Update. Found a work around that gets rid of the unnecessary group by (and
hence speeds up the query, from ~200ms to ~100ms in my use case). Simply
adding a .values('pk').
Bad thing, every model needs a custom manager and it will still use an
inner query, still trying to figure out the side effe
After testing for a while, there really doesn't seem to be a good way to do
this. .
Annotation is required since the query is filtered based on the annotated
value, so any attempt to clear annotations would fail. Although a lookup
could be used for the filtering.
But a custom lookup is not poss
Hello Simon,
You are right, the score is really not meant to be attached so a custom
lookup might work, if it wasn't for the issue that an order_by clause would
fail without the annotation.
So it seems it's either update and duplicate a lot of code or find a very
ugly work around, I was hopin
Hello Cristiano,
If you are solely using this annotation for querying purpose, that means
you are
not expecting a `score` attribute to be attached to your `Vulnerability`
instances,
you could try defining your function as a lookup on CharField/TextField
instead.
You could then use it only when
Hello Simon,
That private API is good to know, but now that I think of it would still
not work for me, since my queryset is passed to a paginator and that's the
class that does both the count and actual queryset execution, so need a
queryset that can have both the annotation but also clears it
Hello Cristiano,
> Isn't there a way (even if it's hackish) to simply clear the annotations
(and order by)? I know querysets are smart enough to not include the order
by clause if there's a count.
The ordering is cleared on `count()` because it shouldn't interfere with
the result in any way. Y
Hello Simon, thanks for the response.
The above code is just an example, the reason behind the annotate because
there's some complicated code that builds a queryset and annotates it so it
can easily be reused. It works fine 99% of the time except when there's a
count involved and it ends up bei
Hello Cristiano,
I understand your frustration but please avoid using the developer mailing
list
as a second tier support channel. I suggest you try the IRC #django channel
if
you need to want to get faster support.
What's happening here is that annotate() really means "select this field"
whil
Hmm, should I try with the dev mailing list? Guess it's something no one
faced before?
El martes, 14 de noviembre de 2017, 22:54:23 (UTC-3), Cristiano Coelho
escribió:
>
> I'm getting some very odd query when combining annotate with count. See
> the following:
>
> >>> q =
>> Vulnerability.obje
I'm getting some very odd query when combining annotate with count. See the
following:
>>> q =
> Vulnerability.objects.annotate(score=WordTrigramCustomSimilarity('test','summary'))
> >>> q.count()
> 3094
> >>> print connection.queries[-1]
> 'SELECT COUNT(*)
> FROM (
> SELECT "vulnerabilitie
10 matches
Mail list logo
