(Crossposted on SO http://stackoverflow.com/questions/41248271)
I can't get DRF to allow providing a read_only version of nested data and a
writeable version of just the ids in a list in one serializer. It feels
like a bug to me, but usually that just means I'm not understanding the
framework well enough, and being misled by the error message.
class Individual(models.Model):
household = models.ForeignKey(
'household.Household',
null=True,
related_name="individuals")
name = models.CharField(
max_length=100, default='')
class Household(models.Model):
address_line1 = models.CharField(max_length=64, default='')
class IndividualListSerializer(serializers.ModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = Individual
depth = 0
fields = ('url', 'id', 'name', 'household')
read_only_fields = fields
class HouseholdUpdateSerializer(serializers.ModelSerializer):
individuals_details = IndividualListSerializer(many=True, source=
'individuals', read_only=True)
class Meta:
model = Household
fields = ('id', 'address_line1', 'individuals',
'individuals_details')
read_only_fields = ('id', 'individuals_details')
The error comes back as
AssertionError: The `.update()` method does not support writable nested
fields by default. Write an explicit `.update()` method for serializer
`household.serializers.HouseholdUpdateSerializer`, or set `read_only=True`
on nested serializer fields. // Werkzeug Debugger</title>
I have used read_only on the nested field (which the client is expecting in
the response to the update). Yet the error still indicates I am not doing
so.
If I remove the `individuals` field entirely, the `individuals_details`
returns the readable data without the error, but since it's ignoring the
`individuals` data being sent, it isn't updating that list.
If I remove the `individuals_details` field, DRF accepts the `individuals`
list and performs the update on the model. But then the return data needed
is not there.
So, while either the read nested or write list work on their own, when the
other is added the serializer doesn't function.
This seems a pretty common area people get stuck, and it seems the answers
[this SO question][1] have become the best practice for a pattern. But it
doesn't work in my code for some reason. Perhaps because of the ManyToOne
in my models.
[1]: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/29950956
I can probably work around this by changing the client to perform the PUT
for the update, ignore the response, and then do a separate GET, but that's
sloppy and shouldn't be needed if the DRF update can be made to work as
expected.
What am I missing in this?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django REST framework" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
