I'm using django (1.5 with mysql) select_for_update method for fetching data from one model and serve this data to user upon request, but when two user request at simultaneously it returns same data for both of the user, see the sample code below
models.py
class SaveAccessCode(models.Model):
code = models.CharField(max_length=10)
class AccessCode(models.Model):
code = models.CharField(max_length=10)
state = models.CharField(max_length=10, default='OPEN')
views.py
def view(request, code):
# for example code = 234567
acccess_code = AccessCode.objects.select_for_update().filter(
code=code, state='OPEN')
acccess_code.delete()
SaveAccessCode.objects.create(code=code)
return
Concurrent request will generate two records of SaveAccessCode with same code, Please guide me how to handle this scenario in better way
You need to set some flag on the model when doing select_for_update, something like:
qs.first().update(is_locked=True)`
and before that should do select like
qs = self.select_for_update().filter(state='OPEN', is_locked=False).order_by('id')
Then after the user, I presume, has done something with it and saved, set the flag is_locked=False and save.
Also make the fetch_available_code as a #staticmethod.
Related
There are two models .I want to make query to extract only the app exact app related Adspaces .
models.py
class Appname(models.Model):
user=models.ForeignKey(User,related_name='appname', null=True, default=None,on_delete=models.CASCADE)
name=models.CharField(max_length=150,blank=False,null=False,help_text='Add your new App')
def __str__(self):
return self.name
def get_absolute_url(self):
return reverse("dashapp:space",kwargs={'pk':self.pk})
class Adspace(models.Model):
user=models.ForeignKey(User,related_name='adspace', null=True, default=None,on_delete=models.CASCADE)
ad_space=models.CharField(max_length=150,blank=False,null=False)
app=models.ForeignKey('Appname', related_name='appnames',default=None, on_delete=models.CASCADE)
PID_TYPE = (
('FN','FORMAT_NATIVE'),
('FNB','FORMAT_NATIVE_BANNER'),
('FI','FORMAT_INTERSTITIAL'),
('FB','FORMAT_BANNER'),
('FMR','FORMAT_MEDIUM,RECT'),
('FRV','FORMAT_REWARDED_VIDEO'),
)
format_type=models.CharField(max_length=3,choices=PID_TYPE,default='FN',blank=False, null=False)
def __str__(self):
return self.ad_space
def get_absolute_url(self):
return reverse("dashapp:create",kwargs={'pk':self.pk})
Views.py
SHowing the one where i need to the query
class spacelist(LoginRequiredMixin,ListView):
model=Adspace
template_name='adspace_list.html'
def get_queryset(self):
query_set=super().get_queryset()
return query_set.filter(user=self.request.user)
Here I need to perform One more query so that EACH APP show their own adspaces when clicked right now every app show every show adspaces.
I have the idea what to do as if i compare app_id then it'll show the exact app related adspaces, but i dont know how to write query for the same as i already have one query present.???
You could try using a Q objects: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/2.1/topics/db/queries/#complex-lookups-with-q-objects
From what I understand you are trying to filter both on the app_id and the request user at the same time, so you could try look something like this:
from django.db.models import Q
...
def get_queryset(self):
query_set=super().get_queryset()
return query_set.filter(Q(user=self.request.user) & Q(app_id=app_id))
...
This lets you do a single filter with both your requirements at the same time (i.e. retrieve the Adspace instances for a specific user with a specific Appname).
You chain another filter at the end like this:
class spacelist(LoginRequiredMixin,ListView):
model=Adspace
template_name='adspace_list.html'
def get_queryset(self):
query_set = super().get_queryset()
query_set = query_set.filter(user=self.request.user)
app_id = [...]
return query_set.filter(app_id=app_id)
The problem left is to find out what is the app_id coming from. How do you know what is the current app? Several options here.
Option 1: From the request
It can come from the current user: self.request.user.appname.all() but that will give you multiple apps, if the user can only have one app, you should change your model Appname.user to a OneToOneField.
Otherwise, I suggest changing your related_name='appnames' to reflect the multiplicity in the reverse relationship.
Option 2: From the URL
It can come from the URL, your space list view should extract an app_id parameter from the URL where it's defined:
url(r'^(?P<app_id>[0-9]+)/spaces/$', spacelist.as_view(), name='space_list'),
And then in the spacelist view, you would get this parameter like this:
app_id = self.kwargs['app_id']
return query_set.filter(app_id=app_id)
Hope that helps
UPDATE:
Also worth noting that QuerySets are lazy, meaning the result will get evaluated as late as possible by Django. Therefore, when you call:
query_set = query_set.filter(user=self.request.user)
The Django ORM doesn't execute any DB queries yet, and you can chain more filters after that:
query_set = query_set.filter(user=self.request.user)
query_set = query_set.filter(app_id=app_id)
Which behind the scenes is extending the query that will be executed when required. But at this point, no query is actually run. To see the query that will get executed you can print out the query attribute of the QuerySet:
print(query_set.query)
Which should log something like:
SELECT "app_adspace"."user_id" ...
FROM
"app_adspace"
WHERE
"app_adspace"."user_id" = 1234 AND "app_adspace"."app_id" = 5678
I'm writing a lot of boilerplate like code to try and persist my form data. In other languages I've not had to manually map the form attribute to the model prior to saving I'm wondering does python/flask has a similar approach? I'd ideally prefer to manually map all my form fields to simply persist a db record.
[edit]
To be clear this approach works fine for me the records are persisted properly however it seems kind of inefficient. In another piece of code I was able to use the wtf library {{ wtf.quick_form(form) }}
to create a form an html form without explicitly listing all its fields. Given I have the same names for my model attributes as I do for the form attributes I was wondering if I can do the same?
[edit]
Any feedback
Example below..
I have a largish model "product"
class Product(db.Model):
field1 = db.Column(db.String(200))
field2 = db.Column(db.String(200))
....
field30 = db.Column(db.String(200))
It's represented as a flask form e.g.
class ProductForm(FlaskForm):
field1 = StringField('Field 1', validators=[DataRequired()])
field2 = TextAreaField('Field 2 Label')
field30 = TextAreaField('Field 30 Label')
submit = SubmitField('Submit')
Here I try and map and persist the product record...
def save_product(self, product, form):
product.field1 = form.field.data
#lots more tedious form to model mapping
db.session.add(product)
# commit the data to the database
db.session.commit()
In my routes.py I have the following. I see it being called and the record does indeed persist.
def crud():
form = CrudForm()
if form.validate_on_submit():
product = Product()
product.save_product(product, form, new=True)
flash(_('Product Saved'))
return redirect(url_for('main.index'))
return render_template('crud.html', title=_('Product CRUD'),
form=form)
Given that the names of your form fields are the same as the names of your database columns it is possible to cut down on the boilerplate. A dict of all of the fields in your form is accessible as the form.data property and this can be passed directly through as keyword arguments when your create the new instance of your model rather than setting them one at a time afterwards.
product = Product(**form.data)
I have a Django app with models accessible by both Django REST Framework and a regular form interface. The form interface has some validation checks before saving changes to the model, but not using any special Django framework, just a simple local change in the view.
I'd like to apply the same validation to forms and REST calls, so I want to move my validation into the model. I can see how to do that for simple cases using the validators field of the Field, but in one case I have a name/type/value model where the acceptable values for 'value' change depending on which type is selected. The validator doesn't get sent any information about the model that the field is in, so it doesn't have access to other fields.
How can I perform this validation, without having essentially the same code in a serializer for DRF and my POST view for the form?
I dug around codebase of drf a little bit. You can get values of all fields using following approach. Doing so, you can throw serialization error as
{'my_field':'error message} instead of {'non_field_error':'error message'}.
def validate_myfield(self, value):
data = self.get_initial() # data for all the fields
#do your validation
However, if you wish to do it for ListSerializer, i.e for serializer = serializer_class(many=True), this won't work. You will get list of empty values.
In that scenario, you could write your validations in def validate function and to avoid non_field_errors in your serialization error, you can raise ValidationError with error message as a dictionary instead of string.
def validate(self, data):
# do your validation
raise serializers.ValidationError({"your_field": "error_message"})
The validation per-field doesn't get sent any information about other fields, when it is defined like this:
def validate_myfield(self, value):
...
However, if you have a method defined like this:
def validate(self, data):
...
Then you get all the data in a dict, and you can do cross-field validation.
You can use the required package for your cross-field validation. It allows you to express your validation rules declaratively in python. You would have something like this with DRF:
class MySerializer(serializers.Serializer):
REQUIREMENTS = (
Requires("end_date", "start_date") +
Requires("end_date", R("end_date") > R("start_date")) +
Requires("end_date", R("end_date") < today.date() + one_year) +
Requires("start_date", R("start_date") < today.date() + one_year)
)
start_date = serializers.DateField(required=False, null=True, blank=True)
end_date = serializers.DateField(required=False, null=True, blank=True)
def validate(self, data):
self.REQUIREMENTS.validate(data) # handle validation error
You could put the REQUIREMENTS on your Model and have both your DRF and Django Form validate your data using it.
Here is a blog post explaining more
I have two tabels(Ingredient_Step and Ingredient) in on relation as you can see below:
Models.Py
class Ingredient_Step(models.Model):
ingredient = models.ForeignKey(Ingredient)
Step = models.ForeignKey(Step)
def __unicode__(self):
return u'{}'.format(self.Step)
class Ingredient(models.Model):
IngredientName = models.CharField(max_length=200,unique=True)
Picture = models.ImageField(upload_to='Ingredient')
def __unicode__(self):
return u'{}'.format(self.IngredientName)
In a function, i need serialize a JSON object from a query that returns from "Ingredient_step", but I need send the field "IngredientName", who comes from "Ingredient" table.
I try using "ingredient__IngredientName" but it fails.
Views.Py:
def IngredientByStep(request):
if request.is_ajax() and request.GET and 'id_Step' in request.GET:
if request.GET["id_Step"] != '':
IngStp = Ingredient_Step.objects.filter(Step =request.GET["id_Step"])
return JSONResponse(serializers.serialize('json', IngStp, fields=('pk','ingredient__IngredientName')))
How i can call extends field from a relation?
Thanks
This "feature" of Django (and many ORM's like SQLAlchemy) are called Lazy Loading, meaning data is only loaded from related models if you specifically ask for them. In this case, build your IngStp as a list of results, and make sure to access the property for each result before serializing.
Here's an example of how to do that: Django: Include related models in JSON string?
I want to make some of my Django global settings configurable through the admin interface.
To that end, I've decided to set them as database fields, rather than in settings.py.
These are the settings I care about:
class ManagementEmail(models.Model):
librarian_email = models.EmailField()
intro_text = models.CharField(max_length=1000)
signoff_text = models.CharField(max_length=1000)
These are one-off global settings, so I only ever want there to be a single librarian_email, intro_text etc floating around the system.
Is there a way I can prevent admin users from adding new records here, without preventing them from editing the existing record?
I guess I can do this by writing a custom admin template for this model, but I'd like to know if there's a neater way to configure this.
Could I use something other than class, for example?
Thanks!
Please see this question on "keep[ing] settings in database", where the answer seems to be django-dbsettings
Update
Just thought of another option: you can create the following model:
from django.contrib.sites.models import Site
class ManagementEmail(models.Model):
site = models.OneToOneField(Site)
librarian_email = models.EmailField()
intro_text = models.CharField(max_length=1000)
signoff_text = models.CharField(max_length=1000)
Because of the OneToOneField field, you can only have one ManagementEmail record per site. Then, just make sure you're using sites and then you can pull the settings thusly:
from django.contrib.sites.models import Site
managementemail = Site.objects.get_current().managementemail
Note that what everyone else is telling you is true; if your goal is to store settings, adding them one by one as fields to a model is not the best implementation. Adding settings over time is going to be a headache: you have to add the field to your model, update the database structure, and modify the code that is calling that setting.
That's why I'd recommend using the django app I mentioned above, since it does exactly what you want -- provide for user-editable settings -- without making you do any extra, unnecessary work.
I think the easiest way you can do this is using has_add_permissions function of the ModelAdmin:
class ContactUsAdmin(admin.ModelAdmin):
form = ContactUsForm
def has_add_permission(self, request):
return False if self.model.objects.count() > 0 else super().has_add_permission(request)
You can set the above to be any number you like, see the django docs.
If you need more granularity than that, and make the class a singleton at the model level, see django-solo. There are many singleton implementations also that I came across.
For StackedInline, you can use max_num = 1.
Try django-constance.
Here are some useful links:
https://github.com/jezdez/django-constance
http://django-constance.readthedocs.org/en/latest/
I'd take a page out of wordpress and create a Model that support settings.
class Settings(models.Model):
option_name = models.CharField(max_length=1000)
option_value = models.CharField(max_length=25000)
option_meta = models.CharField(max_length=1000)
Then you can just pickle (serialize) objects into the fields and you'll be solid.
Build a little api, and you can be as crafty as wordpress and call. AdminOptions.get_option(opt_name)
Then you can just load the custom settings into the runtime, keeping the settings.py module separate, but equal. A good place to write this would be in an __init__.py file.
Just set up an GlobalSettings app or something with a Key and Value field.
You could easily prevent admin users from changing values by not giving them permission to edit the GlobalSettings app.
class GlobalSettingsManager(models.Manager):
def get_setting(self, key):
try:
setting = GlobalSettings.objects.get(key=key)
except:
raise MyExceptionOrWhatever
return setting
class GlobalSettings(models.Model):
key = models.CharField(unique=True, max_length=255)
value = models.CharField(max_length=255)
objects = GlobalSettingsManager()
>>> APP_SETTING = GlobalSettings.objects.get_setting('APP_SETTING')
There are apps for this but I prefer looking at them and writing my own.
You can prevent users from adding/deleting an object by overriding this method on your admin class:
ModelAdmin.has_add_permission(self, request)
ModelAdmin.has_delete_permission(self, request, obj=None)
Modification of #radtek answer to prevent deleting if only one entry is left
class SendgridEmailQuotaAdmin(admin.ModelAdmin):
list_display = ('quota','used')
def has_add_permission(self, request):
return False if self.model.objects.count() > 0 else True
def has_delete_permission(self, request, obj=None):
return False if self.model.objects.count() <= 1 else True
def get_actions(self, request):
actions = super(SendgridEmailQuotaAdmin, self).get_actions(request)
if(self.model.objects.count() <= 1):
del actions['delete_selected']
return actions
I had basically the same problem as the original poster describes, and it's easily fixed by overriding modelAdmin classes. Something similar to this in an admin.py file easily prevents adding a new object but allows editing the current one:
class TitleAdmin(admin.ModelAdmin):
def has_delete_permission(self, request, obj=TestModel.title):
return False
def has_add_permission(self, request):
return False
def has_change_permission(self, request, obj=TestModel.title):
return True
This doesn't prevent a user from posting a form that edits data, but keeps things from happening in the Admin site. Depending on whether or not you feel it's necessary for your needs you can enable deletion and addition of a record with a minimum of coding.