I need to do a jointure between 2 tables to have all fields from Sleep and latlong from Poi.
How can I do ? with Join or with Includes
#sleeps = Sleep.where(track_id: track).includes(:poi)
#sleeps = Sleep.where(track_id: track).joins(:poi)
What's the difference beetwen the both ?
An .includes is left join whereas a .join is an inner join. Note: you may need to add a reference to effectively complete a left join as one query (internal optimizations often default to 2 queries for includes alone) e.g.:
Sleep.includes(:poi).references(:poi).where(...)
Related
There are three models that matter here: Objective, Student, and Seminar. All are associated with has_and_belongs_to_many.
There is an ObjectiveStudent join model that includes columns "ready" and "points_all_time". There is an ObjectiveSeminar join model that includes column "priority".
I need to collect all of the objectives that are associated with a given student and also with a given seminar.
They need to also be marked with a "priority" above zero in the seminar. So I think I need this line:
obj_sems = ObjectiveSeminar.where(:seminar => given_seminar).where("priority > ?", 0)
Finally, they need to also be objectives where the student is ready, but has not scored above 7. So I think I need this line:
obj_studs = ObjectiveStudent.where(:user => given_student, :ready => true).where("points_all_time <= ?", 7)
Is there a way to gather all the objectives whose join table records appear in both of the above queries? Note that neither of the lists return objectives; they return objective_seminars, and objective_students, respectively. My end goal is to collect the objectives that meet all of the above criteria.
Or am I approaching this all wrong?
Bonus question: I would also love to sort the objectives by their priority in the given seminar. But I'm afraid that would add too much to the database load. What are your thoughts on this?
Thank you in advance for any insight.
In order to get Objectives you'll need to start your query from that.
In order to query with an AND condition the associated tables, you'll need inner joins with these tables.
Finally you'll need a distinct operator to only fetch each objective once.
The extended version of what (I think) you need is:
Objective.joins(objective_seminars: :seminar, objective_student: :student).
where(seminars: seminar_search_params, strudents: student_search_params).
where('objective_seminars.priority > 0').
where('objective_students.ready = 1 AND points_all_time <= 7').
order('objective_seminars.priority ASC').
distinct
Now for the database load it all depends on your indexes and the size of your tables.
The above query will translate to the following SQL (or something similar).
SELECT DISTINCT objectives.* FROM objectives
INNER JOIN objective_students ON objective_students.objective_id = objectives.id
INNER JOIN students ON students.id = objective_students.student_id
INNER JOIN objective_seminars ON objective_seminars.objective_id = objectives.id
INNER JOIN seminars ON seminars.id = objective_seminars.seminar_id
WHERE seminars_query AND
students_query AND
objective_seminars.priority > 0 AND
objective_students.ready = 1 AND points_all_time <= 7 AND
objective_seminars.priority ASC
So you'll need to add or extend your indexes so that all 5 tables queries can have an index helping out. The actual index implementation is up to you and depends on your application's specific (read - write load, tables size, cardinality etc)
When I do includes it left joins the table I want to filter on, but when I add pluck that join disappears. Is there any way to mix pluck and left join without manually typing the sql for 'left join'
Here's my case:
Select u.id
From users u
Left join profiles p on u.id=p.id
Left join admin_profiles a on u.id=a.uid
Where 2 in (p.prop, a.prop, u.prop)
Doing this is just loading all the values:
Users.includes(:AdminProfiles, :Profiles).where(...).map{ |a| a[:id] }
But when I do pluck instead of map, it doesn't left join the profile tables.
Your problem is that you're using includes which doesn't really do a join, instead it fires a second query after the first one to query for the associations, in your case you want them both to be actually joined, so for that replace includes(:something) with joins(:something) and every thing should work fine.
Replying to your comment, i'm gonna quote few parts from the rails guide about active record query interface
From the section Solution to N + 1 queries problem
clients = Client.includes(:address).limit(10)
clients.each do |client|
puts client.address.postcode
end
The above code will execute just 2 queries, as opposed to 11 queries in the previous case:
SELECT * FROM clients LIMIT 10
SELECT addresses.* FROM addresses WHERE (addresses.client_id IN (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10))
as you can see, two queries, no joins at all.
From the section Specifying Conditions on Eager Loaded Associations link
Even though Active Record lets you specify conditions on the eager loaded associations just like joins, the recommended way is to use joins instead.
Then an example:
Article.includes(:comments).where(comments: { visible: true })
This would generate a query which contains a LEFT OUTER JOIN whereas the joins method would generate one using the INNER JOIN function instead.
SELECT "articles"."id" AS t0_r0, ... "comments"."updated_at" AS t1_r5 FROM "articles" LEFT OUTER JOIN "comments" ON "comments"."article_id" = "articles"."id" WHERE (comments.visible = 1)
If there was no where condition, this would generate the normal set of two queries.
I'm stuck trying to create a query that pulls results from at least three different tables with many to many relationships.
I want to end up with a table that lists cases, the outcomes and complaints.
All cases may have none, one or multiple outcomes, same relationship applies to the complaints. I want to be able to have the case listed once, then subsequent columns to list all the outcomes and complaints related to that case.
I have tried GROUP_CONCAT to get the outcomes in one column instead of repeating the cases but when I use UNION to combine the outcomes and complaints one column header overwrites the other.
Any help appreciated and here's the link to the fiddle http://sqlfiddle.com/#!2/d111e/2/0
I suggest you START with this this query structure:
SELECT
c.caseID, c.caseTitle, c.caseSynopsis /* if more columns ... add to group by also */
, group_concat(co.concern)
, group_concat(re.resultText)
FROM caseSummaries AS c
LEFT JOIN JNCT_CONCERNS_CASESUMMARY AS JCC ON c.caseID = JCC.caseSummary_FK
LEFT JOIN CONCERNS AS co ON JCC.concerns_FK = co.concernsID
LEFT JOIN JNCT_RESULT_CASESUMMARY AS JRC ON c.caseID = JRC.caseSummary_FK
LEFT JOIN RESULTS AS re ON JRC.result_FK = re.result_ID
GROUP BY
c.caseID, c.caseTitle, c.caseSynopsis /* add more ... here also */
;
Treat the table caseSummaries as the most important and then everything else "hangs off" that.
Please note that although MySQL will allow it, you should place EVERY non-aggregating column that you include in the select clause into the group by clause also.
also see: http://sqlfiddle.com/#!2/2d1a79/7
I have an issue: When I am trying to join two tables which do not have a foreign key or a direct entity relation through my java code within themselves. I am using the below JPQL query: -
SELECT p FROM P p, OM orgm WHERE p.o.id = orgm.o.id and p.u.id = orgm.u.id and orgm.ma = true and p.u.id = ? AND p.o.id IN (:oId);
But this turns to a MySQL query which has a "cross join" which obviously is expensive.
What I need is to make sure that a similar query gives me an inner join MySQL query between the two tables.
I am trying to make usage of the "WITH" clause but seems that it doesn't work with inner join.
Please revert what can be done in this scenario.
Thanks in advance.
I'm using Rails 3.2.
I have a product model, and a variant model. A product can have many variants. A variant can belong to many products.
I want to make a lookup on the Products model, to find only products that have a specific variant count, like such (pseudocode):
Product.where("Product.variants.count == 0")
How do you do this with activerecord?
You can use a LEFT OUTER JOIN to return the records that you need. Rails issues a LEFT OUTER JOIN when you use includes.
For example:
Product.includes(:variants).where('variants.id' => nil)
That will return all products where there are no variants. You can also use an explicit joins.
Product.joins('LEFT OUTER JOIN variants ON variants.product_id = products.id').where('variants.id' => nil)
The LEFT OUTER JOIN will return records on the left side of the join, even if the right side is not present. It will place null values into the associated columns, which you can then use to check negative presence, as I did above. You can read more about left joins here: http://www.w3schools.com/sql/sql_join_left.asp.
The good thing about this solution is that you're not doing subqueries as a conditional, which will most likely be more performant.
products= Product.find(:all,:select => 'variant').select{|product| product.varients.count > 10}
This is rails 2.3 , but only the activeRecord part, you need to see the select part
I don't know of any ActiveRecord way to do this but the following should help with your problem. The good thing about this solution is that everything's done on the db side.
Product.where('(SELECT COUNT(*) FROM variants WHERE variants.product_id = products.id) > 0')
If you want to pull products which have a specific non-0 number of variants, you could do that with something like this (admittedly untested):
Product.select('product.id, product.attr1_of_interest, ... product.attrN_of_interest, variant.id, COUNT(*)')
.joins('variants ON product.id = variants.product_id')
.group('product.id, product.attr1_of_interest, ... product.attrN_of_interest, variant.id')
.having('COUNT(*) = 5') #(or whatever number manipulation you want to do here)
If you want to allow for 0 products, you would have to use Sean's solution above.