[Django] #29764: in_bulk does not works with composed unique field
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: Jean- | Owner: nobody
Daniel |
Type: Bug | Status: new
Component: Database | Version: 2.1
layer (models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Keywords:
Triage Stage: | Has patch: 0
Unreviewed |
Needs documentation: 0 | Needs tests: 0
Patch needs improvement: 0 | Easy pickings: 0
UI/UX: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
For instance, I have a model 'Data' with an unique_together constraint on
(foo, bar) fields.
I would like to use in_bulk() on a query like:
{{{
Data.objects.filter(foo='a').in_bulk(<list of bar values>,
field_name='bar').
}}}
Obviously, the fact that bar is not unique should not be an issue to run
the query, but Django performs a check to make sure the queried field is
unique and raise an error if not.
As it may not be simple to check for all cases where field_name would
result in a unique constraint, maybe it should be possible to disable this
check (using an optional parameter).
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/29764>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Type: Bug | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: 2.1
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage:
| Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Tim Graham):
In your example, if bar isn't unique, then values may be overwritten in
the `in_bulk()` return value unless the keys become `('foo', 'bar')` (but
how would `in_bulk()` know that?). I think this proposal would complicate
`in_bulk()` a bit too much.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/29764#comment:1>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Type: Bug | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: 2.1
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage:
| Unreviewed
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Jean-Daniel):
Replying to [comment:1 Tim Graham]:
> In your example, if bar isn't unique, then values may be overwritten in
the `in_bulk()` return value unless the keys become `('foo', 'bar')` (but
how would `in_bulk()` know that?). I think this proposal would complicate
`in_bulk()` a bit too much.
In my example, bar is guarantee to be unique, as the query already
contains an equality filter on foo. And yes, I understand it would make
the function too complex to try to handle all possibles cases, that's why
I suggested to let the caller choose to disable the check, ie something
like this:
{{{
in_bulk(<list of bar>, field_name='bar', disable_unique_check=True)
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/29764#comment:2>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Type: Bug | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: 2.1
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage:
| Unreviewed
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Simon Charette):
Given `in_bulk` can be easily replaced with a dict literal I don't think
it's worth complexifying it more for the rare cases where this is useful
either.
{{{#!python
bulk_data = {
data.bar: data for data Data.objects.filter(foo='a')
}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/29764#comment:3>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: Jean-Daniel | Owner: nobody
Type: New feature | Status: closed
Component: Database layer | Version: 2.1
(models, ORM) |
Keywords: | Triage Stage:
| Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* status: new => closed
* resolution: => wontfix
* type: Bug => New feature
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/29764#comment:4>