On Monday, November 6, 2017 at 9:36:11 PM UTC+1, Matthew Pava wrote:
>
> Is it really that bad? Maybe I’m missing something in your situation.
>
Ooooh, it isn't really. I incorrectly assumed that the query would perform
like having an implicit DISTINCT(device.id). But it does in fact return
abs
om] On
Behalf Of Samuel Abels
Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 2:22 PM
To: Django users
Subject: Re: Equivalent of multi-table JOIN (another post on reverse
select_related)
On Monday, November 6, 2017 at 9:15:09 PM UTC+1, Matthew Pava wrote:
Maybe you are expecting too much from the user interfa
On Monday, November 6, 2017 at 9:15:09 PM UTC+1, Matthew Pava wrote:
>
> Maybe you are expecting too much from the user interface. Shouldn’t you
> at least request from the user what primary object you are looking for?
>
The primary model is always that one that is closest to "device"; step 2
roups.com [mailto:django-users@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Samuel Abels
Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 1:59 PM
To: Django users
Subject: Re: Equivalent of multi-table JOIN (another post on reverse
select_related)
Thanks, I have seen that and plan to use it, but for this particular feature I
>
> https://github.com/burke-software/django-report-builder
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* django...@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> django...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Samuel Abels
> *Sent:* Monday, November 6, 2017 1:33 PM
> *To:* Django users
> *Subject:* Equivalent
users
Subject: Equivalent of multi-table JOIN (another post on reverse select_related)
I am working on a reporting feature that allows users for querying arbitrary
models and fields, and present the result as a table. For example, consider the
following object model:
Package
|
v
Device
I am working on a reporting feature that allows users for querying
arbitrary models and fields, and present the result as a table. For
example, consider the following object model:
Package
|
v
Device <- Component
^ ^
| |
| Interface <---2--- Connection
7 matches
Mail list logo
