With Django REST Framework, a standard ModelSerializer will allow ForeignKey model relationships to be assigned or changed by POSTing an ID as an Integer.
What's the simplest way to get this behavior out of a nested serializer?
Note, I am only talking about assigning existing database objects, not nested creation.
I have hacked away around this in the past with additional 'id' fields in the serializer and with custom create and update methods, but this is such a seemingly simple and frequent issue for me that I'm curious to know the best way.
class Child(models.Model):
name = CharField(max_length=20)
class Parent(models.Model):
name = CharField(max_length=20)
phone_number = models.ForeignKey(PhoneNumber)
child = models.ForeignKey(Child)
class ChildSerializer(ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = Child
class ParentSerializer(ModelSerializer):
# phone_number relation is automatic and will accept ID integers
children = ChildSerializer() # this one will not
class Meta:
model = Parent
Updated on July 05 2020
This post is getting more attention and it indicates more people have a similar situation. So I decided to add a generic way to handle this problem. This generic way is best suitable for you if you have more serializers that need to change to this format
Since DRF doesn't provide this functionality out of the box, we need to create a serializer field first.
from rest_framework import serializers
class RelatedFieldAlternative(serializers.PrimaryKeyRelatedField):
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
self.serializer = kwargs.pop('serializer', None)
if self.serializer is not None and not issubclass(self.serializer, serializers.Serializer):
raise TypeError('"serializer" is not a valid serializer class')
super().__init__(**kwargs)
def use_pk_only_optimization(self):
return False if self.serializer else True
def to_representation(self, instance):
if self.serializer:
return self.serializer(instance, context=self.context).data
return super().to_representation(instance)
I am not well impressed with this class name, RelatedFieldAlternative, you can use anything you want.
Then use this new serializer field in your parent serializer as,
class ParentSerializer(ModelSerializer):
child = RelatedFieldAlternative(queryset=Child.objects.all(), serializer=ChildSerializer)
class Meta:
model = Parent
fields = '__all__'
Original Post
Using two different fields would be ok (as #Kevin Brown and #joslarson mentioned), but I think it's not perfect (to me). Because getting data from one key (child) and sending data to another key (child_id) might be a little bit ambiguous for front-end developers. (no offense at all)
So, what I suggest here is, override the to_representation() method of ParentSerializer will do the job.
def to_representation(self, instance):
response = super().to_representation(instance)
response['child'] = ChildSerializer(instance.child).data
return response
Complete representation of Serializer
class ChildSerializer(ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = Child
fields = '__all__'
class ParentSerializer(ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = Parent
fields = '__all__'
def to_representation(self, instance):
response = super().to_representation(instance)
response['child'] = ChildSerializer(instance.child).data
return response
Advantage of this method?
By using this method, we don't need two separate fields for creation and reading. Here both creation and reading can be done by using child key.
Sample payload to create parent instance
{
"name": "TestPOSTMAN_name",
"phone_number": 1,
"child": 1
}
Screenshot
The best solution here is to use two different fields: one for reading and the other for writing. Without doing some heavy lifting, it is difficult to get what you are looking for in a single field.
The read-only field would be your nested serializer (ChildSerializer in this case) and it will allow you to get the same nested representation that you are expecting. Most people define this as just child, because they already have their front-end written by this point and changing it would cause problems.
The write-only field would be a PrimaryKeyRelatedField, which is what you would typically use for assigning objects based on their primary key. This does not have to be write-only, especially if you are trying to go for symmetry between what is received and what is sent, but it sounds like that might suit you best. This field should have a source set to the foreign key field (child in this example) so it assigns it properly on creation and updating.
This has been brought up on the discussion group a few times, and I think this is still the best solution. Thanks to Sven Maurer for pointing it out.
Here's an example of what Kevin's answer is talking about, if you want to take that approach and use 2 separate fields.
In your models.py...
class Child(models.Model):
name = CharField(max_length=20)
class Parent(models.Model):
name = CharField(max_length=20)
phone_number = models.ForeignKey(PhoneNumber)
child = models.ForeignKey(Child)
then serializers.py...
class ChildSerializer(ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = Child
class ParentSerializer(ModelSerializer):
# if child is required
child = ChildSerializer(read_only=True)
# if child is a required field and you want write to child properties through parent
# child = ChildSerializer(required=False)
# otherwise the following should work (untested)
# child = ChildSerializer()
child_id = serializers.PrimaryKeyRelatedField(
queryset=Child.objects.all(), source='child', write_only=True)
class Meta:
model = Parent
Setting source=child lets child_id act as child would by default had it not be overridden (our desired behavior). write_only=True makes child_id available to write to, but keeps it from showing up in the response since the id already shows up in the ChildSerializer.
There is a way to substitute a field on create/update operation:
class ChildSerializer(ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = Child
class ParentSerializer(ModelSerializer):
child = ChildSerializer()
# called on create/update operations
def to_internal_value(self, data):
self.fields['child'] = serializers.PrimaryKeyRelatedField(
queryset=Child.objects.all())
return super(ParentSerializer, self).to_internal_value(data)
class Meta:
model = Parent
A few people here have placed a way to keep one field but still be able to get the details when retrieving the object and create it with only the ID. I made a little more generic implementation if people are interested:
First off the tests:
from rest_framework.relations import PrimaryKeyRelatedField
from django.test import TestCase
from .serializers import ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField, ProductSerializer
from .factories import SomethingElseFactory
from .models import SomethingElse
class TestModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField(TestCase):
def setUp(self):
self.serializer = ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField(
model_serializer_class=SomethingElseSerializer,
queryset=SomethingElse.objects.all(),
)
def test_inherits_from_primary_key_related_field(self):
assert issubclass(ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField, PrimaryKeyRelatedField)
def test_use_pk_only_optimization_returns_false(self):
self.assertFalse(self.serializer.use_pk_only_optimization())
def test_to_representation_returns_serialized_object(self):
obj = SomethingElseFactory()
ret = self.serializer.to_representation(obj)
self.assertEqual(ret, SomethingElseSerializer(instance=obj).data)
Then the class itself:
from rest_framework.relations import PrimaryKeyRelatedField
class ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField(PrimaryKeyRelatedField):
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
self.model_serializer_class = kwargs.pop('model_serializer_class')
super().__init__(**kwargs)
def use_pk_only_optimization(self):
return False
def to_representation(self, value):
return self.model_serializer_class(instance=value).data
The usage is like so, if you have a serializer somewhere:
class YourSerializer(ModelSerializer):
something_else = ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField(queryset=SomethingElse.objects.all(), model_serializer_class=SomethingElseSerializer)
This will allow you to create an object with a foreign key still only with the PK, but will return the full serialized nested model when retrieving the object you created (or whenever really).
There is a package for that! Check out PresentablePrimaryKeyRelatedField in Drf Extra Fields package.
https://github.com/Hipo/drf-extra-fields
I think the approach outlined by Kevin probably would be the best solution, but I couldn't ever get it to work. DRF kept throwing errors when I had both a nested serializer and a primary key field set. Removing one or the other would function, but obviously didn't give me the result I needed. The best I could come up with is creating two different serializers for reading and writing, Like so...
serializers.py:
class ChildSerializer(serializers.ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = Child
class ParentSerializer(serializers.ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
abstract = True
model = Parent
fields = ('id', 'child', 'foo', 'bar', 'etc')
class ParentReadSerializer(ParentSerializer):
child = ChildSerializer()
views.py
class ParentViewSet(viewsets.ModelViewSet):
serializer_class = ParentSerializer
queryset = Parent.objects.all()
def get_serializer_class(self):
if self.request.method == 'GET':
return ParentReadSerializer
else:
return self.serializer_class
Here's how I've solved this problem.
serializers.py
class ChildSerializer(ModelSerializer):
def to_internal_value(self, data):
if data.get('id'):
return get_object_or_404(Child.objects.all(), pk=data.get('id'))
return super(ChildSerializer, self).to_internal_value(data)
You'll just pass your nested child serializer just as you get it from the serializer ie child as a json/dictionary. in to_internal_value we instantiate the child object if it has a valid ID so that DRF can further work with the object.
I started by implementing something similar to JPG's solution before I found this answer, and noticed that it breaks the built-in Django Rest Framework's templates. Now, that isn't such a big deal (as their solution works wonderfully via requests/postman/AJAX/curl/etc.), but if someone's new (like me) and wants the built-in DRF form to help them along the way, here's my solution (after cleaning it up and integrating some of JPG's ideas):
class NestedKeyField(serializers.PrimaryKeyRelatedField):
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
self.serializer = kwargs.pop('serializer', None)
if self.serializer is not None and not issubclass(self.serializer, serializers.Serializer):
raise TypeError('You need to pass a instance of serialzers.Serializer or atleast something that inherits from it.')
super().__init__(**kwargs)
def use_pk_only_optimization(self):
return not self.serializer
def to_representation(self, value):
if self.serializer:
return dict(self.serializer(value, context=self.context).data)
else:
return super().to_representation(value)
def get_choices(self, cutoff=None):
queryset = self.get_queryset()
if queryset is None:
return {}
if cutoff is not None:
queryset = queryset[:cutoff]
return OrderedDict([
(
self.to_representation(item)['id'] if self.serializer else self.to_representation(item), # If you end up using another column-name for your primary key, you'll have to change this extraction-key here so it maps the select-element properly.
self.display_value(item)
)
for item in queryset
])
and an example below,
Child Serializer class:
class ChildSerializer(serializers.ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = ChildModel
fields = '__all__'
Parent Serializer Class:
class ParentSerializer(serializers.ModelSerializer):
same_field_name_as_model_foreign_key = NestedKeyField(queryset=ChildModel.objects.all(), serializer=ChildSerializer)
class Meta:
model = ParentModel
fields = '__all__'
Based on the answers of both JPG and Bono, I came up with a solution that handles the OpenAPI Schema generator of DRF as well.
The actual field class is:
from rest_framework import serializers
class ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField(serializers.PrimaryKeyRelatedField):
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
self.response_serializer_class = kwargs.pop('response_serializer_class', None)
if self.response_serializer_class is not None \
and not issubclass(self.response_serializer_class, serializers.Serializer):
raise TypeError('"serializer" is not a valid serializer class')
super(ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField, self).__init__(**kwargs)
def use_pk_only_optimization(self):
return False if self.response_serializer_class else True
def to_representation(self, instance):
if self.response_serializer_class is not None:
return self.response_serializer_class(instance, context=self.context).data
return super(ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField, self).to_representation(instance)
The extended AutoSchema class is:
import inspect
from rest_framework.schemas.openapi import AutoSchema
from .fields import ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField
class CustomSchema(AutoSchema):
def _map_field(self, field):
if isinstance(field, ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField) \
and hasattr(field, 'response_serializer_class'):
frame = inspect.currentframe().f_back
while frame is not None:
method_name = frame.f_code.co_name
if method_name == '_get_request_body':
break
elif method_name == '_get_responses':
field = field.response_serializer_class()
return super(CustomSchema, self)._map_field(field)
frame = frame.f_back
return super(CustomSchema, self)._map_field(field)
Then on your Dganjo's project settings you can define this new Schema class to be used globally like:
REST_FRAMEWORK = {
'DEFAULT_SCHEMA_CLASS': '<path_to_custom_schema>.CustomSchema',
}
Lastly from within your models you can use the new field type like:
class ExampleSerializer(serializers.ModelSerializer):
test_field = ModelRepresentationPrimaryKeyRelatedField(queryset=Test.objects.all(), response_serializer_class=TestListSerializer)
I have been also stuck in the same situation. But what i have done that i have created two serializers for the following models as follow:
class Base_Location(models.Model):
Base_Location_id = models.AutoField(primary_key = True)
Base_Location_Name = models.CharField(max_length=50, db_column="Base_Location_Name")
class Location(models.Model):
Location_id = models.AutoField(primary_key = True)
Location_Name = models.CharField(max_length=50, db_column="Location_Name")
Base_Location_id = models.ForeignKey(Base_Location, db_column="Base_Location_id", related_name="Location_Base_Location", on_delete=models.CASCADE)
This is my parent serializer
class BaseLocationSerializer(serializers.ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = Base_Location
fields = "__all__"
I'm using this serializer only for get request so in response i got data with foreign key also because of nested serializer
class LocationSerializerList(serializers.ModelSerializer): <-- using for get request
Base_Location_id = BaseLocationSerializer()
class Meta:
model = Location
fields = "__all__"
Screenshot of get method request and response in postman
I'm using this serializer only for post request so while sending post request i do not need to include any additional information rather than primary key field value
class LocationSerializerInsert(serializers.ModelSerializer): <-- using for post request
class Meta:
model = Location
fields = "__all__"
Screenshot of post method request and response in postman
Here's what I'm using all over. This may be the simplest, most straight forward method which needs no hacks etc, and is directly using DRF without jumping thru hoops. Happy to hear disagreements with this approach.
In the view's perform_create (or equivalent), fetch the FK model database object corresponding to the field sent in the POST request, and then send that into the Serializer. The field in the POST request can be anything that can be used to filter and locate the DB object, need not be an ID.
This is documented here: https://www.django-rest-framework.org/api-guide/generic-views/#genericapiview
These hooks are particularly useful for setting attributes that are
implicit in the request, but are not part of the request data. For
instance, you might set an attribute on the object based on the
request user, or based on a URL keyword argument.
def perform_create(self, serializer):
serializer.save(user=self.request.user)
This method also has the advantage of maintaining parity between the read and write side, by not sending a nested representation for child in the response to the GET or POST.
Given the example posted by the OP:
class Child(models.Model):
name = CharField(max_length=20)
class Parent(models.Model):
name = CharField(max_length=20)
phone_number = models.ForeignKey(PhoneNumber)
child = models.ForeignKey(Child)
class ChildSerializer(ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = Child
class ParentSerializer(ModelSerializer):
# Note this is different from the OP's example. This will send the
# child name in the response
child = serializers.ReadOnlyField(source='child.name')
class Meta:
model = Parent
fields = ('name', 'phone_number', 'child')
In the View's perform_create:
class SomethingView(generics.ListCreateAPIView):
serializer_class = ParentSerializer
def perform_create(self, serializer):
child_name = self.request.data.get('child_name', None)
child_obj = get_object_or_404(Child.objects, name=child_name)
serializer.save(child=child_obj)
PS: Please note that I've not tested this above snippet, however its based on a pattern I'm using in many places so it should work as is.
I'm trying to build a path for a FileField, getting and using the instance to get another data for the URL, plus the field name, to get something like:
/media/documents/<instance_data>/<field_name>.pdf
My best working approach is:
class UserDocFileField(models.FileField):
def get_fixed_folder_path(self, instance, filename):
return 'documents/{}/{}.pdf'.format(instance.user.rfc, self.name)
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
kwargs["upload_to"] = self.get_fixed_folder_path
super(UserDocFileField, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)
And in my model:
class Documents(models.Model):
user = models.OneToOneField(User, on_delete=models.CASCADE, primary_key=True)
file_1 = UserDocFileField()
file_2 = UserDocFileField()
# ... other documents
Giving me what I'm looking for, i.e.:
/media/documents/ABCD840422ABC/file_1.pdf
However, this makes Django to generate a migration file every single time I run makemigrations, I have tried to set it as an inner class, rewriting the super as
super(Documents.UserDocFileField, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)
But, I got this error:
NameError: name 'Documents' is not defined
So, is there a way to avoid the generations of migrations files or a better approach to solve this?
One way of doing this is to use a custom class for the upload_to itself, with a __call__ method to make the instance callable. In order to make that serializable for migrations you then need to add a deconstruct method. So:
class UploadTo:
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def __call__(self, instance, filename):
return 'documents/{}/{}.pdf'.format(instance.user.rfc, self.name)
def deconstruct(self):
return ('myapp.models.UploadTo', [self.fieldname], {})
class Documents(models.Model):
user = models.OneToOneField(User, on_delete=models.CASCADE, primary_key=True)
file_1 = FileField(upload_to=UploadTo('file_1'))
file_2 = FileField(upload_to=UploadTo('file_2'))
Honestly though, at this point I'd probably just write separate upload_to functions for each field.
I am reading on how to write a custom manager for my model however it seems like I have a few questions. The reason I would like to add a custom manager to my class is because I would like to introduce a method called "customUpdate" which would basically check if the members in a dict are members of this class. This is what my code looks like so far.Then Ill post in some questions that I have
class modelEmployer(models.Model):
user = models.ForeignKey(User, on_delete=models.CASCADE, null=True, blank=True)
location = models.PointField(srid=4326,max_length=40, blank=True, null=True)
objects = GeoManager() # models.GeoManager()
Now this is what my manager class would like this is a rough sketch:
class customEmployerManager(models.Manager):
def customUpdate(dataDict):
# Check if the fields in this data are present in this model
for key in dataDict:
empInst = How do I get instance of class which filter returned ?
if not hasattr(empInst, key):
# This property is not present
dataDict.pop(key)
empInst.update(**dataDict) #Will this work ? Update only works with queryset
Now here are my questions
1- From the tutorials that I read I need to add customEmployerManager to my main model class as an object member like this objects = customEmployerManager() however I am currently using geodjango and I already have something there how do I add another customEmployerManager there ?
2-I would like my update method to be called when I do something like this
modelEmployer.objects.filter(....).customUpdate(xx)
In customUpdate how do I access the queryset so I can call .update(**dataDict) on it ? I am currently doing empInst.update(**dataDict) which will not work ? Also how do I get the instance of modelEmployer instance on which update is being called ?
You can override GeoManager like this:
class customEmployerManager(GeoManager):
def customUpdate(self, **dataDict):
# Check if the fields in this data are present in this model
empInst = self.get_queryset()
for i in empInst:
i.update(**dataDict)
# in models.py
class modelEmployer(models.Model):
objects = customEmployerManager()
...
def update(self, **kwargs):
for key, value in kwargs.items():
if hasattr(self, key):
setattr(self, key, value)
self.save()
You need to call the manager like this:
modelEmployer.objects.customUpdate(**dict)
I am using PyCharm 4.5.2, Django 1.8.2.
If I define a class as:
class User(models.Model):
first_name = models.CharField(max_length=256)
last_name = models.CharField(max_length=256)
slug = models.SlugField(max_length=256, unique=True, default=make_slug)
def make_slug(self):
return self.first_name + self.last_name[0]
The IDE highlights default=make_slug with make_slug being undefined. The interpretter agrees and when the development server tries to refresh it exits with status 1 and the error NameError: name 'make_slug' is not defined.
Because it's just the name of a callable, I can't pass arguments. So if I define the function outside the class (to move into a higher scope and be defined) I can't use the class properties. I have read some suggestions that use lambdas but from the Django documentation that is wrong:
Note that lambdas cannot be used for field options like default
because they cannot be serialized by migrations. See that
documentation for other caveats.
What is the proper way to define a callable for default values in a model.
You shouldn't use this method to set your default value, rather than override the save method of the model and use it there. For example:
class User(models.Model):
first_name = models.CharField(max_length=256)
last_name = models.CharField(max_length=256)
slug = models.SlugField(max_length=256, unique=True, default=uuid.uuid1)
def make_slug(self):
return self.first_name + self.last_name[0]
def save(self, *args, **kwargs):
self.slug = self.make_slug()
super().save(*args, **kwargs)
You get this error
NameError: name 'make_slug' is not defined.
because you refer to make_slug before you defined it. If you moved the make_slug function above the slug field, then you wouldn't get that error.
However, it isn't possible to pass any arguments to the callable that you use as the default, so that won't work either. You can't get around that restriction by using a model method as you are trying.
If you need access to the model instance to calculate the default, then setting the value in the save() method as ruddra suggests is a good idea. Note that you might want to check whether or not the model has a primary key, so that you only create the slug when you first create the instance.
I'm using SQLAlchemy with the below User model to track users on my site. I'm trying to get the __init__ method to populate all of the fields in the class instance once it's passed a valid user id, but it doesn't work like it's supposed to.
Here's my code:
class User(db.Model):
# Fields
id = db.Column(db.Integer, primary_key=True)
name = db.Column(db.String(32))
email = db.Column(db.String(255), index=True)
# Methods
def __init__(self, id):
# Populate the fields
u = User.query.filter_by(id=id).first()
# Fill in the name, email fields from the result
self = u # <-- Not working as expected
# ...
The problem is that the attributes are not getting populated.
u = User(1)
u.id, u.name, u.email # <-- Output: None
How can I auto-populate all the class attributes from the user id without having to set them one by one?
Note: I've removed the validation bits from the above code to avoid clutter
Note2: I'm a beginner in SQLAlchemy, and just recently started using Python.
For this particular case you can use get which gets a row by its primary key:
u = User.get(1)
u.id, u.name, u.email
The problem with your code is that you're trying to use a bound method, even worse, the constructor (in which assigning to self does nothing at all) to get an existing, completely different instance.
I'll just show a reimplementation of the get method so you can reuse it for other cases.
class User(db.Model):
# ...
#classmethod
def get_by_id(cls, id):
return cls.query.filter_by(id=id).one()
u = User.get_by_id(1)