Search Results

Search found 4129 results on 166 pages for 'models'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 21/166 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • ManyToManyField "table exist" error on syncdb

    - by Derek Reynolds
    When I include a ModelToModelField to one of my models the following error is thrown. Traceback (most recent call last): File "manage.py", line 11, in <module> execute_manager(settings) File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/django/core/management/__init__.py", line 362, in execute_manager utility.execute() File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/django/core/management/__init__.py", line 303, in execute self.fetch_command(subcommand).run_from_argv(self.argv) File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/django/core/management/base.py", line 195, in run_from_argv self.execute(*args, **options.__dict__) File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/django/core/management/base.py", line 222, in execute output = self.handle(*args, **options) File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/django/core/management/base.py", line 351, in handle return self.handle_noargs(**options) File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/django/core/management/commands/syncdb.py", line 93, in handle_noargs cursor.execute(statement) File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/django/db/backends/util.py", line 19, in execute return self.cursor.execute(sql, params) File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/django/db/backends/mysql/base.py", line 84, in execute return self.cursor.execute(query, args) File "build/bdist.macosx-10.6-universal/egg/MySQLdb/cursors.py", line 173, in execute File "build/bdist.macosx-10.6-universal/egg/MySQLdb/connections.py", line 36, in defaulterrorhandler _mysql_exceptions.OperationalError: (1050, "Table 'orders_proof_approved_associations' already exists") Field definition: approved_associations = models.ManyToManyField(Association) Everything works fine when I remove the field, and the table is no where in site. Any thoughts as to why this would happen?

    Read the article

  • Can Django admin handle a one-to-many relationship via related_name?

    - by Mat
    The Django admin happily supports many-to-one and many-to-many relationships through an HTML <SELECT> form field, allowing selection of one or many options respectively. There's even a nice Javascript filter_horizontal widget to help. I'm trying to do the same from the one-to-many side through related_name. I don't see how it's much different from many-to-many as far as displaying it in the form is concerned, I just need a multi-select SELECT list. But I cannot simply add the related_name value to my ModelAdmin-derived field list. Does Django support one-to-many fields in this way? My Django model something like this (contrived to simplify the example): class Person(models.Model): ... manager = models.ForeignKey('self', related_name='staff', null=True, blank=True, ) From the Person admin page, I can easily get a <SELECT> list showing all possible staff to choose this person's manager from. I also want to display a multiple-selection <SELECT> list of all the manager's staff. I don't want to use inlines, as I don't want to edit the subordinates details; I do want to be able to add/remove people from the list. (I'm trying to use django-ajax-selects to replace the SELECT widget, but that's by-the-by.)

    Read the article

  • How can I filter these Django records?

    - by mipadi
    I have a set of Django models as shown in the following diagram (the names of the reverse relationships are shown in the yellow bubbles): In each relationship, a Person may have 0 or more of the items. Additionally, the slug field is (unfortunately) not unique; multiple Person records may have the same slug fields. Essentially these records are duplicates. I want to obtain a list of all records that meet the following criteria: All duplicate records (that is, having the same slug) with at least one Entry OR at least one Audio OR at least one Episode OR at least one Article. So far, I have the following query: Person.objects.values('slug').annotate(num_records=Count('slug')).filter(num_records__gt=1) This groups all records by slug, then adds a num_records attribute that says how many records have that slug, but the additional filtering is not performed (and I don't even know if this would work right anyway, since, given a set of duplicate records, one may have, e.g., and Entry and the other may have an Article). In a nutshell, I want to find all duplicate records and collapse them, along with their associated models, into one record. What's the best way to do this with Django?

    Read the article

  • How can I display multiple django modelformset forms together?

    - by JT
    I have a problem with needing to provide multiple model backed forms on the same page. I understand how to do this with single forms, i.e. just create both the forms call them something different then use the appropriate names in the template. Now how exactly do you expand that solution to work with modelformsets? The wrinkle, of course, is that each 'form' must be rendered together in the appropriate fieldset. For example I want my template to produce something like this: <fieldset> <label for="id_base-0-desc">Home Base Description:</label> <input id="id_base-0-desc" type="text" name="base-0-desc" maxlength="100" /> <label for="id_likes-0-icecream">Want ice cream?</label> <input type="checkbox" name="likes-0-icecream" id="id_likes-0-icecream" /> </fieldset> <fieldset> <label for="id_base-1-desc">Home Base Description:</label> <input id="id_base-1-desc" type="text" name="base-1-desc" maxlength="100" /> <label for="id_likes-1-icecream">Want ice cream?</label> <input type="checkbox" name="likes-1-icecream" id="id_likes-1-icecream" /> </fieldset> I am using a loop like this to process the results for base_form, likes_form in map(None, base_forms, likes_forms): which works as I'd expect (I'm using map because the # of forms can be different). The problem is that I can't figure out a way to do the same thing with the templating engine. The system does work if I layout all the base models together then all the likes models after wards, but it doesn't meet the layout requirements.

    Read the article

  • get and set for class in model - MVC 2 asp.net

    - by bergin
    Hi there, I want to improve the program so it has a proper constructor but also works with the models environment of MVC. I currently have: public void recordDocument(int order_id, string filename, string physical_path, string slug, int bytes) { ArchiveDocument doc = new ArchiveDocument(); doc.order_id = order_id; doc.filename = filename; doc.physical_path = physical_path; doc.slug = slug; doc.bytes = bytes; db.ArchiveDocuments.InsertOnSubmit(doc); } This obviously should be a constructor and should change to the leaner: public void recordDocument(ArchiveDocument doc) { db.ArchiveDocuments.InsertOnSubmit(doc); } with a get & set somewhere else - not sure of the syntax - do I create a partial class? so: creating in the somewhere repository - ArchiveDocument doc = new ArchiveDocument(order_id, idTaggedFilename, physical_path, slug, bytes); and then: namespace ordering.Models { public partial class ArchiveDocument { int order_id, string filename, string physical_path, string slug, int bytes; public archiveDocument(int order_id, string filename, string physical_path, string slug, int bytes){ this.order_id = order_id; etc } } How should I alter the code?

    Read the article

  • Passing arguments and conditions to model in codeigniter

    - by stormdrain
    I'm adding some models to a project, and was wondering if there is a "best practice" kind of approach to creating models: Does it make sense to create a function for each specific query? I was starting to do this, then had the idea of creating a generic function that I could pass parameters to. e.g: Instead of function getClients(){ return $this->db->query('SELECT client_id,last FROM Names ORDER BY id DESC'); } function getClientNames($clid){ return $this->db->query('SELECT * FROM Names WHERE client_id = '.$clid); } function getClientName($nameID){ return $this->db->query('SELECT * FROM Names WHERE id ='.$nameID); } } Something like function getNameData($args,$cond){ if($cond==''){ $q=$this->db->query('SELECT '.$args.' FROM Names'); return $q; }else{ $q=$this->db->query('SELECT '.$args.' FROM Names WHERE '.$cond); return $q; } } where I can pass the fields and conditions (if applicable) to the model. Is there a reason the latter example would be a bad idea? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Zend models and database relathionships

    - by user608341
    Hi people, i'm starting with Zend Framework and I'm a little bit confused with models and relathionships (one-to-many, many-to-many etc). The "Zend Framework Quick Start" says to create a Zend_Db_Table, a Data Mapper and finally our model class Suppose we have a database like this: table A ( id integer primary key, name varchar(50) ); table B ( id integer primary key, a_id integer references A ); then, i'll create: Application_Model_DbTable_A extends Zend_Db_Table_Abstract, Application_Model_AMapper, Application_Model_A, Application_Model_DbTable_B extends Zend_Db_Table_Abstract, Application_Model_BMapper, Application_Model_B, if I understood, i've to store the references informations in Application_Model_DbTable_A: protected $_dependentTables = array('B'); and Application_Model_DbTable_B: protected $_referenceMap = array( 'A' => array( 'columns' => array('a_id'), 'refTableClass' => 'A', 'refColums' => array('id') ) ); and my models class: class Application_Model_A { protected $_id; protected $_name; public function __construct(array $options = null) { if(is_array($options)) { $this->setOptions($options); } } public function __set($name, $value) { $method = 'set' . $name; if (('mapper' == $name) || !method_exists($this, $method)) { throw new Exception('Invalid property'); } $this->$method($value); } public function __get($name) { $method = 'get' . $name; if (('mapper' == $name) || !method_exists($this, $method)) { throw new Exception('Invalid property'); } return $this->$method(); } public function setOptions(array $options) { $methods = get_class_methods($this); foreach ($options as $key => $value) { $method = 'set' . ucfirst($key); if (in_array($method, $methods)) { $this->$method($value); } } return $this; } public function setName($name) { $this->_name = (string) $name; return $this; } public function getName() { return $this->_name; } public function setId($id) { $this->_id = (int) $id; return $this; } public function getId() { return $this->_id; } class Application_Model_B { protected $_id; protected $_a_id; public function __construct(array $options = null) { if(is_array($options)) { $this->setOptions($options); } } public function __set($name, $value) { $method = 'set' . $name; if (('mapper' == $name) || !method_exists($this, $method)) { throw new Exception('Invalid property'); } $this->$method($value); } public function __get($name) { $method = 'get' . $name; if (('mapper' == $name) || !method_exists($this, $method)) { throw new Exception('Invalid property'); } return $this->$method(); } public function setOptions(array $options) { $methods = get_class_methods($this); foreach ($options as $key => $value) { $method = 'set' . ucfirst($key); if (in_array($method, $methods)) { $this->$method($value); } } return $this; } public function setA_id($a_id) { $this->_a_id = (int) $a_id; return $this; } public function getA_id() { return $this->_a_id; } public function setId($id) { $this->_id = (int) $id; return $this; } public function getId() { return $this->_id; } it's that right?

    Read the article

  • Django ORM leaves opened connections

    - by cleg
    I'm using django ORM with Postgres. After any operations with models (e.g. simple select) in postgres appears new opened connection in IDLE state. I've tried all possible transaction manipulations, I've tried calling connection.close() manually. All useless. And sooner or later, I'm recieveing "FATAL: connection limit exceeded for non-superusers" message. What can I've made wrong?

    Read the article

  • Filtering manager for django model, customized by user

    - by valya
    Hi there! I have a model, smth like this: class Action(models.Model): def can_be_applied(self, user): #whatever return True and I want to override its default Manager. But I don't know how to pass the current user variable to the manager, so I have to do smth like this: [act for act in Action.objects.all() if act.can_be_applied(current_user)] How do I get rid of it by just overriding the manager? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Extended Django base-class with multiple instances

    - by Gijs
    I'm modeling a simple movie database using Django. models.py defines a base model Person. I extend Person into Actor and Director, which works as I imagined. Persons must be unique. When (in the Admin) I create an instance of Actor, and this person is also a Director, it won't save because of the unique = True. Any ideas how to solve this problem? (generic foreign keys?) Thx

    Read the article

  • In Django Combobox choices, how do you lookup description from short value?

    - by MikeN
    In Django models/forms the choices for a combobox often look like this: food_choices = (("",""), ("1", "Falafel"), ("2", "Hummus"), ("3", "Eggplant Stuff, Babaganoush???"), So the value to be stored in the database will be 1/2/3, but the displayed value on the form will be the long description. When we are working in code outside a form, how can we quickly lookup the long description given the short value stored in the model? So I want to map short values to long values: print foo("1") "Falafel"

    Read the article

  • Django: name of many to many items in the admin interface

    - by Adam
    I have a many to many field, which I'm displaying in the django admin panel. When I add multiple items, they all come up as "ASGGroup object" in the display selector. Instead, I want them to come up as whatever the ASGGroup.name field is set to. How do I do this? My models looks like: class Thing(Model): read_groups = ManyToManyField('ASGGroup', related_name="thing_read", blank=True) class ASGGroup(Model): name = CharField(max_length=63, null=True) But what I'm seeing the m2m widget display is:

    Read the article

  • Model associations

    - by Kalyan M
    I have two models Library and Book. In my Library model, I have an array - book_ids. The primary key of Book model is ID. How do I create a has_many :books relation in my library model? This is a legacy database we are using with rails. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • List of Django model instance foreign keys losing consistency during state changes.

    - by Joshua
    I have model, Match, with two foreign keys: class Match(model.Model): winner = models.ForeignKey(Player) loser = models.ForeignKey(Player) When I loop over Match I find that each model instance uses a unique object for the foreign key. This ends up biting me because it introduces inconsistency, here is an example: >>> def print_elo(match_list): ... for match in match_list: ... print match.winner.id, match.winner.elo ... print match.loser.id, match.loser.elo ... >>> print_elo(teacher_match_list) 4 1192.0000000000 2 1192.0000000000 5 1208.0000000000 2 1192.0000000000 5 1208.0000000000 4 1192.0000000000 >>> teacher_match_list[0].winner.elo = 3000 >>> print_elo(teacher_match_list) 4 3000 # Object 4 2 1192.0000000000 5 1208.0000000000 2 1192.0000000000 5 1208.0000000000 4 1192.0000000000 # Object 4 >>> I solved this problem like so: def unify_refrences(match_list): """Makes each unique refrence to a model instance non-unique. In cases where multiple model instances are being used django creates a new object for each model instance, even if it that means creating the same instance twice. If one of these objects has its state changed any other object refrencing the same model instance will not be updated. This method ensure that state changes are seen. It makes sure that variables which hold objects pointing to the same model all hold the same object. Visually this means that a list of [var1, var2] whose internals look like so: var1 --> object1 --> model1 var2 --> object2 --> model1 Will result in the internals being changed so that: var1 --> object1 --> model1 var2 ------^ """ match_dict = {} for match in match_list: try: match.winner = match_dict[match.winner.id] except KeyError: match_dict[match.winner.id] = match.winner try: match.loser = match_dict[match.loser.id] except KeyError: match_dict[match.loser.id] = match.loser My question: Is there a way to solve the problem more elegantly through the use of QuerySets without needing to call save at any point? If not, I'd like to make the solution more generic: how can you get a list of the foreign keys on a model instance or do you have a better generic solution to my problem? Please correct me if you think I don't understand why this is happening.

    Read the article

  • Keeping track of changes - Django

    - by RadiantHex
    Hi folks!! I have various models of which I would like to keep track and collect statistical data. The problem is how to store the changes throughout time. I thought of various alternative: Storing a log in a TextField, open it and update it every time the model is saved. Alternatively pickle a list and store it in a TextField. Save logs on hard drive. What are your suggestions?

    Read the article

  • BI with Django?

    - by Helmut
    Is there a way to develop Bi (Business Intelligence) solutions with Django? Therefore it should be possible to define models with more than one Datasource. Is anybody out there who has experienced BI with Django? How could it work ?

    Read the article

  • How do I store multiple copies of the same field in Django?

    - by Alistair
    I'm storing OLAC metadata which describes linguistic resources. Many of the elements of the metadata are repeatable -- for example, a resource can have two languages, three authors and four dates associated with it. Is there any way of storing this in one model? It seems like overkill to define a model for each repeatable metadata element -- especially since the models will only have one field: it's value.

    Read the article

  • Django - 2 fields unique together

    - by webvulture
    Suppose, I want to record say poll choices by users everyday. In this case, i have a table named vote which has columns poll , choice and user-id . So how can i out the constraint (maybe in the django models or wherever possible) that poll and user-id both should not be the same for any entry but like the same user can vote for various different polls once and obviously various users can vote for the same poll. I hope I am clear.

    Read the article

  • django url from another template than the one associated with the view-function

    - by dana
    Heyy there, i have an application, and in my urls.py i have something like that: urlpatterns = patterns('', url(r'^profile_view/(?P<id>\d+)/$', profile_view, name='profile_view'),) meaning that the profile_view function has id as a parameter. Now, i want to call that function from another template than the one associated with the def-view that has this url. How should i do that? i have to put two render_to_response to one same function, in order to render the objects from both models? thank you!

    Read the article

  • Loading from pickled data causes database error with new saves

    - by hibbie
    In order to save time moving data I pickled some models and dumped them to file. I then reloaded them into another database using the same exact model. The save worked fine and the objects kept their old id which is what I wanted. However, when saving new objects I run into nextval errors. Not being very adept with postgres, I'm not sure how to fix this so I can keep old records with their existing ID while being able to continue adding new data. Thanks, Thomas

    Read the article

  • SQL commands generated in Django by running sqlall

    - by k-g-f
    In my Django app, I just ran $ python manage.py sqlall and I see a lot of SQL statements that look like this, when describing FK relationships: ALTER TABLE `app1_model1` ADD CONSTRAINT model2_id_refs_id_728de91f FOREIGN KEY (`model2_id`) REFERENCES `app1_model2` (`id`); Where does "7218de91f" come from? I would like to know because I'd like to manually write SQL statements to accompany models changes in the app so that my db's can be kept up to date.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >