Search Results

Search found 4150 results on 166 pages for 'markov models'.

Page 32/166 | < Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >

  • How to render a Partial from a Model in Rails 2.3.5

    - by empire29
    I have a Rails 2.3.5 application and Im trying to render several Partials from within a Model (i know, i know -- im not supposed to). The reason im doing this is im integrating a Comet server (APE) into my Rails app and need to push updates out based on the Model's events (ex. after_create). I have tried doing this: ActionView::Base.new(Rails::Configuration.new.view_path).render(:partial => "pages/show", :locals => {:page => self}) Which allows me to render simple partials that don't user helpers, however if I try to user a link_to in my partial, i receive an error stating: undefined method `url_for' for nil:NilClass I've made sure that the object being passed into the "project_path(project)" is not nil. I've also tried including: include ActionView::Helpers::UrlHelper include ActionController::UrlWriter in the Module that contains the method that makes the above "render" call. Does anyone know how to work around this? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Django: many-to-one fields and data integrity

    - by John
    Let's say that I have a Person who runs an inventory system. Each Person has some Cars, and each Car has a very large number of Parts (thousands, let's say). A Person, Bob, uses a Django form to create a Car. Now, Bob goes to create some Parts. It is only at the form level that Django knows that the Parts belong to some specific Car, and that the Parts.ForeignKey(Car) field should only have a specific Car as a choice. When creating a Part, you have to mess with the form's constructor or similar in order to limit the choice of Cars to only the cars owned by Bob. It does not seem proper that to enforce this ownership at the form level. It seems that other users' Cars must be inaccessible to anyone but the owner of the Car. What do you all think about this, and is there any way to enforce this?

    Read the article

  • Django - calling full_clean() inside of clean() equivalent?

    - by orokusaki
    For transaction purposes, I need all field validations to run before clean() is done. Is this possible? My thinking is this: @transaction.commit_on_success def clean(self): # Some fun stuff here. self.full_clean() # I know this isn't correct, but it illustrates my point. but obviously that's not correct, because it would be recursive. Is there a way to make sure that everything that full_clean() does is done inside clean()?

    Read the article

  • XML file as model for django project

    - by Ankur Chauhan
    Hi, I have a XML file that is managed by other programs, I am writing a web service such that users are able to query this file. In essence i am using a xml based database instead of using sql as the model database in Django. how do i do this? all the tutorials that i find use a sql database in the backend. is there a way to use the xml file as a database.

    Read the article

  • user model password field default password field in django

    - by imran-glt
    Hi, I've created a custom user model in my application. This user model is working fine, but there are a couple of problems I have with it. 1) The change password link in the my register.html page doesn't work? 2) The default password box on the add/edit page for a user is a little unfriendly. Ideally, what I'd like is the two password fields from the change password form on the add/edit user form in the admin, which will automatically turn convert the entered password into a valid encrypted password in Django. This would make the admin system MUCH friendlier and much more suited to my needs, as a fair number of user accounts will be created and maintained manually in this app, and the person responsible for doing so will likely be scared off at the sight of that admin field, or just type a clear text password and wonder why it doesn't work. Is this possible / How do I do this?

    Read the article

  • Doubt about django model API

    - by Clash
    Hello guys! So, here is what I want to do. I have a model Staff, that has a foreign key to the User model. I also have a model Match that has a foreign key to the User model. I want to select how much Matches every Staff has. I don't know how to do that, so far I only got it working for the User model. From Staff, it will not allow to annonate Match. This is what is working right now User.objects.annotate(ammount=Count("match")).filter(Q(ammount__gt=0)).order_by("ammount") And this is what I wanted to do Staff.objects.annotate(ammount=Count("match")).filter(Q(ammount__gt=0)).order_by("ammount") And by the way, is there any way to filter the matches? I want to filter the matches by a certain column. Thanks a lot in advance!

    Read the article

  • Multiprogramming in Django, writing to the Database

    - by Marcus Whybrow
    Introduction I have the following code which checks to see if a similar model exists in the database, and if it does not it creates the new model: class BookProfile(): # ... def save(self, *args, **kwargs): uniqueConstraint = {'book_instance': self.book_instance, 'collection': self.collection} # Test for other objects with identical values profiles = BookProfile.objects.filter(Q(**uniqueConstraint) & ~Q(pk=self.pk)) # If none are found create the object, else fail. if len(profiles) == 0: super(BookProfile, self).save(*args, **kwargs) else: raise ValidationError('A Book Profile for that book instance in that collection already exists') I first build my constraints, then search for a model with those values which I am enforcing must be unique Q(**uniqueConstraint). In addition I ensure that if the save method is updating and not inserting, that we do not find this object when looking for other similar objects ~Q(pk=self.pk). I should mention that I ham implementing soft delete (with a modified objects manager which only shows non-deleted objects) which is why I must check for myself rather then relying on unique_together errors. Problem Right thats the introduction out of the way. My problem is that when multiple identical objects are saved in quick (or as near as simultaneous) succession, sometimes both get added even though the first being added should prevent the second. I have tested the code in the shell and it succeeds every time I run it. Thus my assumption is if say we have two objects being added Object A and Object B. Object A runs its check upon save() being called. Then the process saving Object B gets some time on the processor. Object B runs that same test, but Object A has not yet been added so Object B is added to the database. Then Object A regains control of the processor, and has allready run its test, even though identical Object B is in the database, it adds it regardless. My Thoughts The reason I fear multiprogramming could be involved is that each Object A and Object is being added through an API save view, so a request to the view is made for each save, thus not a single request with multiple sequential saves on objects. It might be the case that Apache is creating a process for each request, and thus causing the problems I think I am seeing. As you would expect, the problem only occurs sometimes, which is characteristic of multiprogramming or multiprocessing errors. If this is the case, is there a way to make the test and set parts of the save() method a critical section, so that a process switch cannot happen between the test and the set?

    Read the article

  • Using set with values from a table

    - by gozzilli
    I'm writing a database of all DVDs I have at home. One of the fields, actors, I would like it to be a set of values from an other table, which is storing actors. So for every film I want to store a list of actors, all of which selected from a list of actors, taken from a different table. Is it possible? How do I do this? It would be a set of foreign keys basically. I'm using a MySQL database for a Django application (python), so any hint in SQL or Python would be much appreciated. I hope the question is clear, many thanks.

    Read the article

  • Django model fields getter / setter

    - by pistacchio
    Hi, is there something like getters and setters for django model's fields? For example, I have a text field in which i need to make a string replace before it get saved (in the admin panel, for both insert and update operations) and make another, different replace each time it is read. Those string replace are dynamic and need to be done at the moment of saving and reading. As I'm using python 2.5, I cannot use python 2.6 getters / setters. Any help?

    Read the article

  • create_or_update in ModelForm

    - by ykaganovich
    I want to have a ModelForm that can create_or_update a model instance based on the request parameters. I've been trying to cobble something together, but am realizing that my python fu is not strong enough, and the ModelForm implementation code is a quite hairy. I found this create_or_update snipplet for working with a Model, but I think it would be incredibly useful if it were integrated with a ModelForm. I would expect it to behave similarly to ModelForm.save(): class BetterModelForm(forms.ModelForm): def init(self, *args, **kwargs) def create_or_update(self): #magic return (instance, created, updated) Conversely I'd also be interested in hearing compelling reasons why this is not a good idea.

    Read the article

  • Django database caching

    - by hekevintran
    I have a Django form that uses an integer field to lookup a model object by its primary key. The form has a save() method that uses the model object referred to by the integer field. The model's manager's get() method is called twice, once in the clean method and once in the save() method: class MyForm(forms.Form): id_a = fields.IntegerField() def clean_id_a(user_id): id_a = self.cleaned_data['id_a'] try: # here is the first call to get MyModel.objects.get(id=id_a) except User.DoesNotExist: raise ValidationError('Object does not exist') def save(self): id_a = self.cleaned_data['id_a'] # here is the second call to get my_model_object = MyModel.objects.get(id=id_a) # do other stuff I wasn't sure whether this hits the database two times or one time so I returned the object itself in the clean method so that I could avoid a second get() call. Does calling get() hit the database two times? Or is the object cached in the thread? class MyForm(forms.Form): id_a = fields.IntegerField() def clean_id_a(user_id): id_a = self.cleaned_data['id_a'] try: # here is my workaround return MyModel.objects.get(id=id_a) except User.DoesNotExist: raise ValidationError('Object does not exist') def save(self): # looking up the cleaned value returns the model object my_model_object = self.cleaned_data['id_a'] # do other stuff

    Read the article

  • How to put an InlineFormSet into a ModelFormSet in Django?

    - by Jannis
    Hi, I'd like to display a number of forms via a ModelFormSet where each one of the forms displays in turn InlineFormSets for all objects connected to the object. Now I'm not really sure how to provide the instances for each ModelFormSet. I thought about subclassing BaseModelFormSet but I have no clue on where to start and would like to know whether this is possible at all before I go through all the trouble. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Django: Setting up database code tables (aka reference tables, domain tables)?

    - by User
    Often times applications will need some database code tables (aka reference tables or domain tables or lookup tables). Suppose I have a model class called Status with a field called name that could hold values like: Canceled Pending InProgress Complete Where and at what point would I setup these values in Django? Its like a one time operation to setup these values in the database. Infrequently, these values could be added to.

    Read the article

  • Django Querysets -- need a less expensive way to do this..

    - by rh0dium
    Hi all, I have a problem with some code and I believe it is because of the expense of the queryset. I am looking for a much less expensive (in terms of time) way to to this.. log.info("Getting Users") employees = Employee.objects.filter(is_active = True) log.info("Have Users") if opt.supervisor: if opt.hierarchical: people = getSubs(employees, " ".join(args)) else: people = employees.filter(supervisor__name__icontains = " ".join(args)) else: log.info("Filtering Users") people = employees.filter(name__icontains = " ".join(args)) | \ employees.filter(unix_accounts__username__icontains = " ".join(args)) log.info("Filtered Users") log.info("Processing data") np = [] for person in people: unix, p4, bugz = "No", "No", "No" if len(person.unix_accounts.all()): unix = "Yes" if len(person.perforce_accounts.all()): p4 = "Yes" if len(person.bugzilla_accounts.all()): bugz = "Yes" if person.cell_phone != "": exphone = fixphone(person.cell_phone) elif person.other_phone != "": exphone = fixphone(person.other_phone) else: exphone = "" np.append({ 'name':person.name, 'office_phone': fixphone(person.office_phone), 'position': person.position, 'location': person.location.description, 'email': person.email, 'functional_area': person.functional_area.name, 'department': person.department.name, 'supervisor': person.supervisor.name, 'unix': unix, 'perforce': p4, 'bugzilla':bugz, 'cell_phone': fixphone(exphone), 'fax': fixphone(person.fax), 'last_update': person.last_update.ctime() }) log.info("Have data") Now this results in a log which looks like this.. 19:00:55 INFO phone phone Getting Users 19:00:57 INFO phone phone Have Users 19:00:57 INFO phone phone Processing data 19:01:30 INFO phone phone Have data As you can see it's taking over 30 seconds to simply iterate over the data. That is way too expensive. Can someone clue me into a more efficient way to do this. I thought that if I did the first filter that would make things easier but seems to have no effect. I'm at a loss on this one. Thanks To be clear this is about 1500 employees -- Not too many!!

    Read the article

  • Is django orm & templates thread safe?

    - by Piotr Czapla
    I'm using django orm and templates to create a background service that is ran as management command. Do you know if django is thread safe? I'd like to use threads to speed up processing. The processing is blocked by I/O not CPU so I don't care about performance hit caused by GIL.

    Read the article

  • Duplicate django query set?

    - by Piotr Czapla
    I have a simple django's query set like: qs = AModel.objects.exclude(state="F").order_by("order") I'd like to use it as follows: qs[0:3].update(state='F') expected = qs[3] # throws error here But last statement throws: "Cannot update a query once a slice has been taken." How can I duplicate the query set?

    Read the article

  • Extending the User model with custom fields in Django

    - by Gaurav
    I am trying to extend the User model so that I can add my own custom fields but I keep getting an error stating: 'NoneType' object has no attribute '_default_manager' whenever I try to use user.get_profile() to add values to the custom field i.e. whenever I use it like so: user = User.objects.create_user(username, email, password) user.first_name = fname user.last_name = lname user.save() uinfo = user.get_profile() uinfo.timezone = "Asia/Pune" uinfo.save() I have already followed the steps given at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/44109/extending-the-user-model-with-custom-fields-in-django/965883#965883 with no luck.

    Read the article

  • Explanation of contribute_to_class

    - by anon.
    I'm attempted to extend code, and have come across an issue, I don't understand a line of code. I know the outcome of it - but I don't understand how it happens and am naturally enough scared to change it. The line of code I've come across is this: MyGenericRelation().contribute_to_class(model, 'field_name') The result of this code is a field with 'field_name' is added to the 'model' and from what I gather the objects inside the field are a list of type X (part of MyGenericRelation). I'm wondering if anyone can explain how this works. As in, why do I get a list of X objects attached to 'field_name' and if does it have to be generic relations prior to contribute_to_class or would using an actual model type, say 'Y' just give me a list of Y's. To be honest, I am more interested in the affect and functionality of the contribute_to_class method.

    Read the article

  • How do I uninstall Django Evolution?

    - by Rhubarb
    I installed it in my dev project. I would like to remove it and any trace of it in my database and my django app, not to mention my python install. I found it didn't quite do what I needed, but that's another topic, and I'm moving to South. Can I just delete the evolution tables in my django db, and remove it from the app settings? Or is there more to it?

    Read the article

  • Incremement Page Hit Count in Django

    - by Andrew C
    I have a table with an IntegerField (hit_count), and when a page is visited (ie. http://site/page/3) I want record id 3 'hit_count' column in the database to increment by 1. The query should be like: update table set hit_count = hit_count + 1 where id=3 Can I do this with the standard Django Model conventions? Or should I just write the query by hand? I'm starting a new project, so I am trying to avoid hacks. We'll see how long this lasts! Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How can I handle dynamic calculated attributes in a model in Django?

    - by bullfish
    In Django I calculate the breadcrumb (a list of fathers) for an geographical object. Since it is not going to change very often, I am thinking of pre calculating it once the object is saved or initialized. 1.) What would be better? Which solution would have a better performance? To calculate it at _init_ or to calculate it when the object is saved (the object takes about 500-2000 characters in the DB)? 2.) I tried to overwrite the _init_ or save() methods but I don't know how to use attributes of the just saved object. Accessing *args, **kwargs did not work. How can I access them? Do I have to save, access the father and then save again? 3.) If I decide to save the breadcrumb. Whats the best way to do it? I used http://www.djangosnippets.org/snippets/1694/ and have crumb = PickledObjectField(). Thats the method to calculate the attribute crumb() def _breadcrumb(self): breadcrumb = [ ] x = self while True: x = x.father try: if hasattr(x, 'country'): breadcrumb.append(x.country) elif hasattr(x, 'region'): breadcrumb.append(x.region) elif hasattr(x, 'city'): breadcrumb.append(x.city) else: break except: break breadcrumb.reverse() return breadcrumb Thats my save-Method: def save(self,*args, **kwargs): # how can I access the father ob the object? father = self.father # does obviously not work father = kwargs['father'] # does not work either # the breadcrumb gets calculated here self.crumb = self._breadcrumb(father) super(GeoObject, self).save(*args,**kwargs) Please help me out. I am working on this for days now. Thank you.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >