Opened 18 years ago
Closed 17 years ago
#3037 closed defect (fixed)
Q(a=1, b=2) treated as Q(a=1) | Q(b=2)
Reported by: | Owned by: | nobody | |
---|---|---|---|
Component: | Database layer (models, ORM) | Version: | dev |
Severity: | normal | Keywords: | qs-rf-fixed |
Cc: | Triage Stage: | Accepted | |
Has patch: | no | Needs documentation: | no |
Needs tests: | no | Patch needs improvement: | no |
Easy pickings: | no | UI/UX: | no |
Description
As far as I can tell from the documentation, arguments to a Q are anded together, e.g. Q(a=1, b=2) is equivalent to Q(a=1) & Q(b=2). However, I am currently finding (in revision 4085) that Q(a=1, b=2) is instead equivalent to Q(a=1) | Q(b=2). In this particular case, I am doing something like:
q1 = Q(a=1, b=2)
q2 = Q(a=3, b=4)
model.objects.filter(q1 | q2)
When I look at connection.queries, I find that there is no parenthesization at all, and all of the terms are combined with OR like "a=1 OR b=2 OR a=3 OR b=4" instead of "(a=1 AND b=2) OR (a=3 AND b=4)".
I made my description a little bit abstract for clarity, but I can post the exact queries if necessary. Right now I'm working around the problem by doing something of the form:
q1 = Q(a=1) & Q(b=2)
etc., which gives the query I expected. I hope this report is clear. Let me know if you have any questions.
Change History (6)
comment:1 by , 18 years ago
Triage Stage: | Unreviewed → Design decision needed |
---|
comment:2 by , 18 years ago
Owner: | changed from | to
---|---|
Triage Stage: | Design decision needed → Accepted |
comment:3 by , 17 years ago
Keywords: | qs-rf added |
---|
comment:4 by , 17 years ago
comment:5 by , 17 years ago
Keywords: | qs-rf-fixed added; qs-rf removed |
---|
comment:6 by , 17 years ago
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
(In [7477]) Merged the queryset-refactor branch into trunk.
This is a big internal change, but mostly backwards compatible with existing
code. Also adds a couple of new features.
Fixed #245, #1050, #1656, #1801, #2076, #2091, #2150, #2253, #2306, #2400, #2430, #2482, #2496, #2676, #2737, #2874, #2902, #2939, #3037, #3141, #3288, #3440, #3592, #3739, #4088, #4260, #4289, #4306, #4358, #4464, #4510, #4858, #5012, #5020, #5261, #5295, #5321, #5324, #5325, #5555, #5707, #5796, #5817, #5987, #6018, #6074, #6088, #6154, #6177, #6180, #6203, #6658
Yeah, this is broken. It will be fixed post-0.96 (but pre-1.0), since fixing all the problems with disjunctive and conjunctive queries (as well as join types, etc) requires a large refactoring of the QuerySet class. I'm working on this area, so I'll take this one.