If you are using Django 1.1 beta (trunk): Player.objects.values(‘player_type’).order_by().annotate(Count(‘player_type’)) values(‘player_type’) – for inclusion only player_type field into GROUP BY clause. order_by() – for exclusion possible default ordering that can cause not needed fields inclusion in SELECT and GROUP BY.
Shazaam! Per my edits, an additional column was being output from my subquery. This was to facilitate ordering (which just isn’t required in a COUNT). I just needed to remove the prescribed meta-order from the model. You can do this by just adding an empty .order_by() to the subquery. In my code terms that meant: … Read more
Based on your error message and this other question, it seems to me this would fix it: p = Product.objects.filter(vendornumber=”403516006″)\ .order_by(‘vendor__name’, ‘-created’).distinct(‘vendor__name’) That is, it seems that the DISTINCT ON expression(s) must match the leftmost ORDER BY expression(s). So by making the column you use in distinct as the first column in the order_by, I … Read more
Try this: Rating.objects.filter(attribute__in=attributes) \ .values(‘location’) \ .annotate(score = Sum(‘score’)) \ .order_by(‘-score’)
Django 1.10 and above Django documentation lists extra as deprecated soon. (Thanks for pointing that out @seddonym, @Lucas03). I opened a ticket and this is the solution that jarshwah provided. from django.db.models.functions import TruncMonth from django.db.models import Count Sales.objects .annotate(month=TruncMonth(‘created’)) # Truncate to month and add to select list .values(‘month’) # Group By month .annotate(c=Count(‘id’)) … Read more
Conditional aggregation in Django 2.0 allows you to further reduce the amount of faff this has been in the past. This will also use Postgres’ filter logic, which is somewhat faster than a sum-case (I’ve seen numbers like 20-30% bandied around). Anyway, in your case, we’re looking at something as simple as: from django.db.models import … Read more