[Django] #24837: Unable to query DateField using DateRange
Django
----------------------------------+-----------------
Reporter: schinckel | Owner:
Type: Uncategorized | Status: new
Component: contrib.postgres | Version: 1.8
Severity: Normal | Keywords:
Triage Stage: Unreviewed | Has patch: 0
Easy pickings: 1 | UI/UX: 0
----------------------------------+-----------------
{{{MyModel.objects.filter(datefield__contained_by=DateRange(...))}}}
The lookup is not defined on that field:
> FieldError: Unsupported lookup 'contained_by' for IntegerField or join
on the field not permitted.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24837>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
Django
Reporter: schinckel | Owner:
Type: Uncategorized | Status: new
Component: contrib.postgres | Version: 1.8
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 1 | UI/UX: 0
Changes (by schinckel):
* needs_better_patch: => 0
* needs_tests: => 0
* needs_docs: => 0
Comment:
I have a partial implementation, showing the next possible issue.
That is, the date field is attempting to coerce the lookup value into a
date:
{{{
======================================================================
ERROR: test_datetime_range
(postgres_tests.test_ranges.TestQueringWithRanges)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"/Users/matt/Development/django/tests/postgres_tests/test_ranges.py", line
238, in test_datetime_range
RangeLookupsModel.objects.filter(timestamp__contained_by=DateTimeTZRange('2015-01-01T09:00',
'2015-05-04T23:55')),
File "/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/manager.py", line
125, in manager_method
return getattr(self.get_queryset(), name)(*args, **kwargs)
File "/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/query.py", line
781, in filter
return self._filter_or_exclude(False, *args, **kwargs)
File "/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/query.py", line
799, in _filter_or_exclude
clone.query.add_q(Q(*args, **kwargs))
File "/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/sql/query.py",
line 1236, in add_q
clause, _ = self._add_q(q_object, self.used_aliases)
File "/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/sql/query.py",
line 1262, in _add_q
allow_joins=allow_joins, split_subq=split_subq,
File "/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/sql/query.py",
line 1196, in build_filter
condition = self.build_lookup(lookups, col, value)
File "/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/sql/query.py",
line 1095, in build_lookup
return final_lookup(lhs, rhs)
File "/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/lookups.py", line
98, in __init__
self.rhs = self.get_prep_lookup()
File "/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/lookups.py", line
136, in get_prep_lookup
return self.lhs.output_field.get_prep_lookup(self.lookup_name,
self.rhs)
File
"/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/fields/__init__.py", line
734, in get_prep_lookup
return self.get_prep_value(value)
File
"/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/fields/__init__.py", line
1432, in get_prep_value
value = super(DateTimeField, self).get_prep_value(value)
File
"/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/fields/__init__.py", line
1288, in get_prep_value
return self.to_python(value)
File
"/Users/matt/Development/django/django/db/models/fields/__init__.py", line
1391, in to_python
parsed = parse_datetime(value)
File "/Users/matt/Development/django/django/utils/dateparse.py", line
93, in parse_datetime
match = datetime_re.match(value)
TypeError: expected string or buffer
}}}
https://github.com/schinckel/django/tree/query-with-ranges
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24837#comment:1>
Django
Reporter: schinckel | Owner:
Type: Uncategorized | Status: new
Component: contrib.postgres | Version: 1.8
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Easy pickings: 1 | UI/UX: 0
Comment (by schinckel):
In the past, I have written a Range field, and a lookup to use Range
types, however I was not using {{{Lookup.process_rhs(qn, connection)}}}:
instead I was first looking to see if the {{{rhs}}} argument was a range
type, and if it was, then just letting that go through.
Part of that test was inspecting a string argument and seeing if it
matched a regex, which is probably not as hygienic as actually processing
the argument correctly.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24837#comment:2>
Django
Reporter: schinckel | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: contrib.postgres | Version: master
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
----------------------------------+------------------------------------
Changes (by timgraham):
* version: 1.8 => master
* type: Uncategorized => New feature
* easy: 1 => 0
* stage: Unreviewed => Accepted
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24837#comment:3>
Django
Reporter: schinckel | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: contrib.postgres | Version: master
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
----------------------------------+------------------------------------
Comment (by mjtamlyn):
I've made some progress, see
https://github.com/django/django/compare/master...mjtamlyn:query-with-
ranges
There is no operator for `not_contained_by` in postgres so I removed that
pseudocode from schinckel's branch.
The code passes the tests but needs some serious tidying up to cover non-
simple use cases (F objects, complex expressions with output types etc).
Sadly a lot of explicit typecasting is required to make postgres not freak
out. As a result, I think we likely should just support "matching"
operations. For example this means big integer in a big integer range,
datetime in a datetime range not a date range.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24837#comment:4>
Django
Reporter: schinckel | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: contrib.postgres | Version: master
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
----------------------------------+------------------------------------
Comment (by schinckel):
Hmm. Is casting a datetime to a date (i.e., in python doing a
{{{.date()}}}) going to give the same result as doing the comparison in
the database with a datetime (contained by a daterange)?
My gut feeling is yes, but I may not have had enough coffee this morning
to make an educated guess.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24837#comment:5>
Django
Reporter: schinckel | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: contrib.postgres | Version: master
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
----------------------------------+------------------------------------
Comment (by schinckel):
I know it _should_ just work, but is it worth having tests for
{{{.exclude(...__contained_by=...)}}} worthwhile?
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24837#comment:6>
Django
Reporter: schinckel | Owner:
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: contrib.postgres | Version: master
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
| checkin
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
Changes (by mjtamlyn):
* stage: Accepted => Ready for checkin
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24837#comment:7>
Django
Reporter: schinckel | Owner: Marc
| Tamlyn <marc.tamlyn@…>
Type: New feature | Status: closed
Component: contrib.postgres | Version: master
Severity: Normal | Resolution: fixed
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Ready for
| checkin
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
* owner: => Marc Tamlyn <marc.tamlyn@…>
* status: new => closed
* resolution: => fixed
Comment:
In [changeset:"7bda2d8ebc7833747363ac837fecb6535c817dcd" 7bda2d8]:
{{{
#!CommitTicketReference repository=""
revision="7bda2d8ebc7833747363ac837fecb6535c817dcd"
Fixed #24837 -- field__contained_by=Range
Provide `contained_by` lookups for the equivalent single valued fields
related to the range field types. This acts as the opposite direction to
rangefield__contains.
With thanks to schinckel for the idea and initial tests.
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24837#comment:8>