Managed it in the end, so for reference here is what I ended up with:
def total_credit_debt(self):
transaction_totals =
Transaction.objects.filter(member__isnull=False).values('member').annotate(total=Sum('amount')).order_by()
creditors = transaction_totals.filter(total__gt=0)
On Wed, 5 Feb 2014 10:11:29 -0800 (PST) ST
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to optimize the run-time of getting total credit and debt
> values out of our database. Ideally I'd like to formulate it as a
> Django query. This is the raw SQL query I have, which produces the
> right answer and is very fast
Den 06/02/2014 kl. 12.34 skrev ST :
> This didn't work - it produced a "SELECT FROM" query, which obviously didn't
> work - tried adding 'amount' to the values_list, but that didn't help either.
> Eventually got it to work by using .only('member', 'amount') instead, and it
> *was* fast, but it
On Wednesday, February 5, 2014 8:01:53 PM UTC, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote:
>
> Something like this might work:
>
> Transaction.objects.values_list('member_id').annotate(total=Sum('amount')).filter(total__gt=0).aggregate(Sum('total'))
>
This didn't work - it produced a "SELECT FROM" query, which
Something like this might work:
Transaction.objects.values_list('member_id').annotate(total=Sum('amount')).filter(total__gt=0).aggregate(Sum('total'))
That is, don't start from Member, Django isn't smart enough to get rid of
the non-necessary joins. Instead go directly for the query you wrot
Hi,
I'm trying to optimize the run-time of getting total credit and debt values
out of our database. Ideally I'd like to formulate it as a Django query.
This is the raw SQL query I have, which produces the right answer and is
very fast (milliseconds):
SELECT sum(tg.total) FROM
(
SELECT sum
6 matches
Mail list logo
