I'm using Rails 2, and I have a one-to-many association between the Project model and the Schedule model in this app.
I have an observer check when attributes of various things change, and in response, it iterates over an array of hashes with which to populate new Schedule instances.
Each Schedule instance should have an attribute, disp_order, which eventually tells the front end where to display it when showing them in a list. The disp_order is populated upon adding the schedule to the project, so that it equals one more than the current highest disp_order.
The problem is in the iteration in the observer. When I iterate over the array of hashes filled with Schedule data, each time through the iteration should calculate the disp_order as one higher than the previous one, to account for the Schedule it just added. However, in practice, it doesn't--unless I refresh the Project object in the middle of the iteration with project = Project.find(project.id), or else it seems always to calculate the same max value of the disp_orders, and doesn't have an accurate list of those Schedule instances to go on.
Is there a better way to do this? (Note: I just mean is there a better way so that I don't have to tell project to re-find itself. There are a number of places I'm actively cleaning up the rest of the code which follows, but for this question I'm really only interested in this one line and things that impact it.)
project.rb
class Project < ActiveRecord::Base
# ...
has_many :schedules, :dependent => :destroy
# ...
belongs_to :data, :polymorphic => true, :dependent => :destroy
accepts_nested_attributes_for :data
# ...
schedule.rb
class Schedule < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :project, :include => [:data]
# ...
project_event_observer.rb
class ProjectEventObserver < ActiveRecord::Observer
# ...
def perform_actions(project, actions)
# ...
actions.each { |action|
action.each { |a_type, action_list|
action_list.each { |action_data|
self.send(action_type.to_s.singularize, action_data, project)
project = Project.find(project.id) #My question is about this line.
}
}
}
# ...
sample actions for the iteration above
[
{:add_tasks => [
{:name => "Do a thing", :section => "General"},
{:name => "Do another thing", :section => "General"},
]
},
# More like this one.
]
the observer method that receives the rest of the action data
def add_task(hash, project)
# ...
sched = Schedule.new
hash.each { |key, val|
# ...
sched.write_attribute(key, val)
# ...
}
sched.add_to(project)
end
schedule.rb
def add_to(proj)
schedules = proj.schedules
return if schedules.map(&:name).include?(self.name)
section_tasks = schedules.select{|sched| sched.section == self.section}
if section_tasks.empty?
self.disp_order = 1
else
self.disp_order = section_tasks.map(&:disp_order).max + 1 #always display after previously existing schedules
end
self.project = proj
self.save
end
You're running into this issue because you're working off of a in-memory cached object.
Take a look at the association documentation.
You can pass the argument of true in your Schedule model's add_to function to reload the query.
Other options would include inverse_of but that's not available to you because you're using polymorphic associations, as per the docs.
Related
I made a real basic github project here that demonstrates the issue. Basically, when I create a new comment, it is saved as expected; when I update an existing comment, it isn't saved. However, that isn't what the docs for :autosave => true say ... they say the opposite. Here's the code:
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :comments,
:autosave => true,
:inverse_of => :post,
:dependent => :destroy
def comment=(val)
obj=comments.find_or_initialize_by(:posted_at=>Date.today)
obj.text=val
end
end
class Comment < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :post, :inverse_of=>:comments
end
Now in the console, I test:
p=Post.create(:name=>'How to groom your unicorn')
p.comment="That's cool!"
p.save!
p.comments # returns value as expected. Now we try the update case ...
p.comment="But how to you polish the rainbow?"
p.save!
p.comments # oops ... it wasn't updated
Why not? What am I missing?
Note if you don't use "find_or_initialize", it works as ActiveRecord respects the association cache - otherwise it reloads the comments too often, throwing out the change. ie, this implementation works
def comment=(val)
obj=comments.detect {|obj| obj.posted_at==Date.today}
obj = comments.build(:posted_at=>Date.today) if(obj.nil?)
obj.text=val
end
But of course, I don't want to walk through the collection in memory if I could just do it with the database. Plus, it seems inconsistent that it works with new object but not an existing object.
Here is another option. You can explicitly add the record returned by find_or_initialize_by to the collection if it is not a new record.
def comment=(val)
obj=comments.find_or_initialize_by(:posted_at=>Date.today)
unless obj.new_record?
association(:comments).add_to_target(obj)
end
obj.text=val
end
I don't think you can make this work. When you use find_or_initialize_by it looks like the collection is not used - just the scoping. So you are getting back a different object.
If you change your method:
def comment=(val)
obj = comments.find_or_initialize_by(:posted_at => Date.today)
obj.text = val
puts "obj.object_id: #{obj.object_id} (#{obj.text})"
puts "comments[0].object_id: #{comments[0].object_id} (#{comments[0].text})"
obj.text
end
You'll see this:
p.comment="But how to you polish the rainbow?"
obj.object_id: 70287116773300 (But how to you polish the rainbow?)
comments[0].object_id: 70287100595240 (That's cool!)
So the comment from find_or_initialize_by is not in the collection, it outside of it. If you want this to work, I think you need to use detect and build as you have in the question:
def comment=(val)
obj = comments.detect {|c| c.posted_at == Date.today } || comments.build(:posted_at => Date.today)
obj.text = val
end
John Naegle is right. But you can still do what you want without using detect. Since you are updating only today's comment you can order the association by posted_date and simply access the first member of the comments collection to updated it. Rails will autosave for you from there:
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :comments, ->{order "posted_at DESC"}, :autosave=>true, :inverse_of=>:post,:dependent=>:destroy
def comment=(val)
if comments.empty? || comments[0].posted_at != Date.today
comments.build(:posted_at=>Date.today, :text => val)
else
comments[0].text=val
end
end
end
I have two models house and booking.Everything is okey over booking_date validation. But when I try to update or create multi booking in the same request. Validation can't check the invalid booking in the same request params.
Let give an example assume that booking table is empty.
params = { :house => {
:title => 'joe', :booking_attributes => [
{ :start_date => '2012-01-01', :finish_date => '2012-01-30 },
{ :start_date => '2012-01-15', :finish_date => '2012-02-15 }
]
}}
Second booking also save but its start_date is between first booking interval. When I save them one by one validation works.
class House < ActiveRecord::Base
attr_accessible :title, :booking_attributes
has_many :booking
accepts_nested_attributes_for :booking, reject_if: :all_blank, allow_destroy: true
end
class Booking < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :house
attr_accessible :start_date, :finish_date
validate :booking_date
def booking_date
# Validate start_date
if Booking.where('start_date <= ? AND finish_date >= ? AND house_id = ?',
self.start_date, self.start_date, self.house_id).exists?
errors.add(:start_date, 'There is an other booking for this interval')
end
# Validate finish_date
if Booking.where('start_date <= ? AND finish_date >= ? AND house_id = ?',
self.finish_date, self.finish_date, self.house_id).exists?
errors.add(:finish_date, 'There is an other booking for this interval')
end
end
end
I google nearly 2 hours and could not find anything. What is the best approach to solve this problem?
Some resources
http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/NestedAttributes/ClassMethods.html
http://railscasts.com/episodes/196-nested-model-form-part-1
This was only a quick 15-minutes research on my part, so I may be wrong, but I believe here's the root cause of your problem:
What accepts_nested_attributes_for does under the hood, it calls 'build' for new Booking objects (nothing is validated at this point, objects are created in memory, not stored to db) and registers validation and save hooks to be called when the parent object (House) is saved. So, in my understanding, all validations are first called for all created objects (by calling 'valid?' for each of them. Then, again if I get it right, they are saved using insert_record(record,false) which leads to save(:validate => false), so validations are not called for the 2nd time.
You can look at the sources inside these pages: http://apidock.com/rails/v3.2.8/ActiveRecord/AutosaveAssociation/save_collection_association,
http://apidock.com/rails/ActiveRecord/Associations/HasAndBelongsToManyAssociation/insert_record
You validations call Booking.where(...) to find the overlapping dates-ranges. At this point the newly created Booking objects are still only in memory, not saved to the db (remember, we are just calling valid? for each of them in the loop, saves will be done later). Thus Booking.where(...) which runs a query against a DB doesn't find them there and returns nothing. Thus they all pass valid? stage and then saved.
In a nutshell, the records created together in such a way will not be cross-validated against each other (only against the previously existing records in the database). Hence the problem you see.
Thus either save them one-by-one, or check for such date-overlapping cases among the simultaneously created Bookings yourself before saving.
Using Rails 3.1.3 and I'm trying to figure out why our counter caches aren't being updated correctly when changing the parent record id via update_attributes.
class ExhibitorRegistration < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :event, :counter_cache => true
end
class Event < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :exhibitor_registrations, :dependent => :destroy
end
describe ExhibitorRegistration do
it 'correctly maintains the counter cache on events' do
event = Factory(:event)
other_event = Factory(:event)
registration = Factory(:exhibitor_registration, :event => event)
event.reload
event.exhibitor_registrations_count.should == 1
registration.update_attributes(:event_id => other_event.id)
event.reload
event.exhibitor_registrations_count.should == 0
other_event.reload
other_event.exhibitor_registrations_count.should == 1
end
end
This spec fails indicating that the counter cache on event is not being decremented.
1) ExhibitorRegistration correctly maintains the counter cache on events
Failure/Error: event.exhibitor_registrations_count.should == 0
expected: 0
got: 1 (using ==)
Should I even expect this to work or do I need to manually track the changes and update the counter myself?
From the fine manual:
:counter_cache
Caches the number of belonging objects on the associate class through the use of increment_counter and decrement_counter. The counter cache is incremented when an object of this class is created and decremented when it’s destroyed.
There's no mention of updating the cache when an object is moved from one owner to another. Of course, the Rails documentation is often incomplete so we'll have to look at the source for confirmation. When you say :counter_cache => true, you trigger a call to the private add_counter_cache_callbacks method and add_counter_cache_callbacks does this:
Adds an after_create callback which calls increment_counter.
Adds an before_destroy callback which calls decrement_counter.
Calls attr_readonly to make the counter column readonly.
I don't think you're expecting too much, you're just expecting ActiveRecord to be more complete than it is.
All is not lost though, you can fill in the missing pieces yourself without too much effort. If you want to allow reparenting and have your counters updated, you can add a before_save callback to your ExhibitorRegistration that adjusts the counters itself, something like this (untested demo code):
class ExhibitorRegistration < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :event, :counter_cache => true
before_save :fix_counter_cache, :if => ->(er) { !er.new_record? && er.event_id_changed? }
private
def fix_counter_cache
Event.decrement_counter(:exhibitor_registration_count, self.event_id_was)
Event.increment_counter(:exhibitor_registration_count, self.event_id)
end
end
If you were adventurous, you could patch something like that into ActiveRecord::Associations::Builder#add_counter_cache_callbacks and submit a patch. The behavior you're expecting is reasonable and I think it would make sense for ActiveRecord to support it.
If your counter has been corrupted or you've modified it directly by SQL, you can fix it.
Using:
ModelName.reset_counters(id_of_the_object_having_corrupted_count, one_or_many_counters)
Example 1: Re-compute the cached count on the post with id = 17.
Post.reset_counters(17, :comments)
Source
Example 2: Re-compute the cached count on all your articles.
Article.ids.each { |id| Article.reset_counters(id, :comments) }
I recently came across this same problem (Rails 3.2.3). Looks like it has yet to be fixed, so I had to go ahead and make a fix. Below is how I amended ActiveRecord::Base and utilize after_update callback to keep my counter_caches in sync.
Extend ActiveRecord::Base
Create a new file lib/fix_counters_update.rb with the following:
module FixUpdateCounters
def fix_updated_counters
self.changes.each {|key, value|
# key should match /master_files_id/ or /bibls_id/
# value should be an array ['old value', 'new value']
if key =~ /_id/
changed_class = key.sub(/_id/, '')
changed_class.camelcase.constantize.decrement_counter(:"#{self.class.name.underscore.pluralize}_count", value[0]) unless value[0] == nil
changed_class.camelcase.constantize.increment_counter(:"#{self.class.name.underscore.pluralize}_count", value[1]) unless value[1] == nil
end
}
end
end
ActiveRecord::Base.send(:include, FixUpdateCounters)
The above code uses the ActiveModel::Dirty method changes which returns a hash containing the attribute changed and an array of both the old value and new value. By testing the attribute to see if it is a relationship (i.e. ends with /_id/), you can conditionally determine whether decrement_counter and/or increment_counter need be run. It is essnetial to test for the presence of nil in the array, otherwise errors will result.
Add to Initializers
Create a new file config/initializers/active_record_extensions.rb with the following:
require 'fix_update_counters'
Add to models
For each model you want the counter caches updated add the callback:
class Comment < ActiveRecord::Base
after_update :fix_updated_counters
....
end
A fix for this has been merged in to active record master
https://github.com/rails/rails/issues/9722
The counter_cache function is designed to work through the association name, not the underlying id column. In your test, instead of:
registration.update_attributes(:event_id => other_event.id)
try
registration.update_attributes(:event => other_event)
More information can be found here: http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/Associations/ClassMethods.html
How can I save (insert) only associated objects without saving (updating) the base object?
For example I just want to save the phone numbers, I don't wan to resave/update the person object.
def create_numbers
#params => person_id => 41, person => {:phone_number => '12343445, 1234566, 234886'}
#person = params[:person_id]
nums = params[:person][:phone_numbers].split(',')
nums.each do |num|
#person.phone_numbers.build(:number => num)
end
#person.save #here I just want to save the numbers, I don't want to save the person. It has read only attributes
end
Models:
Person < ...
# id, name
belongs_to :school, :class_name => :facility
has_many :phone_numbers
end
PhoneNumber < ...
# id, number
belongs_to :person
end
This is a bit of a dumb example, but it illustrates what I'm trying to accomplish
How about #person.phone_numbers.create(:number => num)
The downside is that you wont know whether it failed or not - you can handle that, but it depends on how exactly you want to handle it.
The simplest approach is to replace your build(:number => num) with create(:number => num), which will build and save the phone_number object immediately (assuming it passes validation).
If you need to save them all after creating the whole set (for some reason), you could just do something like
#person.phone_numbers.each{|num| num.save}
I'm writing a little browser game as a project to learn RoR with and I'm quite new to it.
This is a little method that's called regularly by a cronjob.
I'm guessing there should be some way of adding elements to the potions array and then doing a bulk save at the end, I'm also not liking hitting the db each time in the loop to get the number of items for the market again.
def self.restock_energy_potions
market = find_or_create_market
potions = EnergyPotion.find_all_by_user_id(market.id)
while (potions.size < 5)
potion = EnergyPotion.new(:user_id => market.id)
potion.save
potions = EnergyPotion.find_all_by_user_id(market.id)
end
end
I'm not sure I'm understanding your question. Are you looking for something like this?
def self.restock_energy_potions
market = find_or_create_market
potions = EnergyPotion.find_all_by_user_id(market.id)
(potions.size...5).each {EnergyPotion.new(:user_id => market.id).save }
end
end
Note the triple dots in the range; you don't want to create a potion if there are already 5.
Also, if your potions were linked (e.g. by has_many) you could create them through the market.potions property (I'm guessing here, about the relationship between users and markets--details depend on how your models are set up) and save them all at once. I don't think the data base savings would be significant though.
Assuming that your market/user has_many potions, you can do this:
def self.restock_energy_potions
market = find_or_create_market
(market.potions.size..5).each {market.potions.create(:user_id => market.id)}
end
a) use associations:
class Market < AR::Base
# * note that if you are not dealing with a legacy schema, you should
# rename user_id to market_id and remove the foreigh_key assignment.
# * dependent => :destroy is important or you'll have orphaned records
# in your database if you ever decide to delete some market
has_many :energy_potions, :foreign_key => :user_id, :dependent => :destroy
end
class EnergyPotion < AR::Base
belongs_to :market, :foreign_key => :user_id
end
b) no need to reload the association after adding each one. also move the functionality
into the model:
find_or_create_market.restock
class Market
def restock
# * note 4, not 5 here. it starts with 0
(market.energy_potions.size..4).each {market.energy_potions.create!}
end
end
c) also note create! and not create.
you should detect errors.
error handling depends on the application.
in your case since you run it from cron you can do few things
* send email with alert
* catch exceptions and log them, (exception_notifier plugin, or hoptoad hosted service)
* print to stderror and configuring cron to send errors to some email.
def self.restock_potions
market = find_or_create
market.restock
rescue ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid
...
rescue
...
end