Search Results

Search found 3569 results on 143 pages for 'django celery'.

Page 46/143 | < Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >

  • How to combine 2 or more querysets in a Django view?

    - by Espen Christensen
    Hi, I am trying to build the search for a Django site I am building, and in the search I am searching in 3 different models. And to get pagination on the search result list I would like to use a generic object_list view to display the results. But to do that i have to merge 3 querysets into one. How can i do that? Ive tried this: result_list = [] page_list = Page.objects.filter(Q(title__icontains=cleaned_search_term) | Q(body__icontains=cleaned_search_term)) article_list = Article.objects.filter(Q(title__icontains=cleaned_search_term) | Q(body__icontains=cleaned_search_term) | Q(tags__icontains=cleaned_search_term)) post_list = Post.objects.filter(Q(title__icontains=cleaned_search_term) | Q(body__icontains=cleaned_search_term) | Q(tags__icontains=cleaned_search_term)) for x in page_list: result_list.append(x) for x in article_list: result_list.append(x) for x in post_list: result_list.append(x) return object_list(request, queryset=result_list, template_object_name='result', paginate_by=10, extra_context={'search_term': search_term}, template_name="search/result_list.html") But this doesnt work I get an error when i try to use that list in the generic view. The list is missing the clone attribute. Anybody know how i can merge the three lists, page_list, article_list and post_list?

    Read the article

  • how do I use html block snippets with dynamic content inside a django template that extends another

    - by stackoverflowusername
    Hi. Can someone please help me figure out a way to achieve the following (see snippets below) in Django templates? I know that you cannot use more than one extends, but I am new to django and I do not know the proper syntax for something like this. I want to be able to do this so that I can use my nested div layout for css reasons without having to type it like that each time and risking a typo. In words, I want to be able to have a page template extend my base.html file and then use html snippets of dynamic template content (i.e. template for loops or other template logic devices, not just a context variable I set from my view controller). ------------------------------------------------------------ base.html ------------------------------------------------------------ <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" /> <title>{% block title %}Title{% endblock %}</title> </head> <body> <div class="wrapper"> <div class="header"> This is the common header </div> <div class="nav"> This is the common nav </div> {% if messages %} <div class="messages"> <ul> {% for message in messages %} <li{% if message.tags %} class="{{ message.tags }}"{% endif %}>{{ message }}</li> {% endfor %} </ul> </div> {% endif %} <div class="content"> {% block content %}Page Content{% endblock %} </div> <div class="footer"> This is the common footer </div> </div> </body> </html> ------------------------------------------------------------ columnlayout2.html ------------------------------------------------------------ <div class="twocol container2"> <div class="container1"> <div class="col1"> {% block twocol_col1 %}{% endblock %} </div> <div class="col2"> {% block twocol_col2 %}{% endblock %} </div> </div> </div> ------------------------------------------------------------ columnlayout3.html ------------------------------------------------------------ <div class="threecol container3"> <div class="container2"> <div class="container1"> <div class="col1"> {% block threecol_col1 %}{% endblock %} </div> <div class="col2"> {% block threecol_col2 %}{% endblock %} </div> <div class="col3"> {% block threecol_col3 %}{% endblock %} </div> </div> </div> </div> ------------------------------------------------------------ page.html ------------------------------------------------------------ {% extends "base.html" %} {% block content %} {% extends "columnlayout2.html" %} {% block twocol_col1 %}twocolumn column 1{% endblock %} {% block twocol_col2 %}twocolumn column 2{% endblock %} {% extends "columnlayout3.html" %} {% block threecol_col1 %}threecol column 1{% endblock %} {% block threecol_col2 %}threecol column 2{% endblock %} {% block threecol_col3 %}threecol column 3{% endblock %} {% endblock %} ------------------------------------------------------------ page.html output ------------------------------------------------------------ <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" /> <title>Title</title> </head> <body> <div class="wrapper"> <div class="header"> This is the common header </div> <div class="nav"> This is the common nav </div> <div class="content"> <div class="twocol container2"> <div class="container1"> <div class="col1"> twocolumn column 1 </div> <div class="col2"> twocolumn column 2 </div> </div> </div> <div class="threecol container3"> <div class="container2"> <div class="container1"> <div class="col1"> threecol column 1 </div> <div class="col2"> threecol column 2 </div> <div class="col3"> threecol column 3 </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="footer"> This is the common footer </div> </div> </body> </html>

    Read the article

  • Alternate User select interface in django admin to reduce page size on large site?

    - by David Eyk
    I have a Django-based site with roughly 300,000 User objects. Admin pages for objects with a ForeignKey field to User take a very long time to load as the resulting form is about 6MB in size. Of course, the resulting dropdown isn't particularly useful, either. Are there any off-the-shelf replacements for handling this case? I've been googling for a snippet or a blog entry, but haven't found anything yet. I'd like to have a smaller download size and a more usable interface.

    Read the article

  • Can you change/redirect a django form's function by passing in your own function?

    - by Derek
    I'm dealing with django-paypal and want to change the button src images. So I went the the conf.py file in the source and edited the src destination. However, I really want to leave the source alone, and I noticed that the class PayPalPaymentsForm(forms.Form): has def get_image(self): return { (True, self.SUBSCRIBE): SUBSCRIPTION_SANDBOX_IMAGE, (True, self.BUY): SANDBOX_IMAGE, (True, self.DONATE): DONATION_SANDBOX_IMAGE, (False, self.SUBSCRIBE): SUBSCRIPTION_IMAGE, (False, self.BUY): IMAGE, (False, self.DONATE): DONATION_IMAGE, }[TEST, self.button_type] which handles all the image src destinations. Since changing this def in the source is worse than changing conf, I was wondering if there was a way to pass in customized defs you make like passing in initial arguments in forms? This way no source code is changed, and I can customize the get_image def as much as I need. passing in def something like this? def get_image(self): .... .... paypal = { 'amount': 10, 'item_name': 'test1', 'item_number': 'test1_slug', # PayPal wants a unique invoice ID 'invoice': str(uuid.uuid4()), } form = PayPalPaymentsForm(initial=paypal, get_image) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to allow sorting in the Django admin by a custom list_display field, which doesn't have a DB fie

    - by Gj
    I have a custom list_display field which is responsible for a column of integers in one of my admin pages. I need to allow staff members to sort according to it. There's a solution for how to acheive that if the integer represents a count/average/etc of some DB field, which is not the case for me. [ the solution for that case is here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2168475/django-admin-how-to-sort-by-one-of-the-custom-list-display-fields-that-has-no-da ] Any ideas how I can achieve this sorting without actually creating and maintaining a DB field for the values?

    Read the article

  • Is there something similar to 'rake routes' in django?

    - by The MYYN
    In rails, on can show the active routes with rake (http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html): $ rake routes users GET /users {:controller=>"users", :action=>"index"} formatted_users GET /users.:format {:controller=>"users", :action=>"index"} POST /users {:controller=>"users", :action=>"create"} POST /users.:format {:controller=>"users", :action=>"create"} Is there a similar tool/command for django showing the e.g. the URL pattern, the name of the pattern (if any) and the associated function in the views?

    Read the article

  • Java equivalent for database schema changes like South for Django?

    - by gerdemb
    I've been working on a Django project using South to track and manage database schema changes. I'm starting a new Java project using Google Web Toolkit and wonder if there is an equivalent tool. For those who don't know, here's what South does: Automatically recognize changes to my Python database models (add/delete columns, tables etc.) Automatically create SQL statements to apply those changes to my database Track the applied schema migrations and apply them in order Allow data migrations using Python code. For example, splitting a name field into a first-name and last-name field using the Python split() function I haven't decided on my Java ORM yet, but Hibernate looks like the most popular. For me, the ability to easily make database schema changes will be an important factor.

    Read the article

  • Showing custom model validation exceptions in the Django admin site.

    - by Guy Bowden
    I have a booking model that needs to check if the item being booked out is available. I would like to have the logic behind figuring out if the item is available centralised so that no matter where I save the instance this code validates that it can be saved. At the moment I have this code in a custom save function of my model class: def save(self): if self.is_available(): # my custom check availability function super(MyObj, self).save() else: # this is the bit I'm stuck with.. raise forms.ValidationError('Item already booked for those dates') This works fine - the error is raised if the item is unavailable, and my item is not saved. I can capture the exception from my front end form code, but what about the Django admin site? How can I get my exception to be displayed like any other validation error in the admin site?

    Read the article

  • How To Collapse Just One Field in Django Admin?

    - by Apreche
    The django admin allows you to specify fieldsets. You properly structure a tuple that groups different fields together. You can also specify classes for certain groups of fields. One of those classes is collapse, which will hide the field under a collapsable area. This is good for hiding rarely used or advanced fields to keep the UI clean. However, I have a situation where I want to hide just one lonesome field on many different apps. This will be a lot of typing to create a full fieldset specification in every admin.py file just to put one field into the collapsed area. It also creates a difficult maintenance situation because I will have to edit the fieldset every time I edit the associated model. I can easily exclude the field entirely using the exclude option. I want something similar for collapse. Is this possible?

    Read the article

  • django-haystack urlpatterns include('haystack.urls') where does it lead to?

    - by Eugene
    I've recently begun to learn/install django/haystack/solr. Following the tutorial given in haystack site, I have urlpatterns = pattern('', r'^search/', include('haystack.urls')) I found haystack installed in /usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/haystack and located urls.py there. It has urlpatterns=patterns('haystack.views', url(r'^$', SearchView(), name='haystack_search'),) I thought the second argument of url() should be callable object. I looked at the views.py and SearchView is a class. What is going on here? What's get called eventually?

    Read the article

  • Django & custom auth backend (web service) + no database. How to save stuff in session?

    - by Infinity
    I've been searching here and there, and based on this answer I've put together what you see below. It works, but I need to put some stuff in the user's session, right there inside authenticate. How would I store acme_token in the user's session, so that it will get cleared if they logged out? class AcmeUserBackend(object): # Create a User object if not already in the database? create_unknown_user = False def get_user(self, username): return AcmeUser(id=username) def authenticate(self, username=None, password=None): """ Check the username/password and return an AcmeUser. """ acme_token = ask_another_site_about_creds(username, password) if acme_token: return AcmeUser(id=username) return None ################## from django.contrib.auth.models import User class AcmeUser(User): objects = None # we cannot really use this w/o local DB def save(self): """saving to DB disabled""" pass def get_group_permissions(self): """If you don't make your own permissions module, the default also will use the DB. Throw it away""" return [] # likewise with the other permission defs def get_and_delete_messages(self): """Messages are stored in the DB. Darn!""" return []

    Read the article

  • What is the proper way to check the previous value of a field before saving an object? (Using Django

    - by anonymous coward
    I have a Django Model with updated_by and an approved_by fields, both are ForeignKey fields to the built-in (auth) User models. I am aware that with updated_by, it's easy enough to simply over-ride the .save() method on the Model, and shove the request.user in that field before saving. However, for approved_by, this field should only ever be filled in when a related field (date_approved) is first filled in. I'm somewhat certain that I can check this logically, and fill in the field if the previous value was empty. What is the proper way to check the previous value of a field before saving an object? I do not anticipate that date_approved will ever be changed or updated, nor should there be any reason to ever update the approved_by entry. UPDATE: Regarding forms/validation, I should have mentioned that none of the fields in question are seen by or editable by users of the site. If I have misunderstood, I'm sorry, but I'm not sure how forms and validation apply to my question.

    Read the article

  • gunicorn + django + nginx unix://socket failed (11: Resource temporarily unavailable)

    - by user1068118
    Running very high volume traffic on these servers configured with django, gunicorn, supervisor and nginx. But a lot of times I tend to see 502 errors. So I checked the nginx logs to see what error and this is what is recorded: [error] 2388#0: *208027 connect() to unix:/tmp/gunicorn-ourapp.socket failed (11: Resource temporarily unavailable) while connecting to upstream Can anyone help debug what might be causing this to happen? This is our nginx configuration: sendfile on; tcp_nopush on; tcp_nodelay off; listen 80 default_server; server_name imp.ourapp.com; access_log /mnt/ebs/nginx-log/ourapp-access.log; error_log /mnt/ebs/nginx-log/ourapp-error.log; charset utf-8; keepalive_timeout 60; client_max_body_size 8m; gzip_types text/plain text/xml text/css application/javascript application/x-javascript application/json; location / { proxy_pass http://unix:/tmp/gunicorn-ourapp.socket; proxy_pass_request_headers on; proxy_read_timeout 600s; proxy_connect_timeout 600s; proxy_redirect http://localhost/ http://imp.ourapp.com/; #proxy_set_header Host $host; #proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; #proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; #proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-Proto $my_scheme; #proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-Ssl $my_ssl; } We have configure Django to run in Gunicorn as a generic WSGI application. Supervisord is used to launch the gunicorn workers: home/user/virtenv/bin/python2.7 /home/user/virtenv/bin/gunicorn --config /home/user/shared/etc/gunicorn.conf.py daggr.wsgi:application This is what the gunicorn.conf.py looks like: import multiprocessing bind = 'unix:/tmp/gunicorn-ourapp.socket' workers = multiprocessing.cpu_count() * 3 + 1 timeout = 600 graceful_timeout = 40 Does anyone know where I can start digging to see what might be causing the problem? This is what my ulimit -a output looks like on the server: core file size (blocks, -c) 0 data seg size (kbytes, -d) unlimited scheduling priority (-e) 0 file size (blocks, -f) unlimited pending signals (-i) 59481 max locked memory (kbytes, -l) 64 max memory size (kbytes, -m) unlimited open files (-n) 50000 pipe size (512 bytes, -p) 8 POSIX message queues (bytes, -q) 819200 real-time priority (-r) 0 stack size (kbytes, -s) 8192 cpu time (seconds, -t) unlimited max user processes (-u) 1024 virtual memory (kbytes, -v) unlimited file locks (-x) unlimited

    Read the article

  • nginx+django serving static files

    - by avalore
    I have followed instruction for setting up django with nginx from the django wiki (https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/DjangoAndNginx) and have nginx setup as follows (a few name changes to fit my setup). user nginx nginx; worker_processes 2; error_log /var/log/nginx/error_log info; events { worker_connections 1024; use epoll; } http { include /etc/nginx/mime.types; default_type application/octet-stream; log_format main '$remote_addr - $remote_user [$time_local] ' '"$request" $status $bytes_sent ' '"$http_referer" "$http_user_agent" ' '"$gzip_ratio"'; client_header_timeout 10m; client_body_timeout 10m; send_timeout 10m; connection_pool_size 256; client_header_buffer_size 1k; large_client_header_buffers 4 2k; request_pool_size 4k; gzip on; gzip_min_length 1100; gzip_buffers 4 8k; gzip_types text/plain; output_buffers 1 32k; postpone_output 1460; sendfile on; tcp_nopush on; tcp_nodelay on; keepalive_timeout 75 20; ignore_invalid_headers on; index index.html; server { listen 80; server_name localhost; location /static/ { root /srv/static/; } location ~* ^.+\.(jpg|jpeg|gif|png|ico|css|zip|tgz|gz|rar|bz2|doc|xls|exe|pdf|ppt|txt|tar|mid|midi|wav|bmp|rtf|js|mov) { access_log off; expires 30d; } location / { # host and port to fastcgi server fastcgi_pass 127.0.0.1:8080; fastcgi_param PATH_INFO $fastcgi_script_name; fastcgi_param REQUEST_METHOD $request_method; fastcgi_param QUERY_STRING $query_string; fastcgi_param CONTENT_TYPE $content_type; fastcgi_param CONTENT_LENGTH $content_length; fastcgi_pass_header Authorization; fastcgi_intercept_errors off; fastcgi_param REMOTE_ADDR $remote_addr; } access_log /var/log/nginx/localhost.access_log main; error_log /var/log/nginx/localhost.error_log; } } Static files aren't being served (nginx 404). If I look in the access log it seems nginx is looking in /etc/nginx/html/static... rather than /srv/static/ as specified in the config. I've no clue why it's doing this, any help would be hugely appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Request data from database using Django

    - by user21901
    I have somehow two variables for example x and y. I have also made a model with 3 fields (longitude,latitude,name) and have it activated in mysql database. I need to send these two variables(x,y) to the django server so as to search if there is an object with longitude=x and latitude=y.If there is one i want to get back it's name. How can i do this?

    Read the article

  • How to build a Django form which requires a delay to be re-submitted ?

    - by pierre-guillaume-degans
    Hey, In order to avoid spamming, I would like to add a waiting time to re-submit a form (i.e. the user should wait a few seconds to submit the form, except the first time that this form is submitted). To do that, I added a timestamp to my form (and a security_hash field containing the timestamp plus the settings.SECRET_KEY which ensures that the timestamp is not fiddled with). This look like: class MyForm(forms.Form): timestamp = forms.IntegerField(widget=forms.HiddenInput) security_hash = forms.CharField(min_length=40, max_length=40, widget=forms.HiddenInput) # + some other fields.. # + methods to build the hash and to clean the timestamp... # (it is based on django.contrib.comments.forms.CommentSecurityForm) def clean_timestamp(self): """Make sure the delay is over (5 seconds).""" ts = self.cleaned_data["timestamp"] if not time.time() - ts > 5: raise forms.ValidationError("Timestamp check failed") return ts # etc... This works fine. However there is still an issue: the timestamp is checked the first time the form is submitted by the user, and I need to avoid this. Any idea to fix it ? Thank you ! :-)

    Read the article

  • How do I relate two models/tables in Django based on non primary non unique keys?

    - by wizard
    I've got two tables that I need to relate on a single field po_num. The data is imported from another source so while I have a little bit of control over what the tables look like but I can't change them too much. What I want to do is relate these two models so I can look up one from the other based on the po_num fields. What I really need to do is join the two tables so I can do a where on a count of the related table. I would like to do filter for all Order objects that have 0 related EDI856 objects. I tried adding a foreign key to the Order model and specified the db_column and to_fields as po_num but django didn't like that the fact that Edi856.po_num wasn't unique. Here are the important fields of my current models that let me display but not filter for the data that I want. class Edi856(models.Model): po_num = models.CharField(max_length=90, db_index=True ) class Order(models.Model): po_num = models.CharField(max_length=90, db_index=True) def in_edi(self): '''Has the edi been processed?''' return Edi856.objects.filter(po_num = self.po_num).count() Thanks for taking the time to read about my problem. I'm not sure what to do from here.

    Read the article

  • What kind of data do I pass into a Django Model.save() method?

    - by poswald
    Lets say that we are getting POSTed a form like this in Django: rate=10 items= [23,12,31,52,83,34] The items are primary keys of an Item model. I have a bunch of business logic that will run and create more items based on this data, the results of some db lookups, and some business logic. I want to put that logic into a save signal or an overridden Model.save() method of another model (let's call it Inventory). The business logic will run when I create a new Inventory object using this form data. Inventory will look like this: class Inventory(models.Model): picked_items = models.ManyToManyField(Item, related_name="items_picked_set") calculated_items = models.ManyToManyField(Item, related_name="items_calculated_set") rate = models.DecimalField() ... other fields here ... New calculated_items will be created based on the passed in items which will be stored as picked_items. My question is this: is it better for the save() method on this model to accept: the request object (I don't really like this coupling) the form data as arguments or kwargs (a list of primary keys and the other form fields) a list of Items (The caller form or view will lookup the list of Items and create a list as well as pass in the other form fields) some other approach? I know this is a bit subjective, but I was wondering what the general idea is. I've looked through a lot of code but I'm having a hard time finding a pattern I like.

    Read the article

  • Django app that can provide user friendly, multiple / mass file upload functionality to other apps

    - by hopla
    Hi, I'm going to be honest: this is a question I asked on the Django-Users mailinglist last week. Since I didn't get any replies there yet, I'm reposting it on Stack Overflow in the hope that it gets more attention here. I want to create an app that makes it easy to do user friendly, multiple / mass file upload in your own apps. With user friendly I mean upload like Gmail, Flickr, ... where the user can select multiple files at once in the browse file dialog. The files are then uploaded sequentially or in parallel and a nice overview of the selected files is shown on the page with a progress bar next to them. A 'Cancel' upload button is also a possible option. All that niceness is usually solved by using a Flash object. Complete solutions are out there for the client side, like: SWFUpload http://swfupload.org/ , FancyUpload http://digitarald.de/project/fancyupload/ , YUI 2 Uploader http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/uploader/ and probably many more. Ofcourse the trick is getting those solutions integrated in your project. Especially in a framework like Django, double so if you want it to be reusable. So, I have a few ideas, but I'm neither an expert on Django nor on Flash based upload solutions. I'll share my ideas here in the hope of getting some feedback from more knowledgeable and experienced people. (Or even just some 'I want this too!' replies :) ) You will notice that I make a few assumptions: this is to keep the (initial) scope of the application under control. These assumptions are of course debatable: All right, my idea's so far: If you want to mass upload multiple files, you are going to have a model to contain each file in. I.e. the model will contain one FileField or one ImageField. Models with multiple (but ofcourse finite) amount of FileFields/ ImageFields are not in need of easy mass uploading imho: if you have a model with 100 FileFields you are doing something wrong :) Examples where you would want my envisioned kind of mass upload: An app that has just one model 'Brochure' with a file field, a title field (dynamically created from the filename) and a date_added field. A photo gallery app with models 'Gallery' and 'Photo'. You pick a Gallery to add pictures to, upload the pictures and new Photo objects are created and foreign keys set to the chosen Gallery. It would be nice to be able to configure or extend the app for your favorite Flash upload solution. We can pick one of the three above as a default, but implement the app so that people can easily add additional implementations (kinda like Django can use multiple databases). Let it be agnostic to any particular client side solution. If we need to pick one to start with, maybe pick the one with the smallest footprint? (smallest download of client side stuff) The Flash based solutions asynchronously (and either sequentially or in parallel) POST the files to a url. I suggest that url to be local to our generic app (so it's the same for every app where you use our app in). That url will go to a view provided by our generic app. The view will do the following: create a new model instance, add the file, OPTIONALLY DO EXTRA STUFF and save the instance. DO EXTRA STUFF is code that the app that uses our app wants to run. It doesn't have to provide any extra code, if the model has just a FileField/ImageField the standard view code will do the job. But most app will want to do extra stuff I think, like filling in the other fields: title, date_added, foreignkeys, manytomany, ... I have not yet thought about a mechanism for DO EXTRA STUFF. Just wrapping the generic app view came to mind, but that is not developer friendly, since you would have to write your own url pattern and your own view. Then you have to tell the Flash solutions to use a new url etc... I think something like signals could be used here? Forms/Admin: I'm still very sketchy on how all this could best be integrated in the Admin or generic Django forms/widgets/... (and this is were my lack of Django experience shows): In the case of the Gallery/Photo app: You could provide a mass Photo upload widget on the Gallery detail form. But what if the Gallery instance is not saved yet? The file upload view won't be able to set the foreignkeys on the Photo instances. I see that the auth app, when you create a user, first asks for username and password and only then provides you with a bigger form to fill in emailadres, pick roles etc. We could do something like that. In the case of an app with just one model: How do you provide a form in the Django admin to do your mass upload? You can't do it with the detail form of your model, that's just for one model instance. There's probably dozens more questions that need to be answered before I can even start on this app. So please tell me what you think! Give me input! What do you like? What not? What would you do different? Is this idea solid? Where is it not? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Implementing a popularity algorithm in Django

    - by TheLizardKing
    I am creating a site similar to reddit and hacker news that has a database of links and votes. I am implementing hacker news' popularity algorithm and things are going pretty swimmingly until it comes to actually gathering up these links and displaying them. The algorithm is simple: Y Combinator's Hacker News: Popularity = (p - 1) / (t + 2)^1.5` Votes divided by age factor. Where` p : votes (points) from users. t : time since submission in hours. p is subtracted by 1 to negate submitter's vote. Age factor is (time since submission in hours plus two) to the power of 1.5.factor is (time since submission in hours plus two) to the power of 1.5. I asked a very similar question over yonder http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1964395/complex-ordering-in-django but instead of contemplating my options I choose one and tried to make it work because that's how I did it with PHP/MySQL but I now know Django does things a lot differently. My models look something (exactly) like this class Link(models.Model): category = models.ForeignKey(Category) user = models.ForeignKey(User) created = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add = True) modified = models.DateTimeField(auto_now = True) fame = models.PositiveIntegerField(default = 1) title = models.CharField(max_length = 256) url = models.URLField(max_length = 2048) def __unicode__(self): return self.title class Vote(models.Model): link = models.ForeignKey(Link) user = models.ForeignKey(User) created = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add = True) modified = models.DateTimeField(auto_now = True) karma_delta = models.SmallIntegerField() def __unicode__(self): return str(self.karma_delta) and my view: def index(request): popular_links = Link.objects.select_related().annotate(karma_total = Sum('vote__karma_delta')) return render_to_response('links/index.html', {'links': popular_links}) Now from my previous question, I am trying to implement the algorithm using the sorting function. An answer from that question seems to think I should put the algorithm in the select and sort then. I am going to paginate these results so I don't think I can do the sorting in python without grabbing everything. Any suggestions on how I could efficiently do this? EDIT This isn't working yet but I think it's a step in the right direction: from django.shortcuts import render_to_response from linkett.apps.links.models import * def index(request): popular_links = Link.objects.select_related() popular_links = popular_links.extra( select = { 'karma_total': 'SUM(vote.karma_delta)', 'popularity': '(karma_total - 1) / POW(2, 1.5)', }, order_by = ['-popularity'] ) return render_to_response('links/index.html', {'links': popular_links}) This errors out into: Caught an exception while rendering: column "karma_total" does not exist LINE 1: SELECT ((karma_total - 1) / POW(2, 1.5)) AS "popularity", (S... EDIT 2 Better error? TemplateSyntaxError: Caught an exception while rendering: missing FROM-clause entry for table "vote" LINE 1: SELECT ((vote.karma_total - 1) / POW(2, 1.5)) AS "popularity... My index.html is simply: {% block content %} {% for link in links %} karma-up {{ link.karma_total }} karma-down {{ link.title }} Posted by {{ link.user }} to {{ link.category }} at {{ link.created }} {% empty %} No Links {% endfor %} {% endblock content %} EDIT 3 So very close! Again, all these answers are great but I am concentrating on a particular one because I feel it works best for my situation. from django.db.models import Sum from django.shortcuts import render_to_response from linkett.apps.links.models import * def index(request): popular_links = Link.objects.select_related().extra( select = { 'popularity': '(SUM(links_vote.karma_delta) - 1) / POW(2, 1.5)', }, tables = ['links_link', 'links_vote'], order_by = ['-popularity'], ) return render_to_response('links/test.html', {'links': popular_links}) Running this I am presented with an error hating on my lack of group by values. Specifically: TemplateSyntaxError at / Caught an exception while rendering: column "links_link.id" must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be used in an aggregate function LINE 1: ...karma_delta) - 1) / POW(2, 1.5)) AS "popularity", "links_lin... Not sure why my links_link.id wouldn't be in my group by but I am not sure how to alter my group by, django usually does that.

    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

  • django image upload forms

    - by gramware
    I am having problems with django forms and image uploads. I have googled, read the documentations and even questions ere, but cant figure out the issue. Here are my files my models class UserProfile(User): """user with app settings. """ DESIGNATION_CHOICES=( ('ADM', 'Administrator'), ('OFF', 'Club Official'), ('MEM', 'Ordinary Member'), ) onames = models.CharField(max_length=30, blank=True) phoneNumber = models.CharField(max_length=15) regNo = models.CharField(max_length=15) designation = models.CharField(max_length=3,choices=DESIGNATION_CHOICES) image = models.ImageField(max_length=100,upload_to='photos/%Y/%m/%d', blank=True, null=True) course = models.CharField(max_length=30, blank=True, null=True) timezone = models.CharField(max_length=50, default='Africa/Nairobi') smsCom = models.BooleanField() mailCom = models.BooleanField() fbCom = models.BooleanField() objects = UserManager() #def __unicode__(self): # return '%s %s ' % (User.Username, User.is_staff) def get_absolute_url(self): return u'%s%s/%s' % (settings.MEDIA_URL, settings.ATTACHMENT_FOLDER, self.id) def get_download_url(self): return u'%s%s/%s' % (settings.MEDIA_URL, settings.ATTACHMENT_FOLDER, self.name) ... class reports(models.Model): repID = models.AutoField(primary_key=True) repSubject = models.CharField(max_length=100) repRecepients = models.ManyToManyField(UserProfile) repPoster = models.ForeignKey(UserProfile,related_name='repposter') repDescription = models.TextField() repPubAccess = models.BooleanField() repDate = models.DateField() report = models.FileField(max_length=200,upload_to='files/%Y/%m/%d' ) deleted = models.BooleanField() def __unicode__(self): return u'%s ' % (self.repSubject) my forms from django import forms from django.http import HttpResponse from cms.models import * from django.contrib.sessions.models import Session from django.forms.extras.widgets import SelectDateWidget class UserProfileForm(forms.ModelForm): class Meta: model= UserProfile exclude = ('designation','password','is_staff', 'is_active','is_superuser','last_login','date_joined','user_permissions','groups') ... class reportsForm(forms.ModelForm): repPoster = forms.ModelChoiceField(queryset=UserProfile.objects.all(), widget=forms.HiddenInput()) repDescription = forms.CharField(widget=forms.Textarea(attrs={'cols':'50', 'rows':'5'}),label='Enter Report Description here') repDate = forms.DateField(widget=SelectDateWidget()) class Meta: model = reports exclude = ('deleted') my views @login_required def reports_media(request): user = UserProfile.objects.get(pk=request.session['_auth_user_id']) if request.user.is_staff== True: repmedform = reportsForm(request.POST, request.FILES) if repmedform.is_valid(): repmedform.save() repmedform = reportsForm(initial = {'repPoster':user.id,}) else: repmedform = reportsForm(initial = {'repPoster':user.id,}) return render_to_response('staffrepmedia.html', {'repfrm':repmedform, 'rep_media': reports.objects.all()}) else: return render_to_response('reports_&_media.html', {'rep_media': reports.objects.all()}) ... @login_required def settingchng(request): user = UserProfile.objects.get(pk=request.session['_auth_user_id']) form = UserProfileForm(instance = user) if request.method == 'POST': form = UserProfileForm(request.POST, request.FILES, instance = user) if form.is_valid(): form.save() return HttpResponseRedirect('/settings/') else: form = UserProfileForm(instance = user) if request.user.is_staff== True: return render_to_response('staffsettingschange.html', {'form': form}) else: return render_to_response('settingschange.html', {'form': form}) ... @login_required def useradd(request): if request.method == 'POST': form = UserAddForm(request.POST,request.FILES ) if form.is_valid(): password = request.POST['password'] request.POST['password'] = set_password(password) form.save() else: form = UserAddForm() return render_to_response('staffadduser.html', {'form':form}) Example of my templates {% if form.errors %} <ol> {% for field in form %} <H3 class="title"> <p class="error"> {% if field.errors %}<li>{{ field.errors|striptags }}</li>{% endif %}</p> </H3> {% endfor %} </ol> {% endif %} <form method="post" id="form" action="" enctype="multipart/form-data" class="infotabs accfrm"> {{ repfrm.as_p }} <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> </form>

    Read the article

  • Installation requirements of django installing in hostgator dedicated server

    - by jaypabs
    First, before I install OSQA on my dedicated server at hostgator, I want to know the requirements. I don't want to screw up my server so it's better to ask question first. I have read a lot of tutorial on the internet regarding Django but I want to clarify something before I proceed. On my dedicated server I don't use FCGI. Instead I use Mod SuPHP. A lot of tutorial is talking about installing python using FCGI. My question is if it is safe to install Python if I'm using SuPHP? Is it safe to use the tutorial on this link: http://wiki.osqa.net/display/docs/Installing+OSQA+on+CentOS6?focusedCommentId=4784144 Thanks in advance for your help.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >