How to output selected column values

In a single model Person there is an address information. But since we are not separating this yet to another table. I would like to only query the address information out of Person table. Would it be possible using hybrid_property If not what else do I need to achieve this stuff?

I wanna avoid this one:

db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name).get(pk)

The model

class Person(db.Model):

    # some lengthy information



    # address

    address_secret_id = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)

    address_name = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)



    @hybrid_property

    def address(self):

       # I never tested this but i know this is wrong.

       return self.id + self.address_secret_id + self.address_name

Usage:

db.session.query(Person.address).get(pk)

Expected Output:

{id: 1, address_secret_id: xxxx, address_name: 'forgetmeland'}

How can I achieve an output that is only retrieving the desired field? It doesn't need to be dict or tuple as long as Im getting what is needed.

edited Nov 13 '18 at 15:20

SuperShoot

1,679619

asked Nov 13 '18 at 12:48

Roel

2,00122058

Are you trying to avoid typing db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name)?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 12:59

The answer to your title is "yes". The rest is unclear. Why would you expect a dictionary as output? How come the components are separated in the dictionary, though you're trying to query the hybrid that combines them?

– Ilja Everilä
Nov 13 '18 at 13:10

@SuperShoot true!

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 13:21

@IljaEverilä sorry for not making it clear. That is only an example. It could be any other type as long as im getting only the same fields

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 13:22

add a comment |

I wanna avoid this one:

db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name).get(pk)

The model

class Person(db.Model):

    # some lengthy information



    # address

    address_secret_id = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)

    address_name = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)



    @hybrid_property

    def address(self):

       # I never tested this but i know this is wrong.

       return self.id + self.address_secret_id + self.address_name

Usage:

db.session.query(Person.address).get(pk)

Expected Output:

{id: 1, address_secret_id: xxxx, address_name: 'forgetmeland'}

How can I achieve an output that is only retrieving the desired field? It doesn't need to be dict or tuple as long as Im getting what is needed.

edited Nov 13 '18 at 15:20

SuperShoot

1,679619

asked Nov 13 '18 at 12:48

Roel

2,00122058

Are you trying to avoid typing db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name)?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 12:59

The answer to your title is "yes". The rest is unclear. Why would you expect a dictionary as output? How come the components are separated in the dictionary, though you're trying to query the hybrid that combines them?

– Ilja Everilä
Nov 13 '18 at 13:10

@SuperShoot true!

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 13:21

@IljaEverilä sorry for not making it clear. That is only an example. It could be any other type as long as im getting only the same fields

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 13:22

add a comment |

I wanna avoid this one:

db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name).get(pk)

The model

class Person(db.Model):

    # some lengthy information



    # address

    address_secret_id = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)

    address_name = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)



    @hybrid_property

    def address(self):

       # I never tested this but i know this is wrong.

       return self.id + self.address_secret_id + self.address_name

Usage:

db.session.query(Person.address).get(pk)

Expected Output:

{id: 1, address_secret_id: xxxx, address_name: 'forgetmeland'}

How can I achieve an output that is only retrieving the desired field? It doesn't need to be dict or tuple as long as Im getting what is needed.

edited Nov 13 '18 at 15:20

SuperShoot

1,679619

asked Nov 13 '18 at 12:48

Roel

2,00122058

I wanna avoid this one:

db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name).get(pk)

The model

class Person(db.Model):

    # some lengthy information



    # address

    address_secret_id = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)

    address_name = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)



    @hybrid_property

    def address(self):

       # I never tested this but i know this is wrong.

       return self.id + self.address_secret_id + self.address_name

Usage:

db.session.query(Person.address).get(pk)

Expected Output:

{id: 1, address_secret_id: xxxx, address_name: 'forgetmeland'}

How can I achieve an output that is only retrieving the desired field? It doesn't need to be dict or tuple as long as Im getting what is needed.

python sqlalchemy

edited Nov 13 '18 at 15:20

SuperShoot

1,679619

asked Nov 13 '18 at 12:48

Roel

2,00122058

edited Nov 13 '18 at 15:20

SuperShoot

1,679619

asked Nov 13 '18 at 12:48

Roel

2,00122058

edited Nov 13 '18 at 15:20

SuperShoot

1,679619

edited Nov 13 '18 at 15:20

SuperShoot

1,679619

edited Nov 13 '18 at 15:20

SuperShoot

1,679619

asked Nov 13 '18 at 12:48

Roel

2,00122058

asked Nov 13 '18 at 12:48

Roel

2,00122058

asked Nov 13 '18 at 12:48

Roel

2,00122058

Are you trying to avoid typing db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name)?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 12:59

The answer to your title is "yes". The rest is unclear. Why would you expect a dictionary as output? How come the components are separated in the dictionary, though you're trying to query the hybrid that combines them?

– Ilja Everilä
Nov 13 '18 at 13:10

@SuperShoot true!

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 13:21

@IljaEverilä sorry for not making it clear. That is only an example. It could be any other type as long as im getting only the same fields

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 13:22

add a comment |

Are you trying to avoid typing db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name)?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 12:59

The answer to your title is "yes". The rest is unclear. Why would you expect a dictionary as output? How come the components are separated in the dictionary, though you're trying to query the hybrid that combines them?

– Ilja Everilä
Nov 13 '18 at 13:10

@SuperShoot true!

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 13:21

@IljaEverilä sorry for not making it clear. That is only an example. It could be any other type as long as im getting only the same fields

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 13:22

Are you trying to avoid typing db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name)?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 12:59

The answer to your title is "yes". The rest is unclear. Why would you expect a dictionary as output? How come the components are separated in the dictionary, though you're trying to query the hybrid that combines them?

– Ilja Everilä
Nov 13 '18 at 13:10

@SuperShoot true!

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 13:21

@IljaEverilä sorry for not making it clear. That is only an example. It could be any other type as long as im getting only the same fields

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 13:22

add a comment |

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

If you are trying to avoid having to type db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name), just add an address_details property on the person model.

class Person(db.Model):

    # some lengthy information



    # address

    address_secret_id = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)

    address_name = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)



    @property

    def address_details(self):

        keys = ('id', 'address_secret_id', 'address_name')

        return {k: getattr(self, k) for k in in keys}

Probably less lines of code than trying to use some sort of hybrid query, and still just the one trip to the database.

Query would be:

Person.query.get(1).address_details

edited Nov 13 '18 at 14:23

answered Nov 13 '18 at 13:13

SuperShoot

1,679619

Is there no other way in query() level?

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:06

Yes, but you are trying to avoid it.

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:10

I see so there is no otherway in doing this using hybrid_property

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:13

1

There might be, but what would be the advantage of adding the complexity?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:16

actually in the real model there are a lot of field that is need to be refactored. So for the time being we need to come up with a temporary solution. and that is not costly in sql level

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:40

add a comment |

Your Answer

StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});

}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53281365%2fhow-to-output-selected-column-values%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

If you are trying to avoid having to type db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name), just add an address_details property on the person model.

class Person(db.Model):

    # some lengthy information



    # address

    address_secret_id = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)

    address_name = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)



    @property

    def address_details(self):

        keys = ('id', 'address_secret_id', 'address_name')

        return {k: getattr(self, k) for k in in keys}

Probably less lines of code than trying to use some sort of hybrid query, and still just the one trip to the database.

Query would be:

Person.query.get(1).address_details

edited Nov 13 '18 at 14:23

answered Nov 13 '18 at 13:13

SuperShoot

1,679619

Is there no other way in query() level?

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:06

Yes, but you are trying to avoid it.

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:10

I see so there is no otherway in doing this using hybrid_property

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:13

1

There might be, but what would be the advantage of adding the complexity?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:16

actually in the real model there are a lot of field that is need to be refactored. So for the time being we need to come up with a temporary solution. and that is not costly in sql level

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:40

add a comment |

If you are trying to avoid having to type db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name), just add an address_details property on the person model.

class Person(db.Model):

    # some lengthy information



    # address

    address_secret_id = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)

    address_name = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)



    @property

    def address_details(self):

        keys = ('id', 'address_secret_id', 'address_name')

        return {k: getattr(self, k) for k in in keys}

Probably less lines of code than trying to use some sort of hybrid query, and still just the one trip to the database.

Query would be:

Person.query.get(1).address_details

edited Nov 13 '18 at 14:23

answered Nov 13 '18 at 13:13

SuperShoot

1,679619

Is there no other way in query() level?

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:06

Yes, but you are trying to avoid it.

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:10

I see so there is no otherway in doing this using hybrid_property

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:13

1

There might be, but what would be the advantage of adding the complexity?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:16

actually in the real model there are a lot of field that is need to be refactored. So for the time being we need to come up with a temporary solution. and that is not costly in sql level

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:40

add a comment |

If you are trying to avoid having to type db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name), just add an address_details property on the person model.

class Person(db.Model):

    # some lengthy information



    # address

    address_secret_id = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)

    address_name = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)



    @property

    def address_details(self):

        keys = ('id', 'address_secret_id', 'address_name')

        return {k: getattr(self, k) for k in in keys}

Probably less lines of code than trying to use some sort of hybrid query, and still just the one trip to the database.

Query would be:

Person.query.get(1).address_details

edited Nov 13 '18 at 14:23

answered Nov 13 '18 at 13:13

SuperShoot

1,679619

If you are trying to avoid having to type db.session.query(Person.id, Person.address_secret_id, Person.address_name), just add an address_details property on the person model.

class Person(db.Model):

    # some lengthy information



    # address

    address_secret_id = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)

    address_name = db.Column(db.Unicode, nullable=True)



    @property

    def address_details(self):

        keys = ('id', 'address_secret_id', 'address_name')

        return {k: getattr(self, k) for k in in keys}

Probably less lines of code than trying to use some sort of hybrid query, and still just the one trip to the database.

Query would be:

Person.query.get(1).address_details

edited Nov 13 '18 at 14:23

answered Nov 13 '18 at 13:13

SuperShoot

1,679619

edited Nov 13 '18 at 14:23

answered Nov 13 '18 at 13:13

SuperShoot

1,679619

answered Nov 13 '18 at 13:13

SuperShoot

1,679619

answered Nov 13 '18 at 13:13

SuperShoot

1,679619

Is there no other way in query() level?

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:06

Yes, but you are trying to avoid it.

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:10

I see so there is no otherway in doing this using hybrid_property

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:13

1

There might be, but what would be the advantage of adding the complexity?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:16

actually in the real model there are a lot of field that is need to be refactored. So for the time being we need to come up with a temporary solution. and that is not costly in sql level

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:40

add a comment |

Is there no other way in query() level?

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:06

Yes, but you are trying to avoid it.

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:10

I see so there is no otherway in doing this using hybrid_property

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:13

1

There might be, but what would be the advantage of adding the complexity?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:16

actually in the real model there are a lot of field that is need to be refactored. So for the time being we need to come up with a temporary solution. and that is not costly in sql level

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:40

Is there no other way in query() level?

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:06

Yes, but you are trying to avoid it.

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:10

I see so there is no otherway in doing this using hybrid_property

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:13

There might be, but what would be the advantage of adding the complexity?

– SuperShoot
Nov 13 '18 at 14:16

actually in the real model there are a lot of field that is need to be refactored. So for the time being we need to come up with a temporary solution. and that is not costly in sql level

– Roel
Nov 13 '18 at 14:40

add a comment |

draft saved

draft discarded

Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!

Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …

Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

This page is only for reference, If you need detailed information, please check here

搜尋此網誌

Vfrdtyky