I was trying to refactoring and optimizing me code. In particular, I wanted to reduce the amount of queries going to the database. In my users controller it worked very well but in an other controller, where I tried the same, it didn't. I've searched for some time now for the answer why it didn't work but I can't really answer it.
I've got users, which can subscribe to courses through enrolments. They are connected through has_many :through etc. relationships. The following works:
#users_courses = current_user.courses
#courses = #users_courses.a_named_scope
But in my courses controller the following wont work:
#all_courses = Course.all
#specific_course = #all_courses.specific_course_scope
The scopes are defined in the respective models and work properly. They are not complicated, just "where ... true/false" definitions. Does someone know the problem here? Thanks!
I'm using rails version 3.2 and ruby version 2.
Until Rails 4 you should use scoped method if you want to have ActiveRecord::Relation instance (on which you can call other scopes) returned instead of Array:
#all_courses = Course.scoped
#specific_course = #all_courses.specific_course_scoped
This should work.
If you want to use includes(:courses), you just do it, for example with:
#specific_course = #all_courses.specific_course_scoped.includes(:courses)
Related
In my rails app I am fetching a batch of data from the DB with around a million records. I am simply calling the following query combined with some pagination logic, and right now it is working very well. The code is defined in my model, like so:
def find_records(current_page, max_records, start_value, end_value)
where(value_range: start_value..end_value)
.offset((current_page - 1) * max_records).limit(max_records)
end
However, in my previous attempt, I had the following code defined in my model:
def find_records(max_records, start_value, end_value)
where(value_range: start_value..end_value)
end
And I called .offset and .limit inside the controller like so:
def index
current_page = params[:page]
max_records = 3
start_value = 4
end_value = 8
Model.find_records(start_value, end_value).offset((current_page - 1) * max_records).limit(max_records)
end
When I did this, my memory completely gave up on the 3rd or 4th page and my app just crashed. I don't know why calling .limit and .offset in the model solved the issue.
So my question is, how does calling class methods in your model rather than the controller improve code execution performance? I mean this query is obviously data-related so it makes sense to call it inside the model anyways, but I would still like to know the wonders behind the magic.
Thank you!
how does calling class methods in your model rather than the controller improve code execution performance?
It should not. Both your queries return a ActiveRecord::Relation. Both offset and limit are used to build the query, so in both scenarios you should see the same query in your logs. Please check your development.log when in doubt.
Having the code query code in your model makes sense. The controller shouldn't know all those details.
About the pagination, there are a few solutions in the rails world - Kaminari, will_paginate
There is some ruby on rails code
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
def self.all_users_count
User.all
end
end
User.all_users_count
returns, for example, 100
User.limit(5).all_users_count
Now it return 5 because of ActiveRecord::Relation context, in despite of i wroute name of class User.all instead simple all
(.to_sql show that query always contains limit or where id or other things in other cases)
So, how can i make context-independent AR queries inside model methods? like User.all and others?
Thank you!
Ps. Or maybe my code has an error or something like this, and in fact User.all inside any methods and context always must returns correct rows count of this model table
This is very weird and unexpected (unfortunately I can't confirm that, because my computer crashed, and have no rails projects at hand).
I would expect
User.all
to create a new scope (or as you call it - context)
Try working around this with
User.unscoped.all
Edit:
I tried it out on my project and on clean rails repo, and the results are consistent.
And after thinking a bit - this is maybe not even an issue - I think your approach could be faulty.
In what scenario would you chain User.limit(2).all_users_count ?? I can't think of any. Because either you need all users count, and you call User.all_usert_count (or just User.count)
... or you need something else and you call User.limit(2).where(...) - there's no point in calling all_users_count in that chain, is it?
And, when you think of it, it makes sense. Imagine you had some different method like count_retired, what would you expect from such call:
User.limit(2).count_retired ?
The number of retired users not bigger than 2, or the number of all retired users in the system? I would expect the former.
So I think one of two possibilities here:
either you implemented it wrong and should do it in a different way (as described above in the edit section)
or you have some more complex issue, but you boiled your examples down to a point where they don't make much sense anymore (please follow up with another question if you please, and please, ping me in the comment with a link if you do, because it sounds interesting)
For instance:
#examples = #user.examples.mostrecent.paginate(page: params[:page])
Where "mostrecent" is defined as:
def self.mostrecent
self.order('created_at DESC')
end
So basically the first call to the database is pull every User's example, and then on top of that, order them by most recent first. It seems like this should be doable, but for some reason I can't get it to work.
There is no defined order scope in the model I'm working with, and other calls to order work just fine. By checking the development.log I can see only the first database pulling example by users is respected. The mostrecent order is never called.
Is there a Rails way of doing this all in one line?
You could use a scope, as in:
scope :by_recent, lambda
{ |since_when| order("created_at") }
Outlet.rb:
def latest_reports
weekly_reports.limit(10)
end
Outlet_controller.rb:
#all_outlets = Outlet.includes(:weekly_reports)
#search = #all_outlets.search(params[:q]) # load all matching records
#outlets = #search.result.order("created_at DESC").page(params[:page])
outlet/index.slim:
- #outlets.each do |outlet|
tr
td= link_to outlet.name, outlet_path(outlet)
th
ul.reports
li class="#{'done' if outlet.monitored_today}"
th
ul.reports
- for report in outlet.latest_reports
li class="#{'done' if report.quota_met}"= report.times_monitored
I'm not sure why, but this loads it up as several different queries. I'm pretty sure it's because the include in my controller isn't correct (because I'm using a method in the model).
If anyone could help me improve this, I would be extremely grateful :).
Note: I'm developing on PostgreSQL
Update:: Posted the full controller action.
In rails 3 at least, if you use
Model1.includes :model2
then the result is one query for each model. You can access instances of the associated model from the result and no extra queries will be made.
If you really want it all in one query, you can do this:
Model1.joins(:model2).includes(model2)
This will produce a nice long JOIN query that loads all the data for both models in one go. Rails will populate the result with instances of both models already loaded.
So, you should be able to replace
#all_outlets = Outlet.includes(:weekly_reports)
with
#all_outlets = Outlet.includes(:weekly_reports).joins(:weekly_reports)
and it should combine everything into one query.
I have a controller which has a lot of options being sent to it via a form and I'm wondering how best to separate them out as they are not all being used simultaneously. Ie sometimes no, tags, sometimes no price specified. For prices I have a default price set so I can work around with it always being there, but the tags either need to be there, or not. etc.
#locations = Location.find(params[:id])
#location = #locations.places.active.where("cache_price BETWEEN ? AND ?",price_low,price_high).tagged_with([params[:tags]).order(params[:sort]).paginate :page => params[:page]
I haven't seen any good examples of this, but I'm sure it must happen often... any suggestions? Also, even will_paginate which gets tacked on last should be optional as the results either go to a list or to a google map, and the map needs no pagination.
the first thing to do when refactoring a complex search action is to use an anonymous scope.
Ie :
fruits = Fruit.scoped
fruits = fruits.where(:colour => 'red') if options[:red_only]
fruits = fruits.where(:size => 'big') if options[:big_only]
fruits = fruits.limit(10) if options[:only_first]
...
If the action controller still remains too big, you may use a class to handle the search. Moreover, by using a class with Rails 3 and ActiveModel you'll also be able to use validations if you want...
Take a look at one of my plugins : http://github.com/novagile/basic_active_model that allows you to easily create classes that may be used in forms.
Also take a look at http://github.com/novagile/scoped-search another plugin more specialized in creating search objects by using the scopes of a model.