Changes between Initial Version and Version 3 of Ticket #10045


Ignore:
Timestamp:
01/16/2009 02:31:45 AM (11 years ago)
Author:
Russell Keith-Magee
Comment:

In this case, I am confirming that the query is returning the correct results. The order of filter() and annotate() is significant, and the result you have received is what should be expected.

However, I will concede that the documentation of this quirk could certainly be improved. I'll reopen this ticket, but I'll repurpose it to clarify the documentation of this feature since there isn't anything at a code level that requires fixing. If you (or anyone else) wants to take a swing at describing this quirk better, feel free to do so.

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #10045

    • Property Status changed from new to reopened
    • Property Component changed from ORM aggregation to Documentation
    • Property Summary changed from bug in aggregations: .annotate() followed by .filter() on related field breaks to Improve documentation of .annotate() / .filter() ordering quirks
    • Property Triage Stage changed from Unreviewed to Accepted
  • Ticket #10045 – Description

    initial v3  
     1The documentation surrounding the ordering of .annotate() and .filter() clauses needs improvement. The current documentation is confusing (and arguably incorrect), leading to invalid bug reports like the following:
     2
     3---
     4
    15I get something that looks like a missing join condition when doing
    26
     
    711
    812django revision: 9756
     13
     14---
Back to Top