ForeignKey `_id` field resolves to relation object, not field value

[kevinmsun]

Describe the Bug

When I attempt to surface the key used for a many-to-one relation as a resolvable field, it seems to resolve to the object itself (and implicitly, its string form) rather than the key value.

the schema is something like this

# Django User model
class User(models.Model):
  # standard primary key
  organization = models.ForeignKey(
        Organization,
    )

# Django Organization model
class Organization(models.Model):
  # standard primary key
  pass

# Strawberry schemas
@strawberry_django.type(User, name="User")
class UserType:
    id: strawberry.scalars.ID
    organization_id: strawberry.scalars.ID

querying for user { organizationId } yields the str form of the Organization object, rather than the contents of the User.organization_id column

From what I can tell, the deepest issue comes from this django behavior https://github.com/django/django/blob/921670c6943e9c532137b7d164885f2d3ab436b8/django/db/models/options.py#L638-L640 , where get_field returns the relation object rather than the relation ID. This leads to evaluating the wrong value via https://github.com/strawberry-graphql/strawberry-django/blob/425b75bcb33c3ea2abd4b7845ed1e4865e1c83d3/strawberry_django/fields/types.py#L529-L540 , with django_name being set to the wrong value (organization instead of organization_id) at https://github.com/strawberry-graphql/strawberry-django/blob/425b75bcb33c3ea2abd4b7845ed1e4865e1c83d3/strawberry_django/type.py#L321-L325

System Information

• Operating system: MacOS, Linux
• Strawberry version (if applicable): 0.219.2

Additional Context

Upvote & Fund

• We're using Polar.sh so you can upvote and help fund this issue.
• We receive the funding once the issue is completed & confirmed by you.
• Thank you in advance for helping prioritize & fund our backlog.

[kevinmsun]

one workaround is organization_id: strawberry.scalars.ID = strawberry_django.field(field_name="organization_id"), which fixes the name and prevents it from being reassigned/detected

[bellini666]

@kevinmsun this should be solved in the latest release.

Let me know if it works ok for you!

[kevinmsun]

@kevinmsun this should be solved in the latest release.

Let me know if it works ok for you!

thanks so much, I'll check it out!

[moritz89]

This looks is really useful. All my types are annotated with

def to_gid(gql_type: Type, pk: uuid.UUID) -> relay.GlobalID | None:
    if pk:
        return relay.GlobalID(gql_type.__strawberry_definition__.name, str(pk))
    return None

@strawberry_django.type(Site)
class SiteGQLNode(relay.Node):
    @strawberry_django.field
    def organization_id(self, root: PermissionGroup) -> relay.GlobalID | None:
        return to_gid(OrganizationGQLNode, root.organization_id)

[moritz89]

Just noticed that it returns the UUID (if the primary key is set as UUIDs) instead of the relay.GID. Is there an approach to write code similar to the following:

@strawberry_django.type(Site)
class SiteGQLNode(relay.Node):
    organization_id: relay.GlobalID | None

And the respective GQL query:

{
  allSites {
    edges { node {
      id
      organizationId
    }}
  }
}

[bellini666]

@moritz89 you mean, using organization_id: auto but have it being exposed as organization_id: relay.GlobalID | None?

[moritz89]

Not necessarily, just a method to be able to specify it as a single line, organization_id: auto or organization_id: relay.GlobalID | None instead of

@strawberry_django.field
def organization_id(self, root: PermissionGroup) -> relay.GlobalID | None:
    return to_gid(OrganizationGQLNode, root.organization_id)

When I use either of the single line options, it returns the UUID instead of GQL GID.

With v0.33.0 the result was:

{
  "data": {
    "allSites": {
      "edges": [
        {
          "node": {
            "id": "U2l0ZUdRTE5vZGU6N2JmN2ZhNjYtNTU1ZS00N2QzLThiNzktYjA0MGVhYTA1YWM1",
            "organizationId": "Admin's organization"
          }
        },
        {
          "node": {
            "id": "U2l0ZUdRTE5vZGU6ZmE2MzUxMWQtOWEzMC00MTBkLThhMmEtNWY3MmU1NmEyMDcy",
            "organizationId": "Admin's organization"
          }
        }
      ]
    }
  }
}

With v0.37.0 the output is:

{
  "data": {
    "allSites": {
      "edges": [
        {
          "node": {
            "id": "U2l0ZUdRTE5vZGU6N2JmN2ZhNjYtNTU1ZS00N2QzLThiNzktYjA0MGVhYTA1YWM1",
            "organizationId": "6ee306b6-cf33-4b7c-91c1-5371289257ac"
          }
        },
        {
          "node": {
            "id": "U2l0ZUdRTE5vZGU6ZmE2MzUxMWQtOWEzMC00MTBkLThhMmEtNWY3MmU1NmEyMDcy",
            "organizationId": "6ee306b6-cf33-4b7c-91c1-5371289257ac"
          }
        }
      ]
    }
  }
}

[bellini666]

@moritz89 sorry for taking too long to reply here...

I'm still confused about what exactly regressed here. Can you give me a longer explanation, or even maybe a MRE?

Also, you might want to open a new issue to register the regression as it will make it easier to track