Skip to main content

Django: How to hook in after multiple M2M have been processed

This situation comes up, from time to time, when we need to get something to happen after a many-to-many field is changed. The novice will connect a post_save signal and scratch his head when it doesn't fire on the addition or removal of items in the ManyToManyField. We all learn that it takes a slightly more complicated signal, the m2m_changed signal, and its many actions, which tell us exactly what has changed in the particular field sending it (the signal comes from the field's through table, to be exact).

Well, a slightly more complicated case arose in a design today and I was scratching my head and feeling like a novice all over again. You see, I needed to know when new things had been adding to such a field, but I had more than one. In fact, I had four of them. I needed a specific function called on the instance when all of these fields were finished being cleared or added to or subtracted from. This was in a form in the Django admin.

Thankfully I had an assumption I could make this easier with: the fields in question would only be set from the admin interface. With this knowledge in hand, I hopped into the app's and I added these methods:

    def response_change(self, request, obj):
        response = super(MyAdmin, self).response_change(request, obj)


        return response

    def response_add(self, request, obj, *args, **kwargs):
        response = super(MyAdmin, self).response_add(request, obj, *args, **kwargs)


        return response

These get called when the admin interface is used to edit and create a new object, respectively. It happens after both the model instance itself and all of the many-to-many fields have been saved, which is exactly what we need. It works, but I wish I could find a better solution.


Rok Jaklič said…
Thank you! You saved me some more hours scratching my head...

And we hope django 1.4 comes out soon, where we can use save_related

Kind regards,


Popular posts from this blog

Why I Switched From Git to Microsoft OneDrive

I made the unexpected move with a string of recent projects to drop Git to sync between my different computers in favor of OneDrive, the file sync offering from Microsoft. Its like Dropbox, but "enterprise."

Feeling a little ashamed at what I previously would have scoffed at should I hear of it from another developer, I felt a little write up of the why and the experience could be a good idea. Now, I should emphasize that I'm not dropping Git for all my projects, just specific kinds of projects. I've been making this change in habit for projects that are just for me, not shared with anyone else. It has been especially helpful in projects I work on sporadically. More on why a little later.

So, what drove me away from Git, exactly?

On the smallest projects, like game jam hacks, I just wanted to code. I didn't want to think about revisions and commit messages. I didn't need branching or merges. I didn't even need to rollback to another version, ever. I just …

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.

CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…

Respect and Code Reviews

Code Reviews in a development team only function best, or possible at all, when everyone approaches them with respect. That’s something I’ve usually taken for granted because I’ve had the opportunity to work with amazing developers who shine not just in their technical skills but in their interpersonal skills on a team. That isn’t always the case, so I’m going to put into words something that often exists just in assumptions.
You have to respect your code. This is first only because the nature and intent of code reviews are to safeguard the quality of your code, so even having code reviews demonstrates a baseline of respect for that code. But, maybe not everyone on the team has the same level of respect or entered a team with existing review traditions that they aren’t acquainted with.
There can be culture shock when you enter a team that’s really heavy on code reviews, but also if you enter a team or interact with a colleague who doesn’t share that level of respect for the process or…