Re: [Django] #10929: Support a default value for Sum (and possibly other aggregation functions)
Django
---------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: ORM aggregation
Version: 1.1-beta-1 | Severity: Normal
Resolution: | Keywords:
Triage Stage: Accepted | Has patch: 0
Needs documentation: 0 | Needs tests: 0
Patch needs improvement: 0 | Easy pickings: 0
---------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Changes (by ramiro):
* easy: => 0
Comment:
#14548 was a duplicate, had some useful discussion in its comments.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:3>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
Django
Type: New feature | Status: new
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default | Needs documentation: 1
Has patch: 1 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Needs tests: 0 | UI/UX: 0
Easy pickings: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by mrmachine):
* cc: real.human@… (added)
* version: 1.1-beta-1 => SVN
* keywords: => aggregate annotate default
* needs_docs: 0 => 1
* has_patch: 0 => 1
* ui_ux: => 0
Comment:
Just added a patch with an initial implementation for this feature. It
should work for all aggregates by wrapping the default `sql_template` in
`COALESCE(%s, %%(default)s)`, if `params` has a `default` item. There's a
basic test in there that checks the behaviour for `Avg` with and without a
default. If there's positive feedback about the implementation, I'll have
a go at adding documentation and any improvements to the implementation
and tests that are suggested.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:4>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: ORM aggregation | Version: SVN
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default | Needs documentation: 1
Has patch: 1 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Needs tests: 0 | UI/UX: 0
Easy pickings: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* cc: net147 (added)
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:5>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: ORM aggregation | Version: SVN
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default | Needs documentation: 1
Has patch: 1 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Needs tests: 0 | UI/UX: 0
Easy pickings: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by lukeplant):
There is a good case for giving `Sum` a default of zero, while leaving
`Max` and `Min` with default of `None`. Essentially, the reason is that
zero is the fixed point of the `+` operator, while max and min have no
fixed points (excluding negative infinity and positive infinity
respectively, which are problematic). Also, it makes the behaviour
analogous to the Python builtins `sum`, `min` and `max` - `sum` returns 0
for an empty list, whereas `min` and `max` throw exceptions. (We don't
want to throw exceptions here, for various obvious reasons, but I think we
should be indicating 'undefined' in ''some'' way under the same
circumstances).
If we do this, we need a note in the release notes about the backwards
incompatibility - if people were relying on Sum returning None for no data
instead of zero. (We can certainly classify the previous behaviour as a
bug, since it was out of line with our docs, and neither expected or
useful behaviour, but should still mention this). We should also have
some tests that ensure that it returns a zero of the right type for
different underlying field types.
This also brings up the possibility of whether the default for `Sum`
should act like the `start` parameter of the `sum` Python builtin. I think
it should. That would make implementation harder, though, I guess.
Alternatively we could have a separate 'start' parameter for `Sum`, which
might be clearer, and would make that a separate feature.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:6>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default | Needs documentation: 1
Has patch: 1 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Needs tests: 0 | UI/UX: 0
Easy pickings: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* cc: cvrebert (added)
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:7>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: ORM aggregation | Version: master
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default | Needs documentation: 1
Has patch: 1 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Needs tests: 0 | UI/UX: 0
Easy pickings: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* cc: jpk (added)
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:8>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
(models, ORM) | Resolution:
Severity: Normal | Triage Stage: Accepted
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Needs documentation: 1
default | Patch needs improvement: 0
Has patch: 1 | UI/UX: 0
Needs tests: 0 |
Easy pickings: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by jarshwah):
I would support closing this as a duplicate of #23753. Once the linked
ticket is implemented, it'll be possible for users to construct their own
coalesce value like:
{{{
annotate(sum_field = Coalesce(Sum(...), 0))
}}}
This leaves the default behaviour alone, but provides a higher level of
customisation. It relies on the #14030 patch which will also allow adding
a "start" value, as mentioned by @lukeplant above:
{{{
annotate(sum_field = Coalesce(Sum(...), 0) + Value(5))
}}}
Would everyone be happy enough with the above use?
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:10>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) | Resolution:
Severity: Normal | Triage Stage: Accepted
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Needs documentation: 1
default | Patch needs improvement: 0
Has patch: 1 | UI/UX: 0
Needs tests: 0 |
Easy pickings: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by mrmachine):
I'm not totally convinced (yet) that we should give up on this when
`Coalesce()` becomes available. If we just instruct people to use
`Coalesce(Sum(...), default)` all the time, we're basically just
recreating the literal semantics of SQL itself rather than providing an
easy to use abstraction of it. Sure, it would be useful and powerful to
have `Coalesce()` as well, but we might not need to force people to use it
all the time for the common case. At the very least, a decision on closing
this ticket should probably wait until `Coalesce()` is actually
implemented.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:11>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) | Resolution:
Severity: Normal | Triage Stage: Accepted
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Needs documentation: 1
default | Patch needs improvement: 0
Has patch: 1 | UI/UX: 0
Needs tests: 0 |
Easy pickings: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by jarshwah):
@mrmachine that's not a bad argument to make. What we could support is:
{{{
Sum('field', default=0)
}}}
Which would then be returned from {{{ convert_value }}} in the case where
the value is None. The argument against that is we'd be special-casing the
Sum aggregate, while leaving other aggregates to use the Coalesce method.
That's not such a big downside though.
Does anyone else want to weigh in on this? Supporting a default=0 kwarg is
a 4 line + docs change.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:12>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by devunt):
Replying to [comment:12 jarshwah]:
> @mrmachine that's not a bad argument to make. What we could support is:
>
> {{{
> Sum('field', default=0)
> }}}
>
> Which would then be returned from {{{ convert_value }}} in the case
where the value is None. The argument against that is we'd be special-
casing the Sum aggregate, while leaving other aggregates to use the
Coalesce method. That's not such a big downside though.
>
> Does anyone else want to weigh in on this? Supporting a default=0 kwarg
is a 4 line + docs change.
+1 for this.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:13>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by LaundroMat):
Replying to [comment:12 jarshwah]:
> @mrmachine that's not a bad argument to make. What we could support is:
>
> {{{
> Sum('field', default=0)
> }}}
>
> Which would then be returned from {{{ convert_value }}} in the case
where the value is None. The argument against that is we'd be special-
casing the Sum aggregate, while leaving other aggregates to use the
Coalesce method. That's not such a big downside though.
>
> Does anyone else want to weigh in on this? Supporting a default=0 kwarg
is a 4 line + docs change.
+1 from me too.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:14>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by digismack):
Replying to [comment:12 jarshwah]:
> @mrmachine that's not a bad argument to make. What we could support is:
>
> {{{
> Sum('field', default=0)
> }}}
>
> Which would then be returned from {{{ convert_value }}} in the case
where the value is None. The argument against that is we'd be special-
casing the Sum aggregate, while leaving other aggregates to use the
Coalesce method. That's not such a big downside though.
>
> Does anyone else want to weigh in on this? Supporting a default=0 kwarg
is a 4 line + docs change.
I ran into a situation today where this feature would have been nice. +1
from me.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:15>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by jarshwah):
If you are running into this use case, you can use Coalesce(Sum('field'),
0) in Django 1.8. At least until a decision is made on this ticket. If you
want to bring this up on the ML for the other ORM people to have input,
that'd be a good next step.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:16>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Jiyda Mint Moussa):
Replying to [comment:12 Josh Smeaton]:
> @mrmachine that's not a bad argument to make. What we could support is:
>
> {{{
> Sum('field', default=0)
> }}}
>
> Which would then be returned from {{{ convert_value }}} in the case
where the value is None. The argument against that is we'd be special-
casing the Sum aggregate, while leaving other aggregates to use the
Coalesce method. That's not such a big downside though.
>
> Does anyone else want to weigh in on this? Supporting a default=0 kwarg
is a 4 line + docs change.
+1 for me .
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:17>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: (none)
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* cc: Simon Charette (added)
Comment:
May I suggest the argument be named `coalesce` and be added to all
aggregates (through the `django.db.models.aggregate.Aggregate` class)?
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:18>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: (none)
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Aymeric Augustin):
I'm also facing this issue. The workaround with Coalesce works, but...
```
from django.db.models import Sum
from django.db.models.functions import Coalesce
```
really?
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:19>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: (none)
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Simon Charette):
Note that the new aggregate functions in `django.contrib.postgres`
[https://github.com/django/django/blob/4de8aaf7ffc91b91cbb70e9db406abe9b160575a/django/contrib/postgres/aggregates/general.py#L12-L15
silently handle this].
I still believe adding a `coalesce` sugar argument to aggregate functions
would be more appropriate than a `default` one as it would allow passing
expressions instead of simple Python value.
e.g.
{{{#!python
Sum('amount', coalesce=F('minimum_amount')
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:20>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: (none)
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* cc: Hans Aarne Liblik (added)
Comment:
+1 for
{{{
default
}}}
kwarg
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:21>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: (none)
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by myartsev):
Another +1
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:22>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: (none)
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by bwesen):
Aaargh, cmon, 11 years? To add a perfectly sane default of 0 for Sum? I'm
amazed this hasn't been fixed for so long :) What was wrong with
supporting default=0 at least? (yes I had the same perfectly normal
reaction of getting annoyed by seeing NULL in my API output instead of 0
for a Sum of Payments for a User).
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:23>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: (none)
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by felixxm):
Björn, such comments doesn't help. Patch is welcome.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:24>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Type: New feature | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* owner: (none) => Barton Ip
* status: new => assigned
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:25>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Barton Ip
Type: New feature | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 1
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* needs_better_patch: 0 => 1
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:26>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Type: New feature | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: master
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* owner: Barton Ip => Nick Pope
* needs_better_patch: 1 => 0
* needs_docs: 1 => 0
Comment:
I have produced an implementation using `Coalesce` for all aggregates
other than `Count`.
See the new [https://github.com/django/django/pull/14026 PR].
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:27>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Type: New feature | Status: assigned
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* needs_better_patch: 0 => 1
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:28>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Type: New feature | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* needs_better_patch: 1 => 0
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:29>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Type: New feature | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* needs_better_patch: 0 => 1
Comment:
Some tests don't work on MySQL and Oracle.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:30>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Type: New feature | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Accepted
default |
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* needs_better_patch: 1 => 0
Comment:
Replying to [comment:30 Mariusz Felisiak]:
> Some tests don't work on MySQL and Oracle.
The tests are now all passing. \o/
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:31>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Type: New feature | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
default | checkin
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* stage: Accepted => Ready for checkin
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:32>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Ready for
default | checkin
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Mariusz Felisiak <felisiak.mariusz@…>):
In [changeset:"fee87345967b3d917b618533585076cbfa43451b" fee87345]:
{{{
#!CommitTicketReference repository=""
revision="fee87345967b3d917b618533585076cbfa43451b"
Refs #10929 -- Deprecated forced empty result value for PostgreSQL
aggregates.
This deprecates forcing a return value for ArrayAgg, JSONBAgg, and
StringAgg when there are no rows in the query. Now that we have a
``default`` argument for aggregates, we want to revert to returning the
default of ``None`` which most aggregate functions return and leave it
up to the user to decide what they want to be returned by default.
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:34>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Type: New feature | Status: closed
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution: fixed
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Ready for
default | checkin
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* status: assigned => closed
* resolution: => fixed
Comment:
In [changeset:"501a8db46595b2d5b99c1d3b1146a832f43cdf1c" 501a8db4]:
{{{
#!CommitTicketReference repository=""
revision="501a8db46595b2d5b99c1d3b1146a832f43cdf1c"
Fixed #10929 -- Added default argument to aggregates.
Thanks to Simon Charette and Adam Johnson for the reviews.
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:33>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Type: New feature | Status: closed
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution: fixed
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Ready for
default | checkin
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by GitHub <noreply@…>):
In [changeset:"022d29c934107c515dd6d3181945146a2077bdf0" 022d29c9]:
{{{
#!CommitTicketReference repository=""
revision="022d29c934107c515dd6d3181945146a2077bdf0"
Refs #10929 -- Allowed NowUTC SQL customization for third-party backends.
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:35>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Type: New feature | Status: closed
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution: fixed
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Ready for
default | checkin
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Mariusz Felisiak <felisiak.mariusz@…>):
In [changeset:"0db8bf3d60f7a027391ce89555bdb4a95ad0a227" 0db8bf3d]:
{{{
#!CommitTicketReference repository=""
revision="0db8bf3d60f7a027391ce89555bdb4a95ad0a227"
Refs #10929 -- Fixed aggregates crash when passing strings as defaults.
Previously strings were interpreted as F() expressions and default
crashed with AttributeError:
'F' object has no attribute 'empty_result_set_value'
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:36>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Type: New feature | Status: closed
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution: fixed
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Ready for
default | checkin
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Mariusz Felisiak <felisiak.mariusz@…>):
In [changeset:"0be8095b254fad65b2480d677ebe6098c41bbad6" 0be8095]:
{{{
#!CommitTicketReference repository=""
revision="0be8095b254fad65b2480d677ebe6098c41bbad6"
Refs #10929 -- Stopped forcing empty result value by PostgreSQL
aggregates.
Per deprecation timeline.
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:37>
Django
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nolan | Owner: Nick Pope
Type: New feature | Status: closed
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution: fixed
Keywords: aggregate annotate | Triage Stage: Ready for
default | checkin
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by GitHub <noreply@…>):
In [changeset:"b05dfc289429dc4de990617da543af681d6638c7" b05dfc28]:
{{{
#!CommitTicketReference repository=""
revision="b05dfc289429dc4de990617da543af681d6638c7"
Refs #34381, Refs #10929 -- Fixed
postgres_tests.test_aggregates.TestGeneralAggretate.test_empty_result_set()
on PostgreSQL 14+.
Follow up to 0be8095b254fad65b2480d677ebe6098c41bbad6.
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10929#comment:38>