I use Django 1.7 migrations, and in particular, want to populate a newly-created database with initial data. Thus, I use a data migration for this. It looks like this:
def populate_with_initial_data(apps, schema_editor):
User = apps.get_model("auth", "User")
new_user = User.objects.create(username="nobody")
class Migration(migrations.Migration):
...
operations = [
migrations.RunPython(populate_with_initial_data),
]
At the same time, I want to have an instance of the UserDetails
model for every new user:
@receiver(signals.post_save, sender=django.contrib.auth.models.User)
def add_user_details(sender, instance, created, **kwargs):
if created:
my_app.UserDetails.objects.create(user=instance)
But: This signal works only outside the migration. The reason is that apps.get_model("auth", "User")
is different enough from django.contrib.auth.models.User
that no signal is sent. If I try to do it manually, like this, it fails:
signals.post_save.send(django.contrib.auth.models.User, instance=julia, created=True)
This fails because then, the signal handler tries to create a new UserDetails
pointing with O2O to a historical User
:
ValueError: Cannot assign "<User: User object>": "UserDetails.user" must be a "User" instance.
Bummer.
Okay, I could call the signal handler directly. But I had to pass the historical UserDetails
class in a keyword argument (and other historical classes that it needs). Besides, the app with the UserDetails
is not the one with this data migration, so this would be an ugly dependency which easily may break, e.g. if the UserDetails
app is removed from INSTALLED_APPS
.
So, is this simply a current limitation that I have to address with ugly code and a FixMe comment? Or is there a way to send signals out of data migrations?
pre_save. This is sent at the beginning of a model's save() method. Arguments sent with this signal: sender.
Using Django built-in (pre_save, post_save, pre_delete, post_delete, receiver) and custom signals. - MicroPyramid.
You can't (and should not) do this because when your migration is executed, your UserDetails
could be really different than when you wrote this migration.
This is why django (and south) use "frozen models" which are identical to when you wrote the migration.
"Unfortunately", you have to freeze your signal code in your migration to keep the behaviour expected at the time you write the migration.
A simple exemple to understand why it's important to not use real models (or signals etc.) inside a migration :
Today, I could have this :
class UserDetails(models.Model):
user = models.ForeignKey(...)
typo_fild = models.CharField(...)
@receiver(signals.post_save, sender=django.contrib.auth.models.User)
def add_user_details(sender, instance, created, **kwargs):
if created:
UserDetails.objects.create(user=instance, typo_fild='yo')
Then, I have a data migration (called "populate_users") which create new users and I force the execution of add_user_details
inside it. It's okay : it works today.
Tomorrow, I fix my typo_fild
-> typo_field
inside UserDetails
and inside add_user_details
. A new schema migration is created to rename the field in the database.
At this point, my migration "populate_users" will fail because when a new user will be created, it will try to create a new UserDetails
with a field "typo_field" wich does not yet exist in the database : this field will only be rename in the DB with the next migrations.
So, if I want to keep a good migration wich will work at anytime, I have to copy the behaviour of add_user_details
inside the migration. This freeze of add_user_details
will have to use the frozen model UserDetails
via apps.get_model("myapp", "UserDetails")
and create a new UserDetails
with the typo_fild
which is frozen too.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With