for any model instance, there is an #object_id and #id - I know that they are not the same.
However, I'm not quite sure what makes them different and how they would each be used in context.
Please help clear this up!!
Thanks!
In Rails, an ActiveRecord model instance has an id property that maps to the value stored in the id column of the database. This may be nil if the record hasn't been saved.
In Ruby, object_id is a value that represents the identity of the object in question. It is always populated with something since everything in Ruby is an object.
These two are not related. There may be several independent instances of a model, each with their own object_id value but an identical id.
If two variables refer to something with the same object_id, then they refer to exactly the same object.
It's rare to see object_id used in code, it's a Ruby internal that's hardly ever needed. Mostly it's to establish if you're talking about identical objects, or just equivalent ones.
You will, on the other hand, see id and similar values used frequently since that's the glue that holds your relational database together.
Everything (and i mean everything) in Ruby is an object. Each of these objects has an object_id, which is a value used to track them in memory, basically.
In Rails, model instances are automatically set up with methods to return their value from the corresponding column in the database. .id is one of these.
As far as using in context, generally you would not use object_id in your code, ever: it's an under-the-hood thing.
EDIT - as an aside, a common issue seen in older versions of ruby/rails (where the object_id method was actually called id, and was overridden by rail's id method) was caused by the fact that the object_id of nil is 4. So you would call id on a variable which you expected to be a model instance, but was actually nil, thus getting "4" back when you expected to get the id of a record from the database.
In short, :id is the default primary_key of a table.And object_id could be the foriegn_key unless you set a custom foreign_key.
For example,take these two table users and posts.The relation would be
user => has_many posts and
post => belongs to user
so in the posts table,we should create a foreign_key(in this case user_id) to make the relations works.
Hope it helps!
id is specific for ActiveModel record and it relates to id column in database. object_id is defined on Object and is unique for every single object created in the memory.
Related
I have a model which has a lot of associations. What I need to do is to check whether one of those associations is not present or all of them are set correctly.
To do so, I created an array which includes all of those needs-to-be-checked fields. And created a loop through each element, but the case is that I can not access has_many related attributes with read_attribute method. It basically returns nil whenever I try to access has many associated fields.
What I am trying to do, I can access all related objects via car.drivers but I can not access the same object with car.read_attribute(:drivers) (because some of them are attributes and some are relations)
I think it's the behavior of read_attribute, so what should I use to access any (attribute or relation) on ActiveRecord object?
Regarding to the comments, it looks like no one understand what I am trying to do. I want to access the relations of one ActiveRecord object such like;
RELATIONS.each do |relation|
puts "#{relation} exists" if #object.relation.present?
end
What I do not know about this, is there any method that I can access the related objects with their string typed name. Similar to, #object.read_attribute(:attribute_name) In that way I can create a for loop, but for relations not for the attributes
To do so, I used dynamical method call. Below is an example of showing it
RELATIONS.each do |relation|
puts "#{relation} exists" unless #object.send('relation').nil?
end
I'm using the Null Object pattern in my Rails application to implement the concept of a guest user account.
Like many apps, I have a method on ApplicationController called current_user.
In the case of a non-logged in user, I want to use my guest user null object.
It works in many cases, but then there run into something like the following -
params.merge({ user: current_user })
MyModel.new(params)
Of course this fails, with the following exception.
ActiveRecord::AssociationTypeMismatch: User expected, got GuestUser
My question is, what is a way to elegantly handle this kind of case. The idea for the Null Object pattern is that you can transparently swap in this null object and have it essentially be a duck type of the real object.
It's obvious how to do that for methods being called on the object, but in this case, I want to be able to pass this in and basically have it set the association column to null, rather than needing a whole bunch of custom logic (avoiding that is the whole point of the null object pattern anyway).
A polymorphic relation isn't quite it.
Quick answer: No such thing as an elegant way to handle that (I'm not sure how elegance is quantified).
You'll have to create a concern that mimics the persistence methods of the model from which your null object is based on (User). You'll also have to write methods to appease ActiveRecord to make the associated column be nil.
Fortunately for you, this use-case has been solved
if your MyModel accepts null for user_id, then you can do
params.merge(user: current_user) unless current_user.is_a?(GuestUser)
MyModel.new(params)
Using the null object pattern here is definatly not a good idea since you need database generated ids to build associations and maintain referential integrity if you intend the user to have any kind of persistence before "registering".
Allowing a MyModel to be created without a user_id would essentially create an orphaned record and just gives you another problem of linking it to user behind the screen. Thats why your schema should not allow it in the first place.
Rather you want to create the guest user record when needed (like when a guest user adds the first item to a cart) and use a recurring task (like a Cron tab) to periodicaly clean out junk records.
I would also consider if you really want to setup guest users as a seperate class since STI and polymorphism tends to get really messy when joining. Just use a timestamp column (records when the account was activated) or an enum instead.
One option would be to override the user= method, so that it's aware of the existence of GuestUser (and can handle appropriately):
def user=(value)
if value.is_a?(GuestUser)
super(nil)
else
super
end
end
All mass-assignment methods in Rails (create, update, etc.) will use the appropriate setter to set the value. This can be easily be put into a concern if this is a common pattern in your application.
If you don't allow nil in the user_id column you have the flexibility to do something like assign a sentinel value, which you could then use in your accessor as well:
def user
if user_id == GUEST_USER_ID
GuestUser.new
else
super
end
end
I had a similar problem. I just went from assigning the object to assigning the object.id which I set to nil on the Null Object. It is kind of a hack I think though.
I have a procedure which receives two models, one which already exists, and another one which holds new attributes which I want to merge in the first one.
Since other parts of the program are holding the same reference to the new model, I can't just operate on the existing one. Therefor I do the following:
def merge(new_model, existing_model)
new_model.attributes = existing_model.attributes.merge(new_model.attributes)
new_model.id = existing_model.id
end
Now the new_model is being saved which gives me the uniqueness erorr (even though it's technically the same model). I also tried using the reload method, but that yields the same result.
Background:
The method above is run in a before_add callback on an association. I want to be able to call update on a model (with nested associations) without having to specify IDs of the nested models. This update is supposed to merge some associations, which is why I try to do the whole merge thing above.
You can't set the id of a model and then save the record expecting the id to be set since the id is the primary key of the database. So you are actually creating a whole new record and, thus, the uniqueness validation error. So you'll need to think of some other design to accomplish what you are wanting. It may help to know that what you are trying to do sounds similar to a deep_dup, except that ActiveRecord doesn't define this method (but Hash does).
#user = User.new
#user.id returns nil but i need to know it before i save. Is it possible ?
YES you can!
I had the same question and investigated the docs.
The ability to solve this question is very related to your database type in fact.
Oracle and Postgresql do have useful functions to easily solve this.
For MySQL(oracle) or SkySQL(open-source) it seems more complicated (but still possible). I would recommend you avoid using these (MySQL/SkySQL) databases if you need advanced database tools.
First you must try to avoid this situation as much as possible in your application design, as it is dangerous to play with IDs before they get saved.
There may be situation where you don't have any other choice:
For instance when two tables are referencing themselves and for security reason you don't allow DELETE or UPDATE on these tables.
When this is the case, you can use the (PostgreSQL, Oracle) database nextval function to generate the next ID number without actually inserting a new record.
Use it in conjunction with the find_by_sql rails method.
To do this with postgreSQL and Rails for instance, choose one of your rails models and add a class method (not an instance method!).
This is possible with the "self" word at the beginning of the method name.
self tells Ruby that this method is usable only by the class, not by its instance variables (the objects created with 'new').
My Rails model:
class MyToy < ActiveRecord::Base
...
def self.my_next_id_sequence
self.find_by_sql "SELECT nextval('my_toys_id_seq') AS my_next_id"
end
end
When you generate a table with a Rails migration, by default Rails automatically creates a column called id and sets it as the primary key's table. To ensure that you don't get any "duplicate primary key error", Rails automatically creates a sequence inside the database and applies it to the id column. For each new record (row) you insert in your table, the database will calculate by itself what will be the next id for your new record.
Rails names this sequence automatically with the table name append with "_id_seq".
The PostgreSQL nextval function must be applied to this sequence as explained here.
Now about find_by_sql, as explained here, it will create an array containing new objects instances of your class. Each of those objects will contain all the columns the SQL statement generates. Those columns will appear in each new object instance under the form of attributes. Even if those attributes don't exist in your class model !
As you wisely realized, our nextval function will only return a single value.
So find_by_sql will create an array containing a single object instance with a single attribute.
To make it easy to read the value of this very attribute, we will name the resulting SQL column with "my_next_id", so our attribute will have the same name.
So that's it. We can use our new method:
my_resulting_array = MyToy.my_next_id_sequence
my_toy_object = my_resulting_array[0]
my_next_id_value = my_toy_object.my_next_id
And use it to solve our dead lock situation :
my_dog = DogModel.create(:name => 'Dogy', :toy_id => my_next_id_value)
a_dog_toy = MyToy.new(:my_dog_id => my_dog.id)
a_dog_toy.id = my_next_id_value
a_dog_toy.save
Be aware that if you don't use your my_next_id_value this id number will be lost forever. (I mean, it won't be used by any record in the future).
The database doesn't wait on you to use it. If somewhere at any time, your application needs to insert a new record in your my_table_example (maybe at the same time as we are playing with my_next_id_sequence), the database will always assign an id number to this new record immediately following the one you generated with my_next_id_sequence, considering that your my_next_id_value is reserved.
This may lead to situations where the records in your my_table_example don't appear to be sorted by the time they were created.
No, you can't get the ID before saving. The ID number comes from the database but the database won't assign the ID until you call save. All this is assuming that you're using ActiveRecord of course.
I had a similar situation. I called the sequence using find_by_sql on my model which returns the model array. I got the id from the first object of the arry. something like below.
Class User < ActiveRecord::Base
set_primary_key 'user_id'
alias user_id= id=
def self.get_sequence_id
self.find_by_sql "select TEST_USER_ID_SEQ.nextval as contact_id from dual"
end
end
and on the class on which you reference the user model,
#users = User.get_sequence_id
user = users[0]
Normally the ID is filled from a database sequence automatically.
In rails you can use the after_create event, which gives you access to the object just after it has been saved (and thus it has the ID). This would cover most cases.
When using Oracle i had the case where I wanted to create the ID ourselves (and not use a sequence), and in this post i provide the details how i did that. In short the code:
# a small patch as proposed by the author of OracleEnhancedAdapter: http://blog.rayapps.com/2008/05/13/activerecord-oracle-enhanced-adapter/#comment-240
# if a ActiveRecord model has a sequence with name "autogenerated", the id will not be filled in from any sequence
ActiveRecord::ConnectionAdapters::OracleEnhancedAdapter.class_eval do
alias_method :orig_next_sequence_value, :next_sequence_value
def next_sequence_value(sequence_name)
if sequence_name == 'autogenerated'
# we assume id must have gotten a good value before insert!
id
else
orig_next_sequence_value(sequence_name)
end
end
end
while this solution is specific to Oracle-enhanced, i am assuming the other databases will have a similar method that you could redefine.
So, while it is definitely not advised and you want to be absolutely sure why you would not want to use an id generated by a sequence, if it is needed it is most definitely possible.
It is why I love ruby and Ruby on Rails! :)
In Oracle you can get your current sequence value with this query:
SELECT last_number FROM user_sequences where sequence_name='your_sequence_name';
So in your model class, you can put something like this:
class MyModel < ActiveRecord::Base
self.sequence_name = 'your_sequence_name'
def self.my_next_id_sequence
get_data = self.find_by_sql "SELECT last_number FROM user_sequences where sequence_name='your_sequence_name'"
get_data[0].last_number
end
end
And finally, in controller you can get this value with this:
my_sequence_number = MyModel.my_next_id_sequence
So, there is no need to get your next value by using NEXTVAL and you won't lose you ID.
What you could do is User.max(id). which will return the highest ID in the database, you could then add 1. This is not reliable, although might meet your needs.
Since Rails 5 you can simply call next_sequence_value
Note: For Oracle when self.sequence_name is set, requesting next sequence value creates side effect by incrementing sequence value
I'm using Ruby on Rails and the paths_of_glory gem
I need to access the types of achievements that a user accomplishes in order to display a picture along with each particular achievement. When I try to access it via #user.achievements.type, I get an error that says that it wants to return "array" (as in achievements is an array) instead of actually returning the elements in the type column of my database.
Since every ruby object has a method called type, my call to access the type column of the database fails. When I try to change the entry in the table, the paths_of_glory gem says it needs a type column in order to function properly.
I'm not quite sure where to go from here in order to access that column in the database. Any suggestions?
Not entirely sure what you're asking here, but maybe this will help.
For the first thing, #user.achievements is an array because you have multiple achievements, and the type method is for individual elements of #user.achievements which is why that won't work just like that. You'll have to do something like this:
#user.achievements.each do |achievement|
# Do stuff here
end
Regarding the type column, type is a reserved column in Rails used specifically for Single Table Inheritance, where multiple Rails models use a single database table. So you can't access it directly. I assume that paths_of_glory uses STI in some manner. You can access the model's class with something like achievement.class, then if you want just the name of it you can try achievement.class.to_s.
#user.achievements.each do |achievement|
model = achievement.class # => MyAwesomeAchievementClass
#image = model.picture # You could write some method in the model like this
end