Here's something you could do.
Execute the raw SQL to bring back just the id's, then whilst iterating over
that, if you need to grab the ORM'd row, just do "row_orm =
model.get(id=iterated_id_here)"
This is what I tend to do for raw sql queries.
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:26 AM, [CPR]-AL.exe <cpr.al....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmm, yeah, but that still iterates over the objects and filters out
> them by count on the application server, not on the database one :(
>
> I'm bypassing it already in my running project, but I try to avoid
> using raw sql as longer as it is possible. So, the question, actually
> remains open.
>
> It should go something like [pseudo-code]:
>
>
> Book.objects.values('tablefield').annotate(Count('tablefield')).filter('tablefield__count__gte
> = 1)
>
> But, of course, that wouldn't work, because annotate's return value is
> not a queryset :(
>
> On 19 янв, 14:18, "Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]"
> <cal.leem...@simplicitymedialtd.co.uk> wrote:
> > Yeah you should be able to use annotate, something like:
> >
> > from django.db.models import Count
> > res =
> >
> Book.objects.values('tablefield').annotate(Count('tablefield')).order_by('t
> ablefield')
> > res2 = filter(lambda x: x.tablefield__count > 1, res)
> >
> > The above is probably not going to work first time, but it would be
> > something along those lines most likely.
> >
> > I would suggest that for complex queries, bypassing the ORM isn't
> > necessarily a bad thing, and there are many cases where a developer will
> > purposely bypass the ORM at bottlenecks and directly query SQL for
> > optimization.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:07 AM, [CPR]-AL.exe <cpr.al....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > Umm... Don't know, actually. That seems, that it would be okay, too. Is
> > > there a way to execute this one using ORM?
> >
> > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd] <
> > > cal.leem...@simplicitymedialtd.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > >> May I ask why you didn't just use:
> >
> > >> SELECT id from table GROUP BY tablefield HAVING (COUNT(tablefield) >
> 1)
> >
> > >> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:02 AM, [CPR]-AL.exe <cpr.al....@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> > >>> Hi there.
> >
> > >>> I'm trying to do something like this:
> >
> > >>> SELECT *
> > >>> FROM table
> > >>> WHERE tablefield IN (
> > >>> SELECT tablefield
> > >>> FROM table
> > >>> GROUP BY tablefield
> > >>> HAVING (COUNT(tablefield ) > 1)
> > >>> )
> >
> > >>> Tried it in many ways, but didn't suceed. Is there a way to do it
> with
> > >>> Django ORM without having to iterate over objects or using raw SQL?
> >
> > >>> --
> > >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> > >>> "Django users" group.
> > >>> To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
> > >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > >>> django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<django-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> <django-users%2Bunsubscribe@google groups.com>
> > >>> .
> > >>> For more options, visit this group at
> > >>>http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
> >
> > > --
> > > Sincerely yours, Alexey.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<django-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
