mirror of https://github.com/tiangolo/fastapi.git
182 lines
5.1 KiB
Markdown
182 lines
5.1 KiB
Markdown
Continuing with the previous example, it will be common to have more than one related model.
|
|
|
|
This is especially the case for user models, because:
|
|
|
|
* The **input model** needs to be able to have a password.
|
|
* The **output model** should not have a password.
|
|
* The **database model** would probably need to have a hashed password.
|
|
|
|
!!! danger
|
|
Never store user's plaintext passwords. Always store a "secure hash" that you can then verify.
|
|
|
|
If you don't know, you will learn what a "password hash" is in the <a href="/tutorial/security/simple-oauth2/#password-hashing" target="_blank">security chapters</a>.
|
|
|
|
## Multiple models
|
|
|
|
Here's a general idea of how the models could look like with their password fields and the places where they are used:
|
|
|
|
```Python hl_lines="8 10 15 21 23 32 34 39 40"
|
|
{!./src/extra_models/tutorial001.py!}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### About `**user_in.dict()`
|
|
|
|
#### Pydantic's `.dict()`
|
|
|
|
`user_in` is a Pydantic model of class `UserIn`.
|
|
|
|
Pydantic models have a `.dict()` method that returns a `dict` with the model's data.
|
|
|
|
So, if we create a Pydantic object `user_in` like:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
user_in = UserIn(username="john", password="secret", email="john.doe@example.com")
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
and then we call:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
user_dict = user_in.dict()
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
we now have a `dict` with the data in the variable `user_dict` (it's a `dict` instead of a Pydantic model object).
|
|
|
|
And if we call:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
print(user_dict)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
we would get a Python `dict` with:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
{
|
|
'username': 'john',
|
|
'password': 'secret',
|
|
'email': 'john.doe@example.com',
|
|
'full_name': None,
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
#### Unwrapping a `dict`
|
|
|
|
If we take a `dict` like `user_dict` and pass it to a function (or class) with `**user_dict`, Python will "unwrap" it. It will pass the keys and values of the `user_dict` directly as key-value arguments.
|
|
|
|
So, continuing with the `user_dict` from above, writing:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
UserInDB(**user_dict)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Would result in something equivalent to:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
UserInDB(
|
|
username="john",
|
|
password="secret",
|
|
email="john.doe@example.com",
|
|
full_name=None,
|
|
)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Or more exactly, using `user_dict` directly, with whatever contents it might have in the future:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
UserInDB(
|
|
username = user_dict["username"],
|
|
password = user_dict["password"],
|
|
email = user_dict["email"],
|
|
full_name = user_dict["full_name"],
|
|
)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
#### A Pydantic model from the contents of another
|
|
|
|
As in the example above we got `user_dict` from `user_in.dict()`, this code:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
user_dict = user_in.dict()
|
|
UserInDB(**user_dict)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
would be equivalent to:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
UserInDB(**user_in.dict())
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
...because `user_in.dict()` is a `dict`, and then we make Python "unwrap" it by passing it to `UserInDB` prepended with `**`.
|
|
|
|
So, we get a Pydantic model from the data in another Pydantic model.
|
|
|
|
#### Unwrapping a `dict` and extra keywords
|
|
|
|
And then adding the extra keyword argument `hashed_password=hashed_password`, like in:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
UserInDB(**user_in.dict(), hashed_password=hashed_password)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
...ends up being like:
|
|
|
|
```Python
|
|
UserInDB(
|
|
username = user_dict["username"],
|
|
password = user_dict["password"],
|
|
email = user_dict["email"],
|
|
full_name = user_dict["full_name"],
|
|
hashed_password = hashed_password,
|
|
)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
!!! warning
|
|
The supporting additional functions are just to demo a possible flow of the data, but they of course are not providing any real security.
|
|
|
|
## Reduce duplication
|
|
|
|
Reducing code duplication is one of the core ideas in **FastAPI**.
|
|
|
|
As code duplication increments the chances of bugs, security issues, code desynchronization issues (when you update in one place but not in the others), etc.
|
|
|
|
And these models are all sharing a lot of the data and duplicating attribute names and types.
|
|
|
|
We could do better.
|
|
|
|
We can declare a `UserBase` model that serves as a base for our other models. And then we can make subclasses of that model that inherit its attributes (type declarations, validation, etc).
|
|
|
|
All the data conversion, validation, documentation, etc. will still work as normally.
|
|
|
|
That way, we can declare just the differences between the models (with plaintext `password`, with `hashed_password` and without password):
|
|
|
|
```Python hl_lines="8 14 15 18 19 22 23"
|
|
{!./src/extra_models/tutorial002.py!}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## `Union` or `anyOf`
|
|
|
|
You can declare a response to be the `Union` of two types, that means, that the response would be any of the two.
|
|
|
|
It will be defined in OpenAPI with `anyOf`.
|
|
|
|
To do that, use the standard Python type hint <a href="https://docs.python.org/3/library/typing.html#typing.Union" target="_blank">`typing.Union`</a>:
|
|
|
|
```Python hl_lines="1 14 15 18 19 20 33"
|
|
{!./src/extra_models/tutorial003.py!}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## List of models
|
|
|
|
The same way, you can declare responses of lists of objects.
|
|
|
|
For that, use the standard Python `typing.List`:
|
|
|
|
```Python hl_lines="1 20"
|
|
{!./src/extra_models/tutorial004.py!}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Recap
|
|
|
|
Use multiple Pydantic models and inherit freely for each case.
|
|
|
|
You don't need to have a single data model per entity if that entity must be able to have different "states". As the case with the user "entity" with a state including `password`, `password_hash` and no password.
|