fix(datamodel): add missing attachment relationships

[grantfitzsimmons]

Fixes #8181

There were missing attachment data model relationships for some of the new tables. This fixes that.

Testing instructions

• Perform a batch edit on an attachment table and verify that you can save and commit the changes (see Missing reverse relationships in datamodel.py for new *Attachment models #8181)

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Refactor
  • Updated data model relationships to establish connections between attachments and age-related records, providing enhanced organization for absolute and relative age documentation within the system.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 5a309712-d158-4dc0-a801-d41f045ba493

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e694107 and ce9b783.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• specifyweb/specify/datamodel.py

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This PR adds two missing reverse relationship definitions to the Attachment model in datamodel.py. The new absoluteageattachments and relativeageattachments relationships expose the corresponding *Attachment model associations through the API and query builder, resolving a FieldDoesNotExistError that occurred when accessing these relationships during batch editing.

Changes

Attachment reverse relationships

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Attachment reverse relationships for new age attachment models specifyweb/specify/datamodel.py	Two new one-to-many relationship entries (absoluteageattachments and relativeageattachments) are added to the Attachment datamodel definition, linking back to the newly-added AbsoluteAgeAttachment and RelativeAgeAttachment models via otherSideName='attachment'.

Suggested reviewers

• CarolineDenis
• emenslin
• bhumikaguptaa

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Automatic Tests	⚠️ Warning	The PR changes only specifyweb/specify/datamodel.py (+2/-0) and doesn’t modify/add any test files.	Add an automated unit/integration test that exercises Attachment batch-edit/query access for absoluteageattachments and relativeageattachments (prevent FieldDoesNotExistError).

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly summarizes the main change: adding missing attachment relationships to the datamodel, which is the primary objective of the PR.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The PR adds the two missing reverse relationships (absoluteageattachments and relativeageattachments) to the Attachment table in datamodel.py, directly resolving the requirements specified in issue #8181.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All changes are directly scoped to adding the missing relationships to the Attachment table definition; no unrelated modifications are present.
Testing Instructions	✅ Passed	Testing step targets Batch Edit save/commit, matching the linked FieldDoesNotExistError on attachment editing. Verified datamodel Attachment now includes absoluteageattachments and relativeageattac...

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch issue-8181

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[bhumikaguptaa]

• Perform a batch edit on an attachment table and verify that you can save and commit the changes (see #8181)

I tried running a query on the Attachments table and ran into an "AttributeError" on the Absolute Age and Relative Age fields. It only happened with Attachment as a base table, and not when Collection Object was the base table.

Crash Report: Specify 7 Crash Report - 2026-06-11T15_46_07.572Z.txt

Query: New Query.json

Issue Branch:

Screen.Recording.2026-06-11.at.10.41.54.AM.1.mov

Link to DB: https://ojsmnh20260326-issue-8181.test.specifysystems.org/specify/query/334/

[CarolineDenis]

@CodeRabbit full review

[coderabbitai]

✅ Action performed

Full review finished.

[CarolineDenis]

capital A

[CarolineDenis]

same here