I have about 12 models but I'm not sure how to make relations and another stuff with 3 model:
Current relationships:
purchase has_many purchase_items
purchase_item belongs_to item
purchase_item belongs_to purchase
item has_many purchase_items
I've made working form, where I can create new purchase (add multiple items), but now i want to store in table 'inventory' actual quantity of items, so after create/update/delete model purchase or purchase_items (I'm not sure which) model 'inventory' should be updated also. I know that I have to make this in ActiveRecord callback.
Questions:
Which relation should I use to make that and between which models?
Current snippet of code in view (new purchase):
<%= purchase_form.nested_fields_for :purchase_items do |nested| %>
Do I have to add something to this ^ for model inventory?
You wouldn't necessarily need to update your inventory model to accomplish this. Consider solving it like this:
# purchase_item.rb
after_save :update_quantity
def update_quantity
item.quantity --
end
And accessing the inventory for each specific item could be something like this:
# inventory.rb
def get_inventory_for_item(item)
item.quantity
end
Related
I'm running Rails 5.2. I have a Cart and Item model and I want to combine the quantities and totals of duplicate items that are added to the cart.
My Cart accepts nested attributes for Item and I originally thought about using the reject_if condition to prevent the save of the "duplicate" item. However, I need to actually do this from the model since I have other scripts that can create a cart and items without submitting form data to the controller. From a callback in my Item model, how can I reject the save like I would with reject_if?
My original idea which I have abandoned:
class Cart < ApplicationRecord
has_many :items
accepts_nested_attributes_for :items, reject_if: proc { |attributes| attributes.function_that_decides_to_reject_or_not }
end
What I would like to achieve:
class Item < ApplicationRecord
belongs_to :cart
before_save :combine_and_reject
def combine_and_reject
#pseudo-code
#if self.sku == to other items' sku in cart
#combine the quantities and reject self silently.
#end
end
end
Thanks in advance.
Maybe I miss something but I don't understand why you want to handle this within your model. I would recommend you to calculate this "on the fly" when you display your Cart. Imagine the following code:
#carts controller
def show
skus = #cart.items.pluck(:sku)
# ['678TYU', '678TYU', 'POPO90']
skus.each_with_object(Hash.new(0)) { |sku,counts| counts[sky] += 1 }
# {"678TYU"=>2, "POPO90"=>1}
end
In this way each time you want to display your cart you can handle quantities depending of your duplicates.
Duplicates in your cart are not an issue, because in real life you can have two chocolate bar in your cart. It's only on your receipt where the duplicates disappears.
I've set up three models: User, List, and UserList -- the latter being the join model between User and List, in a has_many_through relationship.
I'm trying to set up what I think should be fairly vanilla uniqueness constraints -- but it's not quite working. Would appreciate your guidance / advice please!
Technical details
I have 3 models:
class User < ApplicationRecord
has_many :user_lists
has_many :lists, through: :user_lists, dependent: :destroy
End
class List < ApplicationRecord
has_many :user_lists
has_many :users, through: :user_lists, dependent: :destroy
# no duplicate titles in the List table
validates :title, uniqueness: true
End
class UserList < ApplicationRecord
belongs_to :list
belongs_to :user
# a given user can only have one copy of a list item
validates :list_id, uniqueness: { scope: :user_id }
end
As you can see, I'd like List items to be unique, based on their title. In other words, if user Adam adds a List with title "The Dark Knight", then user Beatrice adding a List with title "The Dark Knight" shouldn't actually create a new List record -- it should just create a new / distinct UserList association, pointing to the previously created List item.
(Somewhat tangential, but I also added a unique index on the table since I understand this avoids a race condition)
class AddIndexToUserLists < ActiveRecord::Migration[5.2]
def change
add_index :user_lists, [:user_id, :list_id], unique: true
end
end
Here's where things are going wrong.
As user Adam, I log in, and add a new title, "The Dark Knight", to my list.
Here's the controller action (assume current_user correctly retrieves Adam):
# POST /lists
def create
#list = current_user.lists.find_or_create_by!(list_params)
end
This correctly results in a new List record, and associated UserList record, being created. Hurrah!
As Adam, if I try to add that same title "The Dark Knight", to my list again, nothing happens -- including no errors on the console. Hurrah!
However -- as user Beatrice, if I log in and now try to add "The Dark Knight" to my list, I now get an error in the console:
POST http://localhost:3000/api/v1/lists 422 (Unprocessable Entity)
My debugging and hypothesis
If I remove the uniqueness constraint on List.title, this error disappears, and Beatrice is able to add "The Dark Knight" to her list.
However, List then contains two records, both titled "The Dark Knight", which seems redundant.
As Adam, it seems like perhaps current_user.lists.find_or_create_by!(list_params) in my controller action is finding the existing "The Dark Knight" list associated with my current user, and realising it exists -- thereby not triggering the create action.
Then as Beatrice, it seems that the same controller action is not finding the existing "The Dark Knight" list item associated with my current user -- and therefore it tries to trigger the create action.
However, this create action tries to create a new List item with a title that already exists -- i.e. it falls foul of the List.rb model uniqueness validation.
I'm not sure how to modify that find_or_create_by action, or the model validations, to ensure that for Beatrice, a new UserList record / association is created -- but not a new List record (since that already exists).
It feels like maybe I'm missing something easy here. Or maybe not. Would really appreciate some guidance on how to proceed. Thanks!
I'm 99% certain that what's happening is current_user.lists.find_or_create_by will only search for List records that the user has a UserList entry for. Thus if the List exists but the current user doesn't have an association to it, it will try to create a new list which will conflict with the existing one.
Assuming this is the issue, you need to find the List independently of the user associations: #list = List.find_or_create_by(list_params)
Once you have that list, you can create a UserList record through the associations or the UserList model. If you're looking for brevity, I think you can use current_user.lists << #list to create the UserList, but you should check how this behaves if the user has a UserList for that list already, I'm not sure if it will overwrite your existing data.
So (assuming the << method works appropriately for creating the UserList) your controller action could look like this:
def create
#list = List.find_or_create_by!(list_params)
current_user.lists << #list
end
Context:
Each Order has many Items & Logistics. Each Item & Logistic (as well as the Order itself) have many Revenues.
I am creating Order + Items & Logistics at once using an accepts_nested_attributes_for on Order. However, Revenues gets created using an after_create callback on each of the models Order, Item, and Logistics. Why? Because given the difference in interpretation in these models, the code reads cleaner this way. (But if this way of doing it is what's causing this question to be asked, I will obviously reconsider!)
One key attribute that I need to store in Revenues is pp_charge_id. But pp_charge_id is not something that either Order, Items, or Logistics needs to worry about. I've attached an attr_accessor :pp_charge_id to Order, so that one works fine, however, once I'm in the child Items or Logistics models, I no longer have access to pp_charge_id which again I need to save an associated Revenue. How should I do this?
Controller Code:
#order = Order.new(params) #params includes Order params, and nested params for child Item & Logistics
#order.pp_charge_id = "cash"
#order.save #I need this to not only save the Order, the children Item & Logistics, but then to also create the associated Revenue for each of the aforementioned 3 models
ORDER Model Code:
has_many :items
has_many :revenues
attr_accessor :pp_charge_id
after_create :create_revenue
def create_revenue
self.revenues.create(pp_charge_id: self.pp_charge_id)
end
#This WORKS as expected because of the attr_accessor
ITEM/ LOGISTIC model code:
has_many :revenues
belongs_to :order
after_create :create_revenue
def create_revenue
self.revenues.create(pp_charge_id: self.order.pp_charge_id)
end
#This DOES NOT work because self.order.pp_charge_id is nil
ORDER model code:
belongs_to :order
belongs_to :item
belongs_to :logistic
Again I understand the attr_accessor is not designed to persist across a request or even if the Order itself is reloaded. But it also doesn't make sense to save it redundantly in a table that has no use for it. If the only way to do this is to put the pp_charge_id into the params for the order and save everything all at once (including Revenues), then let me know because I know how to do that. (Again, would just rather avoid that because of how it's interpreted: params are coming from User, Revenue data is something I'm providing)
I think if you want the order's pp_charge_id to apply to all its items and logistics, I'd put all that into the order's after_create callback:
# order.rb
def create_revenue
revenues.create(pp_charge_id: pp_charge_id)
items.each {|i| i.revenues.create(pp_charge_id: pp_charge_id)}
logistics.each {|l| l.revenues.create(pp_charge_id: pp_charge_id)}
end
EDIT: Alternately, you could add inverse_of to your belongs_to declarations, and then I believe Item#create_revenue would see the same Order instance that you set in the controller. So if you also added an attr_accessor to the Item class, you could write its create_revenue like this:
# item.rb
def create_revenue
revenues.create(pp_charge_id: pp_charge_id || order.pp_charge_id)
end
This should cover the new requirement you've mentioned in your comment.
instead of using after_create and accessors you should consider having a proper method that does exactly what you need, ie:
Order.create_with_charge(:cash, params)
i find it disturbing to persist redundant information in the database just because the code reads cleaner that way!
So many tutorials on how to set up a has_many :through but not enough on how to actually do it!
I have a Inventories and Requests table joined by Bookings. Example: there could be 3 lenders who have tents in inventory, each of which is requested by 3 other borrowers. What I want to do is for each of the 3 tents in inventory, show that lender the list of 3 borrowers who requested the tent. Then the lender can pick who s/he wants to be the ultimate borrower.
I have thoughts on how this should work, but no idea if it's right, so please give advice on the below! The action is driven all by the Requests controller. Let's run through an example where the Inventories table already has 3 tents, ids [1, 2, 3]. Let's say Borrower Pat submits a Request_ID 1 for a tent.
Am I then supposed to create 3 new Bookings all with Request_ID 1 and then Inventory_ID [1, 2, 3] to get all the conceivable combinations? Something like
Inventory.where(name: "tent").each { |inventory| #request.bookings.create(inventory_id: inventory.id) }
And then is it right to use the Bookings primary key as the foreign key in both the Request and Inventory? Which means that after Borrower Pat submits his request, the bookings_id will be blank until say Lender 2 accepts, at which point bookings_id equals the id that matches the combination of Request_ID 1 and Inventory_ID 2
Now let's say when a Request is posted and a Bookings is made, I email the lender. However, I realized I don't want to bother Lender Taylor if 3 borrowers want her tent over the same time period. I'll just email her the first time, and then the subsequent ones she'll find out about when she logs in to say yes or no. In this situation is it OK to just query the Bookings table in the create action, something like (expanding off above)
-
Inventory.where(name: "tent").each do |inventory|
if !Bookings.find_by_inventory_id(inventory.id).exists?
# If there are no other bookings for this inventory, then create the booking and send an email
#request.bookings.create(inventory_id: inventory.id)
AlertMail.mail_to_lender(inventory).deliver
else
# If there are other bookings for this inventory, do any of those bookings have a request ID where the requested time overlaps with this new request's requested time? If so then just create a booking, don't bother with another email
if Bookings.where(inventory_id: inventory.id).select { |bookings_id| Bookings.find_by_id(bookings_id).request.time overlaps_with current_request.time }.count > 0
#request.bookings.create(inventory_id: inventory.id)
# If there are other bookings for this inventory but without overlapping times, go ahead and send an new email
else
#request.bookings.create(inventory_id: inventory.id)
AlertMail.mail_to_lender(inventory).deliver
end
end
end
Code above is probably flawed, I just want to know the theory of how this is supposed to be working.
Join Table
Firstly, has_many :through works by using a join table - a central table used to identify two different foreign_keys for your other tables. This is what provides the through functionality:
Some trivia for you:
has_and_belongs_to_many tables are called [plural_model_1]_[plural_model_2] and the models need to be in alphabetical order (entries_users)
has_many :through join tables can be called anything, but are typically called [alphabetical_model_1_singular]_[alphabetical_model_2_plural]
--
Models
The has_many :through models are generally constructed as such:
#app/models/inventory.rb
Class Inventory < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :bookings
has_many :requests, through: :bookings
end
#app/models/booking.rb
Class Booking < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :inventory
belongs_to :request
end
#app/models/request.rb
Class Request < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :bookings
has_many :requests, through: :bookings
end
--
Code
Your code is really quite bloated - you'll be much better doing something like this:
#app/controllers/inventories_controller.rb
Class InventoriesController < ApplicationController
def action
#tents = Inventory.where name: "tent"
#tents.each do |tent|
booking = Booking.find_or_create_by inventory_id: tend.id
AlertMail.mail_to_lender(tent).deliver if booking.is_past_due?
end
end
end
#app/models/booking.rb
Class Booking < ActiveRecord::Base
def is_past_due?
...logic here for instance method
end
end
Used find_or_create_by
You should only be referencing things once - it's called DRY (don't repeat yourself)
I did a poor job of asking this question. What I wanted to know was how to create the actual associations once everything is set up in the DB and Model files.
If you want to create a record of B that is in a many-to-many relationship with an existing record of A, it's the same syntax of A.Bs.create. What was more important for me, was how to link an A and B that already existed, in which case the answer was A.B_ids += B_id.
Two other things:
More obvious: if you created/ linked something one way, was the other way automatic? And yes, of course. In a many-to-many relationship, if you've done say A.B_ids += B_id, you no longer have to do 'B.A_ids += A_id`.
Less obvious: if A and B are joined by table AB, the primary key of table AB doesn't need to be added to A or B. Rails wants you to worry about the AB table as less as possible, so searches, builds, etc. can all be done by A.B or B.A instead of A.AB.B or B.AB.A
A Miniatures model has many Collections. Users can have and vote for the best Collection version of a Miniature. The votes are in a model called Imagevotes which update a counter_cache attribute in the Collections model.
What I want to do is flag Collections which are ranked first for a Miniature as GOLD, then rank the 2nd, 3rd and 4th as SILVER. I realise I can do this on the Miniature model by selecting the #miniature.collection.first, but I would like to be able to store that like you would store the vote-count in a counter_cache so that I could display the total number of GOLDS or SILVERS for any one user.
Is there a way that each model could have Boolean fields called GOLD and SILVER which would be updated as new votes are cast in the same way that a counter_cache is updated?
Any pointers and further reading much appreciated.
Update:
It occurs to me that this could also be done with a sort of second index column. A vote_position column if you will, that updated with a number from "1" for the record with the highest counter_cache number and ascended from there. Then I could use #miniature.collection.where(:vote_position => "1") or similar. Perhaps this is more ideal?
As it seems for me you just need to implement method in Miniature model:
def set_gold_and_silver
top_collections = self.collections.order("imagevotes_count desc").limit(4)
gold = top_collections.shift
gold.update_attribute :is_gold, true if gold
top_collections.each {|s| s.update_attribute :is_silver, true}
end
after that you can add it to after_create filter of Imagevotes model:
class Imagevotes < ActiveRecord::Base
after_create :set_gold_and_silver
def set_gold_and_silver
self.miniature.set_gold_and_silver
end
end