I have Board model. Board can be subscribed to other boards (as a feed).
Lets say I have board tree like this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f7/Binary_tree.svg/200px-Binary_tree.svg.png
So:
Board.find(2).feeds are boards 5 and 7
Board.find(7).feeds are boards 2 and 6 etc.
I want to write method all_feeds which returns all feeds from all levels for certain board. For example:
Board.find(7).all_feeds would output array of boards with ids: 2,6,5,11
I started with something like:
def all_feeds
if feeds.empty?
return
else
feeds.each {|feed| feed.all_feeds}
return feeds
end
end
Probably have to add this return feeds to some global array, but not sure how should I do this.
Thanks for help.
ps. this is not always a binary tree, you can have more than 2 feeds.
I guess that what you want could be achieved with:
def all_feeds
unless feeds.empty?
feeds + feeds.map(&:all_feeds).flatten.compact
end
end
Array#flatten makes the result one-dimensional, while Array#compact removes the nil components.
For an explanation of the map(&:all_feeds) part, you can refer to this SO answer :)
Looks like it's working for below code:
def all_feeds
if feeds.empty?
self
else
[self]+feeds.map(&:all_feeds)
end
end
if it is allowed to use gems ancestry gem will help do the trick
Board.find(7).descendants
in this case it will be definitely one request to db without any recursion which is better for performance
you can implement ancestry idea without gem (or in top of it):
add ancestry field to your model
fill it correctly when you build your tree (for nested nodes with ids 2 and 6 it will be 2/7, with ids 5 and 11 - 2/7/6 )
and then just take it from db with like 2/% query
Related
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)
I have a collection that contains a class like:
locations = Location.all
class Location < ActiveRecord::Base
end
The location class has a property: code
I wan to remove an item from the collection if code == "unused".
How many different ways can I do this in ruby?
I am currently doing this:
locations = Location.all.select { |l| l.code != "unused" }
This works great but just wondering what other ways I could do this just for learning purposes (if there big performance advantages in another way that would be good to know also).
Update
Please ignore the fact that I am loading my collection initially from the database, that wasn't the point. I want to learn how to remove things in-memory not simple where clauses :)
You can simply fetch records from your database what you need:
Rails 4 onwards:
locations = Location.where.not(code: "unused")
Before Rails 4:
locations = Location.where("code != ?", "unused")
If you have a collection and you want to reject some items from it, then you can try this:
locations.reject! {|location| location.code != "unused"}
You are doing this the wrong way. In your case, you are retrieving all records from DB and getting an array of records. Then you are looking for records you need in the array. Instead, you should get the records directly from DB:
Location.where("code != 'unused'")
# or in Rails 4 and latest
Location.where.not(code: "unused")
If you need to remove records from DB, you can do it like this:
Location.where.not(code: "unused").destroy_all
If you just want to know what is the best way to remove elements from an existing array, I think you are on the right track. Besides select there are reject, reject!, delete_if methods. You can learn more about them in the documentation http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.3.1/Array.html
There is a related post that might give more information: Ruby .reject! vs .delete_if
I'm writing an application that allows users to send one another messages about an 'offer'.
I thought I'd save myself some work and use the Mailboxer gem.
I'm following a test driven development approach with RSpec. I'm writing a test that should ensure that only one Conversation is allowed per offer. An offer belongs_to two different users (the user that made the offer, and the user that received the offer).
Here is my failing test:
describe "after a message is sent to the same user twice" do
before do
2.times { sending_user.message_user_regarding_offer! offer, receiving_user, random_string }
end
specify { sending_user.mailbox.conversations.count.should == 1 }
end
So before the test runs a user sending_user sends a message to the receiving_user twice. The message_user_regarding_offer! looks like this:
def message_user_regarding_offer! offer, receiver, body
conversation = offer.conversation
if conversation.nil?
self.send_message(receiver, body, offer.conversation_subject)
else
self.reply_to_conversation(conversation, body)
# I put a binding.pry here to examine in console
end
offer.create_activity key: PublicActivityKeys.message_received, owner: self, recipient: receiver
end
On the first iteration in the test (when the first message is sent) the conversation variable is nil therefore a message is sent and a conversation is created between the two users.
On the second iteration the conversation created in the first iteration is returned and the user replies to that conversation, but a new conversation isn't created.
This all works, but the test fails and I cannot understand why!
When I place a pry binding in the code in the location specified above I can examine what is going on... now riddle me this:
self.mailbox.conversations[0] returns a Conversation instance
self.mailbox.conversations[1] returns nil
self.mailbox.conversations clearly shows a collection containing ONE object.
self.mailbox.conversations.count returns 2?!
What is going on there? the count method is incorrect and my test is failing...
What am I missing? Or is this a bug?!
EDIT
offer.conversation looks like this:
def conversation
Conversation.where({subject: conversation_subject}).last
end
and offer.conversation_subject:
def conversation_subject
"offer-#{self.id}"
end
EDIT 2 - Showing the first and second iteration in pry
Also...
Conversation.all.count returns 1!
and:
Conversation.all == self.mailbox.conversations returns true
and
Conversation.all.count == self.mailbox.conversations.count returns false
How can that be if the arrays are equal? I don't know what's going on here, blown hours on this now. Think it's a bug?!
EDIT 3
From the source of the Mailboxer gem...
def conversations(options = {})
conv = Conversation.participant(#messageable)
if options[:mailbox_type].present?
case options[:mailbox_type]
when 'inbox'
conv = Conversation.inbox(#messageable)
when 'sentbox'
conv = Conversation.sentbox(#messageable)
when 'trash'
conv = Conversation.trash(#messageable)
when 'not_trash'
conv = Conversation.not_trash(#messageable)
end
end
if (options.has_key?(:read) && options[:read]==false) || (options.has_key?(:unread) && options[:unread]==true)
conv = conv.unread(#messageable)
end
conv
end
The reply_to_convesation code is available here -> http://rubydoc.info/gems/mailboxer/frames.
Just can't see what I'm doing wrong! Might rework my tests to get around this. Or ditch the gem and write my own.
see this Rails 3: Difference between Relation.count and Relation.all.count
In short Rails ignores the select columns (if more than one) when you apply count to the query. This is because
SQL's COUNT allows only one or less columns as parameters.
From Mailbox code
scope :participant, lambda {|participant|
select('DISTINCT conversations.*').
where('notifications.type'=> Message.name).
order("conversations.updated_at DESC").
joins(:receipts).merge(Receipt.recipient(participant))
}
self.mailbox.conversations.count ignores the select('DISTINCT conversations.*') and counts the join table with receipts, essentially counting number of receipts with duplicate conversations in it.
On the other hand, self.mailbox.conversations.all.count first gets the records applying the select, which gets unique conversations and then counts it.
self.mailbox.conversations.all == self.mailbox.conversations since both of them query the db with the select.
To solve your problem you can use sending_user.mailbox.conversations.all.count or sending_user.mailbox.conversations.group('conversations.id').length
I have tended to use the size method in my code. As per the ActiveRecord code, size will use a cached count if available and also returns the correct number when models have been created through relations and have not yet been saved.
# File activerecord/lib/active_record/relation.rb, line 228
def size
loaded? ? #records.length : count
end
There is a blog on this here.
In Ruby, #length and #size are synonyms and both do the same thing: they tell you how many elements are in an array or hash. Technically #length is the method and #size is an alias to it.
In ActiveRecord, there are several ways to find out how many records are in an association, and there are some subtle differences in how they work.
post.comments.count - Determine the number of elements with an SQL COUNT query. You can also specify conditions to count only a subset of the associated elements (e.g. :conditions => {:author_name => "josh"}). If you set up a counter cache on the association, #count will return that cached value instead of executing a new query.
post.comments.length - This always loads the contents of the association into memory, then returns the number of elements loaded. Note that this won't force an update if the association had been previously loaded and then new comments were created through another way (e.g. Comment.create(...) instead of post.comments.create(...)).
post.comments.size - This works as a combination of the two previous options. If the collection has already been loaded, it will return its length just like calling #length. If it hasn't been loaded yet, it's like calling #count.
It is also worth mentioning to be careful if you are not creating models through associations, as the related model will not necessarily have those instances in its association proxy/collection.
# do this
mailbox.conversations.build(attrs)
# or this
mailbox.conversations << Conversation.new(attrs)
# or this
mailbox.conversations.create(attrs)
# or this
mailbox.conversations.create!(attrs)
# NOT this
Conversation.new(mailbox_id: some_id, ....)
I don't know if this explains what's going on, but the ActiveRecord count method queries the database for the number of records stored. The length of the Relation could be different, as discussed in http://archive.railsforum.com/viewtopic.php?id=6255, although in that example, the number of records in the database was less than the number of items in the Rails data structure.
Try
self.mailbox.conversations.reload; self.mailbox.conversations.count
or perhaps
self.mailbox.reload; self.mailbox.conversations.count
or, if neither of those work, just try reloading as many of the objects as possible to see if you can get it to work (self, mailbox, conversations, etc.).
My guess is that something is messed up between memory and the DB. This is definitely a really weird error though, might wanna put in an issue on Rails to see why this would be the case.
The result of mailbox.conversations is cached after the first call. To reload it write mailbox.conversations(true)
I need to select random records from db. In Sqlite3, which I use on development, there is a function called Random(). However, in Postgresql it's called Rand(). I don't remember about MySql, but probably it's called so there.
So if I have a code of (for Sqlite3)
data = Items.where(pubshied: is_pubshied).order("RANDOM()").limit(count)
how do I ensure that it will work with different databases?
Rails doesn't support this out of the box. I believe I achieved this with a model extension (I dont use it anymore because I force the use of Postgresql), but something like this could work:
module Randomize
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
included do
scope :random, -> { order(rand_cmd) }
end
module ClassMethods
def rand_cmd
if connection.adapter_name =~ /mysql/i
'rand()'
else
'random()'
end
end
end
end
You can then do
class Item
include Randomize
end
Item.where(...).random.limit(...)
For a performant, non-adapter-specific way to order randomly, populate a random column, put an index on it and call it something like:
Foo.order("random_column > #{rand}").limit(1)
From the comments from the post that waldyr.ar mentions in his comment: https://stackoverflow.com/a/12038506/16784.
Tl;dr: you can use Items.all.sample(count). Of course that retrieves the entire table and may not be useful for large tables.
How can I get duplicate posts in my view?
I want to be able to do something like this:
#post = post.find(1,2,1)
to return post 1 , post 2 and then post 1 (again).
realize this is a dumb question but I can't find any documentation.
Although I'm not sure about the use case you can do something like:
#posts = Post.find(1,2) << Post.find(1)
of you can define this in your Post model:
def find_with_array(*args)
posts = []
for arg in args
posts << Post.find(arg)
end
posts
end
Obviously the above is inefficient as you are making many SQL calls. If you want it efficient then you can write a code that makes one sql call (but will not return duplicates) and then iterate through the array and rearrange (with copying for duplicates) such as (not fully tested):
def find_with_array(*args)
posts_with_no_duplicates = Post.find(args)
posts_with_duplicates = []
for arg in args
for post in posts_with_no_duplicates
if arg == post.id
posts_with_duplicates << post
end
end
end
end
This one should be better as you are only making one call to DB (normally slowest part) however it's O(N^2) There might be a way to make it O(N) if need be. However It's great improvement from the previous option
Without knowing more detail, here's what I would advise. Take a look at this post regarding checkbox arrays: http://www.skuunk.com/2008/05/checkbox-arrays-in-rails.html
Each checkbox drops a value into a particular params key. This will solve the problem of getting an array with a list of values. Let me know in the comments if this doesn't resolve your particular issue.