id	summary	reporter	owner	description	type	status	component	version	severity	resolution	keywords	cc	stage	has_patch	needs_docs	needs_tests	needs_better_patch	easy	ui_ux
34130	order_by() has no effect on values()/values_list()	Michal Dabski	nobody	"I have encounteded a bug with a model that has default ordering. I am making a query with `order_by()` without parameters to avoid ordering and then use `values()` or` values_list()` to extract a subset of fields. The end result is an ordered queryset.

It appears that `values()` restores model's default ordering if called after `order_by()`, except if queryset is already ordered by cystom ordering (e.g. `order_by('name')`), in which case order_by is maintained.

Django 3.2.16


The model:
{{{
class Dashboard(models.Model):
    name = models.CharField(max_length=100)
    order = models.PositiveIntegerField(default=1)

    class Meta:
        ordering = 'order',
}}}
Note: it is important that the model defineds `ordering`


To reproduce issue:

{{{
# Queryset is ordered by default field as expected ✔
Dashboard.objects.all().values('name').ordered
Out[44]: True

# Queryset is not ordered after adding order_by() as expected ✔
Dashboard.objects.all().order_by().ordered
Out[54]: False

# adding values() call somehow restores default ordering. Expected behaviour is for QS to remain unordered ✖
Dashboard.objects.all().order_by().values('name').ordered
Out[42]: True

# placing order_by() after values() works as expected ✔
Dashboard.objects.all().values('name').order_by().ordered
Out[48]: False

}}}

In my case I am using order_by() to avoid using JOIN in the query when I know that order does not matter, but resulting query does make a join unbeknownst to me and makes the more complex ordered query.

The documentation for values/values_list and order_by does not appear to mention this behaviour so I am assuming it is not intentional."	Bug	new	Database layer (models, ORM)	3.2	Normal		queryset,ordering,values,values_list		Unreviewed	0	0	0	0	0	0