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]
Related
I'm wondering what is the idomatic Django equivalent of:
DELETE FROM article WHERE ID = ( SELECT Min( ID ) FROM article )
What I have tried is to retrieve the article with the lowest id
article = Article.objects.all().order_by("-id")[:1]
And then:
Article.objects.filter(id=article.id).delete()
But I'm wondering if there is more efficient/elegant way to do so?
There is no way to do this in a single query, since Django manages some relations itself. If you perform a delete, it will first obtain the items you plan to delete, then check if some triggers need to be peformed, and then delete the related objects that need to be removed and the object(s) itself.
You can thus do something like:
Model.objects.filter(
pk=Model.objects.annotate(min=Min('pk')
).values('min')[:1]).delete()
But it will still result in multiple queries.
Probably the most elegant way to do this is:
article = Article.objects.order_by('id').first()
if article:
article.delete()
According to django documentation:
first()
Returns the first object matched by the queryset, or None if there is no matching object. If the QuerySet has no ordering defined, then the queryset is automatically ordered by the primary key.
You can use this command:
Article.objects.all().first().delete() if Article.objects.all().first() else None
I am using Django, with mongoengine. I have a model Classes with an inscriptions list, And I want to get the docs that have an id in that list.
classes = Classes.objects.filter(inscriptions__contains=request.data['inscription'])
Here's a general explanation of querying ArrayField membership:
Per the Django ArrayField docs, the __contains operator checks if a provided array is a subset of the values in the ArrayField.
So, to filter on whether an ArrayField contains the value "foo", you pass in a length 1 array containing the value you're looking for, like this:
# matches rows where myarrayfield is something like ['foo','bar']
Customer.objects.filter(myarrayfield__contains=['foo'])
The Django ORM produces the #> postgres operator, as you can see by printing the query:
print Customer.objects.filter(myarrayfield__contains=['foo']).only('pk').query
>>> SELECT "website_customer"."id" FROM "website_customer" WHERE "website_customer"."myarrayfield_" #> ['foo']::varchar(100)[]
If you provide something other than an array, you'll get a cryptic error like DataError: malformed array literal: "foo" DETAIL: Array value must start with "{" or dimension information.
Perhaps I'm missing something...but it seems that you should be using .filter():
classes = Classes.objects.filter(inscriptions__contains=request.data['inscription'])
This answer is in reference to your comment for rnevius answer
In Django ORM whenever you make a Database call using ORM, it will generally return either a QuerySet or an object of the model if using get() / number if you are using count() ect., depending on the functions that you are using which return other than a queryset.
The result from a Queryset function can be used to implement further more refinement, like if you like to perform a order() or collecting only distinct() etc. Queryset are lazy which means it only hits the database when they are actually used not when they are assigned. You can find more information about them here.
Where as the functions that doesn't return queryset cannot implement such things.
Take time and go through the Queryset Documentation more in depth explanation with examples are provided. It is useful to understand the behavior to make your application more efficient.
I've followed django tutorial and arrived at tutorial05.
I tried to not show empty poll as tutorial says, so I added filter condition like this:
class IndexView(generic.ListView):
...
def get_queryset(self):
return Question.objects.filter(
pub_date__lte=timezone.now(),
choice__isnull=False
).order_by('-pub_date')[:5]
But this returned two objects which are exactly same.
I think choice__isnull=False caused the problem, but not sure.
choice__isnull causes the problem. It leads to join with choice table (to weed out questions without choices), that is something like this:
SELECT question.*
FROM question
JOIN choice
ON question.id = choice.question_id
WHERE question.pub_date < NOW()
You can inspect query attribute of QuerySet to be sure. So if you have one question with two choices, you will get that question two times. You need to use distinct() method in this case: queryset.distinct().
Just use .distinct() at the end of your ORM.
A little late to the party, but I figured it could help others looking up the same issue.
Instead of using choice__isnull=False with the filter() method, use it with exclude() instead to exclude out any questions without any choices. So your code would look something like this:
...
def get_queryset(self):
return Question.objects.filter(pub_date__lte=timezone.now()).exclude(choice__isnull=True).order_by('-pub_date')[:5]
By doing it this way, it will return only one instance of the question. Be sure to use choice_isnull=True though.
Because you created two objects with same properties. If you want to ensure uniqueness, you should add validation in clean and add unique index on identifier field too.
Besides filter returns all the objects that match the criteria, if you are expecting only one item to be returned, you should use get instead. get would raise exception if less or more than 1 item is found.
I have the following models:
class Work(models.Model):
visible = models.BooleanField(default=False)
class Book(models.Model):
work = models.ForeignKey('Work')
I am attempting to update some rows like so:
qs=Work.objects.all()
qs.annotate(Count('book')).filter(Q(book__count__gt=1)).update(visible=False)
However, this is giving an error:
DatabaseError: subquery has too many columns
LINE 1: ...SET "visible" = false WHERE "app_work"."id" IN (SELECT...
If I remove the update clause, the query runs with no problems and returns what I am expecting.
It looks like this error happens for queries with an annotate followed by an update. Is there some other way to write this?
Without making a toy database to be able to duplicate your issue and try out solutions, I can at least suggest the approach in Django: Getting complement of queryset as one possible approach.
Try this approach:
qs.annotate(Count('book')).filter(Q(book__count__gt=1))
Work.objects.filter(pk__in=qs.values_list('pk', flat=True)).update(visible=False)
You can also clear the annotations off a queryset quite simply:
qs.query.annotations.clear()
qs.update(..)
And this means you're only firing off one query, not one into another, but don't use this if your query relies on an annotation to filter. This is great for stripping out database-generated concatenations, and the utility rubbish that I occasionally add into model's default queries... but the example in the question is a perfect example of where this would not work.
To add to Oli's answer: If you need your annotations for the update then do the filters first and store the result in a variable and then call filter with no arguments on that queryset to access the update function like so:
q = X.objects.filter(annotated_val=5, annotated_name='Nima')
q.query.annotations.clear()
q.filter().update(field=900)
I've duplicated this issue & believe its a bug with the Django ORM. #acjay answer is a good workaround. Bug report: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25171
Fix released in Django 2 alpha: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/19513
Suppose you have a model Entry, with a field "author" pointing to another model Author. Suppose this field can be null.
If I run the following QuerySet:
Entry.objects.filter(author=X)
Where X is some value. Suppose in MySQL I have setup a compound index on Entry for some other column and author_id, ideally I'd like the SQL to just use "author_id" on the Entry model, so that it can use the compound index.
It turns out that Entry.objects.filter(author=5) would work, no join is done. But, if I say author=None, Django does a join with Author, then add to the Where clause Author.id IS NULL. So in this case, it can't use the compound index.
Is there a way to tell Django to just check the pk, and not follow the link?
The only way I know is to add an additional .extra(where=['author_id IS NULL']) to the QuerySet, but I was hoping some magic in .filter() would work.
Thanks.
(Sorry I was not clearer earlier about this, and thanks for the answers from lazerscience and Josh).
Does this not work as expected?
Entry.objects.filter(author=X.id)
You can either use a model or the model id in a foreign key filter. I can't check right yet if this executes a separate query, though I'd really hope it wouldn't.
If do as you described and do not use select_related() Django will not perform any join at all - no matter if you filter for the primary key of the related object or the related itself (which doesn't make any difference).
You can try:
print Entry.objects.(author=X).query
Assuming that the foreign key to Author has the name author_id, (if you didn't specify the name of the foreign key column for ForeignKey field, it should be NAME_id, if you specified the name, then check the model definition / your database schema),
Entry.objects.filter(author_id=value)
should work.
Second Attempt:
http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/models/querysets/#isnull
Maybe you can have a separate query, depending on whether X is null or not by having author__isnull?
Pretty late, but I just ran into this. I'm using Q objects to build up the query, so in my case this worked fine:
~Q(author_id__gt=0)
This generates sql like
NOT ("author_id" > 0 AND "author_id" IS NOT NULL)
You could probably solve the problem in this question by using
Entry.objects.exclude(author_id__gt=0)