On Friday, August 23, 2013 6:25:42 PM UTC+3, Andrew Ingram wrote:
>
> I'd love to see this solved. I'm not sold on the API, but then again I've
> yet to see a single suggested API for this problem that I actually like.
>
> I showed you this a little while ago, you had some reservations with my
> idea, but I figured I might as well add it to the conversation anyway:
> https://gist.github.com/AndrewIngram/5636041
>
> Essentially, I'm wondering if extending the prefetch_related concept is
> the right approach, and whether it's instead worth exploring the more
> general idea of "attaching stuff to models at the ORM level". There're a
> lot of useful concepts from other ORMs related to attaching prebuilt data
> structures like arrays, dicts, calculated values, filtered annotations, etc
> to models. The problems all seem somewhat related, and I'm worried about
> the possibility of solving them all in completely different ways.
>
I don't like the idea of mixing annotate() and prefetch_related().
Annotations work inside the query, prefetch_related runs additional queries.
That being said I do like the idea of
.annotate(active_authors=Count('authors').filter(active=True)). There is an
old ticket about this sort of annotation, see
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/11305.
- Anssi
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
