Integer primary key is wrongly casted to UUID when filtering GenericRelation on model with UUID primary key.

[Santos Gallegos]

Hi, at Read the Docs we have migrated from Django 2.2 to 3.2, and we encountered the following problem. In a model that makes use of a GenericForeignKey field, and it has a UUID field as its pk will result in Django casting the ID of the related model as UUID in some queries (the related model makes use of the default BigAutoField). I was able to reproduce this with the following models and using postgres as the DB backend.

from django.db import models
from django.contrib.contenttypes.models import ContentType
from django.contrib.contenttypes.fields import (
    GenericForeignKey,
    GenericRelation,
)
import uuid

class TTag(models.Model):
    id = models.UUIDField(primary_key=True, default=uuid.uuid4, editable=False)

    content_type = models.ForeignKey(ContentType, on_delete=models.CASCADE)
    object_id = models.PositiveIntegerField()
    content = GenericForeignKey()


class TIntegration(models.Model):
    tags = GenericRelation(TTag, related_query_name='integration')

The problematic queries:

integration = TIntegration.objects.create()
tag = integration.tags.create()
r = TTag.objects.filter(integration=integration)
print(r.query)

# The next error is raised if the query is evaluated
# psycopg2.errors.UndefinedFunction: operator does not exist: bigint = uuid

The query will result in the following SQL

SELECT "core_ttag"."id", "core_ttag"."content_type_id", "core_ttag"."object_id" FROM "core_ttag" INNER JOIN "core_tintegration" ON ("core_ttag"."object_id" = "core_tintegration"."id" AND ("core_ttag"."content_type_id" = 7)) WHERE "core_tintegration"."id" = 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001

Note as core_tintegration"."id" is being casted as an UUID when it should be an integer (1). I was able to bisect the error to this commit ​https://github.com/django/django/commit/1afbc96a75bd1765a56054f57ea2d4b238af3f4d. Before that commit, the generated SQL is as follows:

SELECT "core_ttag"."id", "core_ttag"."content_type_id", "core_ttag"."object_id" FROM "core_ttag" INNER JOIN "core_tintegration" ON ("core_ttag"."object_id" = "core_tintegration"."id" AND ("core_ttag"."content_type_id" = 7)) WHERE "core_tintegration"."id" = 1

We were able to work around this issue by changing the queries to explicitly use the ID.

TTag.objects.filter(integration__id=integration.id)

[Mariusz Felisiak]

Thanks for the report! Regression in 1afbc96a75bd1765a56054f57ea2d4b238af3f4d.

While checking this report I found another issue that's related but it's not a regression:

>>> integration = TIntegration.objects.create()
>>> tag = integration.tags.create()
>>> tag.integration.first()
  ...
  File "/django/django/db/backends/utils.py", line 84, in _execute
    return self.cursor.execute(sql, params)
django.db.utils.ProgrammingError: operator does not exist: uuid = numeric
LINE 1: ...ntent_type_id" = 7)) WHERE "test_33450_ttag"."id" = 10341161...

so cast to uuid is missing here 🤔.

[Jeffrey]

Upon further investigation in Santos Gallegos original post, I also found that in RelatedLookupMixin.get_prep_lookup it also part of the issue since "target_field = self.lhs.output_field.path_infos[-1].fields[-1]" points at TTag's primary key which is a UUID instead of TIntegration's ID. Was able to resolve the issue by using reverse_path_infos but unsure if this is correct. So the issue is not so much related to ​https://github.com/django/django/commit/1afbc96a75bd1765a56054f57ea2d4b238af3f4d which does the casting but that at this point of the code it thinks it should get the ID value for TTag instead of TIntegration.

I will try to see if I can resolve the issue but wanted to share what I found so far. Let me know what you guys think.

[Jeffrey]

Here is the pull request ​https://github.com/django/django/pull/15397

[Jacob Walls]

Thanks for submitting the PR. RFC is a status set by a reviewer.

[Abhinav Yadav]

I have been working on this issue for a while, trying to understand it, but I'm unable to figure out how django is working internally to answer a question raised by Mariusz Felisiak in ​this comment asking why self.lhs.output_field points generic_relations.TIntegration.tags and not to generic_relations.TIntegration. I tried debugging and checking the variables in related_lookups.py but to no avail.

Any suggestions on where to proceed so as to fix this bug? The patch provided for this issue seems to work by reversing the fields but I suppose it's not the expected behaviour to begin with?

[Clifford Gama]

​PR