-
|
I want to use Traceback (most recent call last):
File "...\api\.venv\lib\site-packages\asgiref\sync.py", line 534, in thread_handler
raise exc_info[1]
File "...\api\.venv\lib\site-packages\django\core\handlers\exception.py", line 42, in inner
response = await get_response(request)
File "...\api\.venv\lib\site-packages\django\core\handlers\base.py", line 284, in _get_response_async
response = await sync_to_async(
File "...\api\.venv\lib\site-packages\asgiref\sync.py", line 479, in __call__
ret: _R = await loop.run_in_executor(
File "...\api\.venv\lib\site-packages\asgiref\current_thread_executor.py", line 40, in run
result = self.fn(*self.args, **self.kwargs)
File "...\api\.venv\lib\site-packages\asgiref\sync.py", line 538, in thread_handler
return func(*args, **kwargs)
File "...\api\.venv\lib\site-packages\django\template\response.py", line 114, in render
self.content = self.rendered_content
File "...\api\.venv\lib\site-packages\rest_framework\response.py", line 70, in rendered_content
ret = renderer.render(self.data, accepted_media_type, context)
File "...\api\.venv\lib\site-packages\rest_framework_json_api\renderers.py", line 568, in render
self.extract_included(
File "...\api\.venv\lib\site-packages\rest_framework_json_api\renderers.py", line 338, in extract_included
relation_queryset = list(relation_instance)
TypeError: 'NoneType' object is not iterableI suppose this is because the field is not intended to load the data and therefore raises an error when the data to include is |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 2 comments 1 reply
-
|
If you use hyperlinked related fields, if you have a resource in the included array, you do not know where it would be linked to. Therefore, as I see it, it is against the spec to allow this. See here where it talks about full-linkage which needs to be clear by the compound document. Anyhow, I am not so sure about the use case anyway. My suggestion is to either have all relationships as hyperlinks or use included serializers, but not both together. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This is what I meant: // No ?included=images
{
"data": {
...,
"relationships": {
"images": {
"links": {
"self": "URL",
"related": "URL",
}
}
}
}
}
// With ?included=images
{
"data": {
...,
"relationships": {
"images": {
"meta": {
"count": 1
},
"data": [
{ "type": "image", "id": "500c5ecf-8d83-4333-8f0f-207941aaa552" }
],
"links": {
"self": "URL",
"related": "URL",
}
}
}
},
"included": [
{
"type": "image",
"id": "500c5ecf-8d83-4333-8f0f-207941aaa552",
"attributes": {
...
},
...
}
]
}This way, the user can select what to load and prevent from sending a big body with things the user won't use. In my app I have big relationships (1k resources in many-to-many) and responses take too much time to get delivered. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
OK I see. You can do this somehow with a custom ResourceRelatedField and custom JSONRenderer. However, I do not think that is the intended use case for compound documents, that when using include query parameter the JSON:API structure suddenly changes. If you have issues with too large bodies, I rather recommend you use sparse field sets as per spec where you can define what fields you need returned. This is supported by DJA out of the box as long as you use rest_framework_json_api.serializers.ModelSerializer for your serializers. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
If you use hyperlinked related fields, if you have a resource in the included array, you do not know where it would be linked to. Therefore, as I see it, it is against the spec to allow this. See here where it talks about full-linkage which needs to be clear by the compound document. Anyhow, I am not so sure about the use case anyway.
My suggestion is to either have all relationships as hyperlinks or use included serializers, but not both together.