Some results were inadvertently being excluded if we were ordering across a
nullable relation which itself ordering by a non-nullable relation.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@9916 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
Previous behaviour was pretty stupid. Let's never speak of it again. New
behaviour both works and is documented.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@9759 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
This extends previous functionality that allowed passing Query objects as the
rvals to filters. You can now pass QuerySets, which requires less poking at
opaque attributes. See the documentation of the "__in" lookup type for the
details.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@9701 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
Extricated the code that works directly with SQL columns (standard
"where" stuff) from the the code that takes SQL fragments and combines
it with lookup types and values. The latter portion is now more
generally reusable. Any existing code that was poking at Query.having
will now break in very visible ways (no subtle miscalculations, which is
a good thing).
This patch, en passant, removes the existing "having" test, since the
new implementation requires more setting up than previously. The
aggregates support (currently in a separate codebase) has tests for this
functionality that work as a replacement for the removed test.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@9700 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
that happens with MySQL when a "GROUP BY" clause is included. This is a
backend-specific operation, so any other databases requiring similar
encouragement can have a function added to their own backend code.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@9637 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
again later (order_by('foo')). Or, at least, it can now. Thanks to Ilya
Novoselov for diagnosing the problem here.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@9206 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
more than 20 objects.
This means that accidentally executing HugeStoryArchive.objects.all() at the
interactive prompt (or in the debug template) won't try to load all 4,233,010
stories into memory and print them out. That would previously cause resource
starvation and other "interesting" crashes.
If you really, really want the previous behaviour (e.g. in a doctest that
prints more than 20 items), display "list(qs)" instead of just "qs".
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@9202 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
"having" attributes, only the former was included in the resulting SQL, meaning
subclasses had to completely duplicate Query.as_sql() if they were using any
kind of grouping filtering on the results.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@9007 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
Python beta releases. Failures there mean that incorrect code won't raise an
error, but it's otherwise harmless (correct code still runs correctly).
Fixed#7786.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@8570 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
aren't always equivalent. This is documented, stable behaviour, so we should
ensure it doesn't change accidentally.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@8312 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
Based on a patch from Justin Bronn.
The test in this patch most likely breaks on Oracle. That's another issue.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@8053 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
The problem being "hidden" here is not serious. It won't affect correct code
and only gives a different failure mode for incorrect code. The moral is: don't
write incorrect code.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@7939 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
Patch from mturtle@gmail.com. The remaining uses of "%s__pk" in
fields/related.py all look safe, since they are for many-to-many fields, which
doesn't take "to_field" as a parameter.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@7785 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
We no longer store any reference to Django field instances or models in the
Where node. This should improve cloning speed, fix some pickling difficulties,
reduce memory usage and remove some infinite loop possibilities in odd cases.
Slightly backwards incompatible if you're writing custom filters. See the
BackwardsIncompatibleChanges wiki page for details.
Fixed#7128, #7204, #7506.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@7773 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
These types of relations don't have reverse accessor names, so that name can be
used by a normal field on the model. Fixed#7107.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@7764 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
so that the ordering doesn't accidentally restrict the result set.
(Ironically, one existing test actually showed this problem, but I was too
dumb to notice the result was incorrect.)
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@7761 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
Field.db_type().
This fixes a problem with using reserved words for field names in Oracle. Only
affects Oracle at the moment, but the same changes could easily be used by
other backends if they are required (requires changing creation.py, only).
This commit also reverts [7501] so that if the fix doesn't work, it will show
up in the tests (and if it does work, the tests will prevent us from breaking
it again).
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@7743 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
Avoids joining with the wrong tables when connecting select_related() tables to
the main query. This also leads to slightly more efficient (meaning less tables
are joined) SQL queries in some other cases, too. Some unnecessary tables are
now trimmed that were not previously.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@7741 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
Previously, if we were querying across a nullable join and then a non-nullable
one, the second join would not be a LEFT OUTER join, which would exclude
certain valid results from the result set.
This is the same problem as [7597] but for values() field specifications, so
this covers the second case where Django adds extra stuff to the select-clause.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@7740 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
marked as erroneous. It's just more dangerous and risky, not forbidden. This
commit restores backwards compatibility there.
git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@7490 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
