Filtering the Aggregate in the Django ORM

后端 未结 5 859
误落风尘
误落风尘 2021-02-08 14:49

I have a function that looks like this:

def post_count(self):
        return self.thread_set.aggregate(num_posts=Count(\'post\'))[\'num_posts\']
<
相关标签:
5条回答
  • 2021-02-08 15:20

    Yes. Just do it. This should work as expected:

    self.thread_set.filter(active_status=1).aggregate(num_posts=Count('post'))['num_posts']
    

    Any original query returns a QuerySet, so any available methods that return QuerySets can be can be pretty much indefinitely chained together for complex criteria matches. Since aggregate() does not return a QuerySet, you want to make sure that it is last in the chain.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-02-08 15:28

    You may want to look at writing a custom Manager object:

    http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.1/topics/db/managers/

    I haven't used aggregate(), but that may let you write a custom manager to provide a filtered active_thread_set and then do self.active_thread_set.aggregate(...). If not, it will let you do the custom SQL and add a num_posts property onto the Thread objects (see the PollManager.with_counts() example.)

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-02-08 15:31

    I have been looking into something similar and have not found a great solution. I'm using something like this:

    def post_count(self):
            return len(Post.objects.filter(someModel = self).filter(active_status = 1))
    

    It's not great, but I don't think that Django allows you to filter based on the secondary model aggregations and annotations. I'll be checking to see if anyone comes up with a better solution.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-02-08 15:39

    OK, now that the question includes the model definitions, I submit to you that this should work, unless your version of Django doesn't support some feature I use here (in which case, please let me know!):

    Post.objects.filter(thread__in=thread_set, status='active').aggregate(num_posts=Count('id'))
    

    Django allows __in filters to take a QuerySet to decide what the IN clause should look like in SQL, so if you pass thread__in=thread_set, Django will filter the posts so that only those whose thread field points to one of the ids of the threads in your thread_set remain for the aggregate call to see.

    This should filter the posts with just one db query with something like WHERE thread_id IN ... inside, rather than with one query per thread, which would indeed be horrid. If anything else happened, this would be a bug in Django...

    The result should be at most two queries to establish a Category's postcount -- one to obtain thread_set and another one actually to count the posts. The alternative is to have a thread/post join to be filtered based on Thread's category field and Post's status field, which I wouldn't necessarily expect to be that much faster. (I say 'at most', because I guess they could be fused automatically... Though I don't think this would happen with current Django. Can't check ATM, sorry.)

    EDIT: Django's QuerySet API reference says this on __in filters:


    IN

    In a given list.

    Example:

    Entry.objects.filter(id__in=[1, 3, 4])
    

    SQL equivalent:

    SELECT ... WHERE id IN (1, 3, 4);
    

    You can also use a queryset to dynamically evaluate the list of values instead of providing a list of literal values:

    inner_qs = Blog.objects.filter(name__contains='Cheddar')
    entries = Entry.objects.filter(blog__in=inner_qs)
    

    This queryset will be evaluated as subselect statement:

    SELECT ... WHERE blog.id IN (SELECT id FROM ... WHERE NAME LIKE '%Cheddar%')
    

    The above code fragment could also be written as follows:

    inner_q = Blog.objects.filter(name__contains='Cheddar').values('pk').query
    entries = Entry.objects.filter(blog__in=inner_q)
    

    Changed in Django 1.1: In Django 1.0, only the latter piece of code is valid.

    This second form is a bit less readable and unnatural to write, since it accesses the internal query attribute and requires a ValuesQuerySet. If your code doesn't require compatibility with Django 1.0, use the first form, passing in a queryset directly.


    So, I guess Django is capable of passing a single query to the db in the case at issue here. If the db's query analyser does a good job, the effect might be very nearly optimal. :-)

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-02-08 15:42

    Would it be ok to change around things a bit?

    As illustrated below, you could add a post_count property to the Thread class, which counts active Posts in a Thread.

    This post_count could then be used to calculate active posts in a category by adding up all active posts in all thread in a category.

    class Category(models.Model):
        name = models.CharField(max_length=100)
        slug = models.SlugField(max_length=100, blank=True, primary_key=True)
        ordering = models.IntegerField(max_length=3, default=0)
    
        @property
        def thread_count(self):
            return self.thread_set.all().count()
    
        @property
        def post_count(self): # <-- Changed
            return reduce(lambda x,y: x + y, [x.post_count for x in self.thread_set.all()])
    
    class Thread(models.Model):
        user = models.ForeignKey(User)
        category = models.ForeignKey(Category)
        title = models.CharField(max_length=100)
        slug = models.SlugField(max_length=100)
        content = models.TextField()
        created = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True)
        latest_activity = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True)
    
        @property
        def post_count(self): # <---- Newly added
            return self.post_set.filter(status = 'ACTIVE').count()
    
    class Post(models.Model):
        thread = models.ForeignKey(Thread)
        parent = models.ForeignKey('Post', null=True, blank=True)
        display_name = models.CharField(max_length=100)
        email = models.EmailField(db_index=True)
        ip_address = models.IPAddressField(null=True, blank=True)
        content = models.TextField()
        status = models.CharField(choices=STATUS_CHOICES, max_length=25, db_index=True, default='approved')
        created = models.DateTimeField()
    
    0 讨论(0)
提交回复
热议问题