating', proj_reading.id, proj_reading.user_id, proj_reading.rating, proj_reading.entrydate from proj_reading where proj_reading.user_id=1;
assuming
user.id=1
friend.id=2
the error is:
OperationalError: Unknown column proj_book.id in 'where clause'
and it happens because the table proj_book is not included in the query. To restate what I said above - if I now do readings2=readings.order_by('book__entrydate') I can see the proper join is set up and the query works.
Ideally I'd just like to figure out what the name of the qs.query function is that looks at two tables and figures out how they are joined by foreign keys, and just call that manually.
Your generated query:
select ((select rating from proj_reading where user_id=2 and book_id=proj_book.id and rating in (1,2,3,4,5,6)) as 'hisrating', proj_reading.id, proj_reading.user_id, proj_reading.rating, proj_reading.entrydate from proj_reading where proj_reading.user_id=1;
The db has no way to understand what does it mean by proj_book, since it is not included in (from tables or inner join).
You are getting expected results, when you add order_by, because that order_by query is adding inner join between proj_book and proj_reading.
As far as I understand, if you refer any other column in Book, not just order_by, you will get similar results.
Q1 = Reading.objects.filter(user=user).exclude(Book__name='') # Exclude forces to add JOIN
Q2 = "Select rating from proj_reading where user_id=%d" % user.id
Result = Q1.extra("foo":Q2)
This way, at step Q1, you are forcing DJango to add join on Book table, which is not default, unless you access any field of Book table.
you mean:
class SomeModel(models.Model)
id = models.IntegerField()
...
class SomeOtherModel(models.Model)
otherfield = models.ForeignKey(SomeModel)
qrst = SomeOtherModel.objects.filter(otherfield__id=1)
You can use "__" to create table joins.
EDIT:
It wont work because you do not define table join correctly.
myrating='(select rating from proj_reading inner join proj_book on (proj_book.id=proj_reading_id) where proj_reading.user_id=%d and rating in (1,2,3,4,5,6))'%user.id)'
This is a pesdocode and it is not tested.
But, i advice you to use django filters instead of writing sql queries.
read = Reading.objects.filter(book__urlname__icontains="smith", user_id=user.id, rating__in=(1,2,3,4,5,6)).values('rating')
Documentation for more details.