I am trying to order by a field in a related model in Rails. All of the solutions I have researched have not addressed if the related model is filtered by another parameter?
Item model
class Item < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :priorities
Related Model:
class Priority < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :item
validates :item_id, presence: true
validates :company_id, presence: true
validates :position, presence: true
end
I am retrieving Items using a where clause:
#items = Item.where('company_id = ? and approved = ?', #company.id, true).all
I need to order by the 'Position' column in the related table. The trouble has been that in the Priority model, an item could be listed for multiple companies. So the positions are dependent on which company_id they have. When I display the items, it is for one company, ordered by position within the company. What is the proper way to accomplish this? Any help is appreciated.
PS - I am aware of acts_as_list however found it did not quite suit my setup here, so I am manually handling saving the sorting while still using jquery ui sortable.
You could use the includes method to include the build association then order by it. You just make sure you disambiguate the field you are ordering on and there are some things you should read up on here on eager loading. So it could be something like:
#items = Item.includes(:priorities).where('company_id = ? and approved = ?', #company.id, true).order("priorities.position ASC")
class Item < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :priorities
belongs_to :company
def self.approved
where(approved: true)
end
end
class Priority < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :item
end
class Company < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :items
end
#company = Company.find(params[:company_id])
#items = #company.items.joins(:priorities).approved.order(priorities: :position)
If I've understood your question, that's how I'd do it. It doesn't really need much explanation but lemme know if you're not sure.
If you wanted to push more of it into the model, if it's a common requirement, you could scope the order:
class Item < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :priorities
belongs_to :company
def self.approved
where(approved: true)
end
def self.order_by_priority_position
joins(:priorities).order(priorities: :position)
end
end
and just use: #company.items.approved.order_by_priority_position
Related
I have an activerecord class method scope that returns all when the scope should remain unchanged. However I would expect it to use the counter cache when chaining size to the all scope. Here is an example:
class Post < ApplicationRecord
has_many :comments
end
class Comment < ApplicationRecord
belongs_to :post, counter_cache: true
def self.filtered(only_approved:)
if only_approved
where(approved: true)
else
all
end
end
end
# This does not use the counter cache but should since the scope is unchanged
Post.first.comments.filtered(only_approved: false).size
So it looks like Post.comments.size triggers the counter cache while Post.comments.all.size does not. Is there a way around this?
This happens because of how the counter_cache works. It needs 2 things:
Add the counter_cache: true to the belonging model (Comment)
Add a column comments_count to the having model (Post)
The column added to the Post model gets updated everytime you create or destroy a model so it will count all existing records on the table. This is the reason why it won't work on a scope (a scope might be useful to filter the resulting records, but the actual column comments_count is still counting the whole table).
As a workaround I'd suggest you to take a look at and see if it can be used for your usecase https://github.com/magnusvk/counter_culture.
From their own repo:
class Product < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :category
scope :awesomes, ->{ where "products.product_type = ?", 'awesome' }
scope :suckys, ->{ where "products.product_type = ?", 'sucky' }
counter_culture :category,
column_name: proc {|model| "#{model.product_type}_count" },
column_names: -> { {
Product.awesomes => :awesome_count,
Product.suckys => :sucky_count
} }
end
The only way I found to deal with this is to pass the scope to the class method and return it if no additional scope is to be added. It's not as clean but it works. Here is the updated code:
class Post < ApplicationRecord
has_many :comments
end
class Comment < ApplicationRecord
belongs_to :post, counter_cache: true
def self.filtered(scope:, only_approved:)
if only_approved
scope.where(approved: true)
else
scope
end
end
end
# This works with counter cache if the scope is returned as is
Comment.filtered(scope: Post.first.comments, only_approved: false).size
Terribly worded, but I'm confusing it.
I have a User model who has_many Clients and has_many statements, through: :clients and then statements which belongs_to clients and belongs to user
In Console I can do all the queries I want. User.statements User.client.first.statements etc - What I'm struggling on is Controller restrictions
For now it's simple - A user should only be able to see Clients and Statements in which they own.
For Clients I did
Client Controller
def index
#clients = Client.where(user_id: current_user.id)
end
Which seems to work perfectly. Client has a field for user_id
I'm kind of stuck on how to emulate this for Statements. Statements do -not- have a user_id field. I'm not quite sure I want them too since in the very-soon-future I want clients to belongs_to_many :users and Statements to not be bound.
Statement Controller
def index
#clients = Client.where(user_id: current_user.id)
#statements = Statement.where(params[:client_id])
end
I'm just genuinely not sure what to put - I know the params[:client_id] doesn't make sense, but what is the proper way to fulfill this? Am I going about it an unsecure way?
Client Model
class Client < ApplicationRecord
has_many :statements
has_many :client_notes, inverse_of: :client
belongs_to :user
validates :name, presence: true
validates :status, presence: true
accepts_nested_attributes_for :client_notes, reject_if: :all_blank, allow_destroy: true
end
Statement Model
class Statement < ApplicationRecord
belongs_to :client
belongs_to :user
validates :name, presence: true
validates :statement_type, presence: true
validates :client_id, presence: true
validates :start_date, presence: true
validates :end_date, presence: true
end
User Model
class User < ApplicationRecord
has_many :clients
has_many :statements, through: :clients
end
Based on the reply provided below I am using
def index
if params[:client][:user_id] == #current_user.id
#clients = Client.includes(:statements).where(user_id: params[:client][:user_id])
#statements = #clients.statements
else
return 'error'
end
end
Unsure if this logic is proper
Use includes to avoid [N+1] queries.
And regarding "A user should only be able to see Clients and Statements in which they own".
if params[:client][:user_id] == #current_user.id
#clients = Client.includes(:statements).where(user_id: params[:client][:user_id])
# do more
else
# Type your error message
end
Additionally, you might need to use strong params and scope.
The best way to do it is using includes:
#clients = Client.where(user_id: current_user.id)
#statements = Statement.includes(clients: :users}).where('users.id = ?', current_user.id)
You can take a look in here: https://apidock.com/rails/ActiveRecord/QueryMethods/includes
In this case, thanks to the reminder that current_user is a helper from Devise, and the relational structure I showed, it was actually just as simple as
def index
#statements = current_user.statements
end
resolved my issue.
Due to the [N+1] Queries issue that #BigB has brought to my attention, while this method works, I wouldn't suggest it for a sizable transaction.
I'm new to Rails and ActiveRecord and need some help. Basically, I have 4 models: User, Property, PropertyAccount, and AccountInvitation. Users and Properties have a many to many relationship via PropertyAccounts. AccountInvitations have a user's email and a property_id.
What I want to happen is that after a user registers on my app, his user account is automatically associated with some pre-created Properties. What I don't know how to do is write the query to get the Property objects from the AccountInvitations and save them to the User object. Please see def assign_properties for my pseudo code. Any help is welcome, thanks so much!
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :property_accounts
has_many :properties, through: :property_accounts
after_create :assign_properties
# Check to see if user has any pre-assigned properties, and if so assign them
def assign_properties
account_invitations = AccountInvitations.where(email: self.email)
if account_invitations.any?
account_invitations.each do |i|
properties += Property.find(i.property_id)
end
self.properties = properties
self.save
end
end
end
class AccountInvitation < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :property
validates :property_id, presence: true
validates :email, uniqueness: {scope: :property_id}
end
class Property < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :account_invitations
has_many :property_accounts
has_many :users, through: :property_accounts
end
class PropertyAccount < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :property
belongs_to :user
end
Thanks to #wangthony , I looked at the includes method on http://apidock.com/rails/ActiveRecord/QueryMethods/includes and tweaked one of their examples in order to get this to work. Here's the solution:
def assign_property
self.properties = Property.includes(:account_invitations).where('account_invitations.email = ?', self.email).references(:account_invitations)
self.save
end
I believe you can do this:
user.properties = Property.includes(:account_invitations).where(email: user.email)
user.save
I read this interesting article about Using Polymorphism to Make a Better Activity Feed in Rails.
We end up with something like
class Activity < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :subject, polymorphic: true
end
Now, if two of those subjects are for example:
class Event < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :guests
after_create :create_activities
has_one :activity, as: :subject, dependent: :destroy
end
class Image < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :tags
after_create :create_activities
has_one :activity, as: :subject, dependent: :destroy
end
With create_activities defined as
def create_activities
Activity.create(subject: self)
end
And with guests and tags defined as:
class Guest < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :event
end
class Tag < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :image
end
If we query the last 20 activities logged, we can do:
Activity.order(created_at: :desc).limit(20)
We have a first N+1 query issue that we can solve with:
Activity.includes(:subject).order(created_at: :desc).limit(20)
But then, when we call guests or tags, we have another N+1 query problem.
What's the proper way to solve that in order to be able to use pagination ?
Edit 2: I'm now using rails 4.2 and eager loading polymorphism is now a feature :)
Edit: This seemed to work in the console, but for some reason, my suggestion of use with the partials below still generates N+1 Query Stack warnings with the bullet gem. I need to investigate...
Ok, I found the solution ([edit] or did I ?), but it assumes that you know all subjects types.
class Activity < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :subject, polymorphic: true
belongs_to :event, -> { includes(:activities).where(activities: { subject_type: 'Event' }) }, foreign_key: :subject_id
belongs_to :image, -> { includes(:activities).where(activities: { subject_type: 'Image' }) }, foreign_key: :subject_id
end
And now you can do
Activity.includes(:part, event: :guests, image: :tags).order(created_at: :desc).limit(10)
But for eager loading to work, you must use for example
activity.event.guests.first
and not
activity.part.guests.first
So you can probably define a method to use instead of subject
def eager_loaded_subject
public_send(subject.class.to_s.underscore)
end
So now you can have a view with
render partial: :subject, collection: activity
A partial with
# _activity.html.erb
render :partial => 'activities/' + activity.subject_type.underscore, object: activity.eager_loaded_subject
And two (dummy) partials
# _event.html.erb
<p><%= event.guests.map(&:name).join(', ') %></p>
# _image.html.erb
<p><%= image.tags.first.map(&:name).join(', ') %></p>
This will hopefully be fixed in rails 5.0. There is already an issue and a pull request for it.
https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/17479
https://github.com/rails/rails/issues/8005
I have forked rails and applied the patch to 4.2-stable and it works for me. Feel free to use my fork, even though I cannot guarantee to sync with upstream on a regular basis.
https://github.com/ttosch/rails/tree/4-2-stable
You can use ActiveRecord::Associations::Preloader to preload guests and tags linked, respectively, to each of the event and image objects that are associated as a subject with the collection of activities.
class ActivitiesController < ApplicationController
def index
activities = current_user.activities.page(:page)
#activities = Activities::PreloadForIndex.new(activities).run
end
end
class Activities::PreloadForIndex
def initialize(activities)
#activities = activities
end
def run
preload_for event(activities), subject: :guests
preload_for image(activities), subject: :tags
activities
end
private
def preload_for(activities, associations)
ActiveRecord::Associations::Preloader.new.preload(activities, associations)
end
def event(activities)
activities.select &:event?
end
def image(activities)
activities.select &:image?
end
end
image_activities = Activity.where(:subject_type => 'Image').includes(:subject => :tags).order(created_at: :desc).limit(20)
event_activities = Activity.where(:subject_type => 'Event').includes(:subject => :guests).order(created_at: :desc).limit(20)
activities = (image_activities + event_activities).sort_by(&:created_at).reverse.first(20)
I would suggest adding the polymorphic association to your Event and Guest models.
polymorphic doc
class Event < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :guests
has_many :subjects
after_create :create_activities
end
class Image < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :tags
has_many :subjects
after_create :create_activities
end
and then try doing
Activity.includes(:subject => [:event, :guest]).order(created_at: :desc).limit(20)
Does this generate a valid SQL query or does it fail because events can't be JOINed with tags and images can't be JOINed with guests?
class Activity < ActiveRecord::Base
self.per_page = 10
def self.feed
includes(subject: [:guests, :tags]).order(created_at: :desc)
end
end
# in the controller
Activity.feed.paginate(page: params[:page])
This would use will_paginate.
What i have created is a "active" field in my topics table which i can use to display the active topics, which will contain at first the time the topic was created and when someone comments it will use the comment.created_at time and put it in the active field in the topics table, like any other forum system.
I found i similar question here
How to order by the date of the last comment and sort by last created otherwise?
But it wont work for me, im not sure why it wouldn't. And i also don't understand if i need to use counter_cache in this case or not. Im using a polymorphic association for my comments, so therefore im not sure how i would use counter_cache. It works fine in my topic table to copy the created_at time to the active field. But it wont work when i create a comment.
Error:
NoMethodError in CommentsController#create
undefined method `topic' for
Topic.rb
class Topic < ActiveRecord::Base
attr_accessible :body, :forum_id, :title
before_create :init_sort_column
belongs_to :user
belongs_to :forum
validates :forum_id, :body, :title, presence: true
has_many :comments, :as => :commentable
default_scope order: 'topics.created_at DESC'
private
def init_sort_column
self.active = self.created_at || Time.now
end
end
Comment.rb
class Comment < ActiveRecord::Base
attr_accessible :body, :commentable_id, :commentable_type, :user_id
belongs_to :user
belongs_to :commentable, :polymorphic => true
before_create :update_parent_sort_column
private
def update_parent_sort_column
self.topic.active = self.created_at if self.topic
end
end
Didn't realise you were using a polymorphic association. Use the following:
def update_parent_sort_column
commentable.active = created_at if commentable.is_a?(Topic)
commentable.save!
end
Should do the trick.