Basically, I have an app with a tagging system and when someone searches for tag 'badger', I want it to return records tagged "badger", "Badger" and "Badgers".
With a single tag I can do this to get the records:
#notes = Tag.find_by_name(params[:tag_name]).notes.order("created_at DESC")
and it works fine. However if I get multiple tags (this is just for upper and lower case - I haven't figured out the 's' bit either yet):
Tag.find(:all, :conditions => [ "lower(name) = ?", 'badger'])
I can't use .notes.order("created_at DESC") because there are multiple results.
So, the question is.... 1) Am I going about this the right way? 2) If so, how do I get all my records back in order?
Any help much appreciated!
One implementation would be to do:
#notes = []
Tag.find(:all, :conditions => [ "lower(name) = ?", 'badger']).each do |tag|
#notes << tag.notes
end
#notes.sort_by {|note| note.created_at}
However you should be aware that this is what is known as an N + 1 query, in that it makes one query in the outer section, and then one query per result. This can be optimized by changing the first query to be:
Tag.find(:all, :conditions => [ "lower(name) = ?", 'badger'], :includes => :notes).each do |tag|
If you are using Rails 3 or above, it can be re-written slightly:
Tag.where("lower(name) = ?", "badger").includes(:notes) do |tag|
Edited
First, get an array of all possible tag names, plural, singular, lower, and upper
tag_name = params[:tag_name].to_s.downcase
possible_tag_names = [tag_name, tag_name.pluralize, tag_name.singularize].uniq
# It's probably faster to search for both lower and capitalized tags than to use the db's `lower` function
possible_tag_names += possible_tag_names.map(&:capitalize)
Are you using a tagging library? I know that some provide a method for querying multiple tags. If you aren't using one of those, you'll need to do some manual SQL joins in your query (assuming you're using a relational db like MySQL, Postgres or SQLite). I'd be happy to assist with that, but I don't know your schema.
Related
I've populated a hash with two different models. I then try to sort them like so:
#search_results = User.find(:all, :conditions => ['name LIKE ?', "%#{params[:query]}%"])
#search_results += Book.find(:all, :conditions => ['title LIKE ?', "%#{params[:query]}%"])
#search_results.sort! { |a,b| a.impressions_count <=> b.impressions_count }
This throws the following error:
comparison of User with Book failed
Both users and books have an integer-based impressions_count. Why can't I sort via this attribute? What other options do I have?
I faced a similar problem recently and ended up writing some custom sql because all other ways returned an array. Pretty sure its not a good idea to use the sort method since it will always be more efficient to sort in SQL than ruby, especially when the data set gets large
#combined_results = User.find_by_sql(["SELECT title, id, impressions_count, NULL as some_attribute_of_book
FROM user
WHERE title LIKE ?
UNION SELECT title, id, impressions_count, some_attribute_of_book FROM book
WHERE title LIKE ?
ORDER BY impressions_count", params[:query], params[:query]])
The above is completely untested code, more of an example than anything
How do I select a single random record for each user, but order the Array by the latest record pr. user.
If Foo uploads a new painting, I would like to select a single random record from foo. This way a user that uploads 10 paintings won't monopolize all the space on the front page, but still get a slot on the top of the page.
This is how I did it with Rails 2.x running on MySQL.
#paintings = Painting.all.reverse
first_paintings = []
#paintings.group_by(&:user_id).each do |user_id, paintings|
first_paintings << paintings[rand(paintings.size-1)]
end
#paintings = (first_paintings + (Painting.all - first_paintings).reverse).paginate(:per_page => 9, :page => params[:page])
The example above generates a lot of SQL query's and is properly badly optimized. How would you pull this off with Rails 3.1 running on PostgreSQL? I have 7000 records..
#paintings = Painting.all.reverse = #paintings = Painting.order("id desc")
If you really want to reverse the order of the the paintings result set I would set up a scope then just use that
Something like
class Painting < ActiveRecord::Base
scope :reversed, order("id desc")
end
Then you can use Painting.reversed anywhere you need it
You have definitely set up a belongs_to association in your Painting model, so I would do:
# painting.rb
default_scope order('id DESC')
# paintings_controller.rb
first_paintings = User.includes(:paintings).collect do |user|
user.paintings.sample
end
#paintings = (first_paintings + Painting.where('id NOT IN (?)', first_paintings)).paginate(:per_page => 9, :page => params[:page])
I think this solution results in the fewest SQL queries, and is very readable. Not tested, but I hope you got the idea.
You could use the dynamic finders:
Painting.order("id desc").find_by_user_id!(user.id)
This is assuming your Paintings table contains a user_id column or some other way to associate users to paintings which it appears you have covered since you're calling user_id in your initial code. This isn't random but using find_all_by_user_id would allow you to call .reverse on the array if you still wanted and find a random painting.
Rails 2.3.5
I've looked at a number of other questions relating to building conditions dynamically for an ActiveRecord find.
I'm aware there are some great gems out there like search logic and that this is better in Rails3. However, I'm using geokit for geospacial search and I'm trying to build just a standard conditions set that will allow me to combine a slew of different filters.
I have 12 different filters that I'm trying to combine dynamically for an advanced search. I need to be able to mix equality, greater than, less than, in (?) and IS NULLs conditions.
Here's an example of what I'm trying to get working:
conditions = []
conditions << ["sites.site_type in (?)", params[:site_categories]] if params[:site_categories]
conditions << [<< ["sites.operational_status = ?", 'operational'] if params[:oponly] == 1
condition_set = [conditions.map{|c| c[0] }.join(" AND "), *conditions.map{|c| c[1..-1] }.flatten]
#sites = Site.find :all,
:origin => [lat,lng],
:units => distance_unit,
:limit => limit,
:within => range,
:include => [:chargers, :site_reports, :networks],
:conditions => condition_set,
:order => 'distance asc'
I seem to be able to get this working fine when there are only single variables for the conditions expression but when I have something that is a (?) and has an array of values I'm getting an error for the wrong number of bind conditions. The way I'm joining and flattening the conditions (based on the answer from Combine arrays of conditions in Rails) seems not to handle an array properly and I don't understand the flattening logic enough to track down the issue.
So let's say I have 3 values in params[:site_categories] I'll the above code leaves me with the following:
Conditions is
[["sites.operational_status = ?", "operational"], ["sites.site_type in (?)", ["shopping", "food", "lodging"]]]
The flattened attempt is:
["sites.operational_status = ? AND sites.site_type in (?)", ["operational"], [["shopping", "food", "lodging"]]]
Which gives me:
wrong number of bind variables (4 for 2)
I'm going to step back and work on converting all of this to named scopes but I'd really like to understand how to get this working this way.
Rails 4
users = User.all
users = User.where(id: params[id]) if params[id].present?
users = User.where(state: states) if states.present?
users.each do |u|
puts u.name
end
Old answer
Monkey patch the Array class. Create a file called monkey_patch.rb in config/initializers directory.
class Array
def where(*args)
sql = args.first
unless (sql.is_a?(String) and sql.present?)
return self
end
self[0] = self.first.present? ? " #{self.first} AND #{sql} " : sql
self.concat(args[1..-1])
end
end
Now you can do this:
cond = []
cond.where("id = ?", params[id]) if params[id].present?
cond.where("state IN (?)", states) unless states.empty?
User.all(:conditions => cond)
I have have 3 Tables of data and 2 Join Tables connecting everything. I'm trying to figure out a way to query the results based on the condition that the join table data is the same.
To explain, I have User, Interest, and Event Tables. These tables are linked through an HABTM relationship (which is fine for my needs since I dont need to store any other fields) and joined through two join tables. So i also have a UsersInterests table with (user_id, interest_id) and a EventsInterests table with (event_id, interest_id).
The problem comes when trying to query all the Events where the users interests match the events interests.
I thought it would look something like this...
#events= Event.find(:all, :conditions => [#user.interests = #event.interests])
but I get the error
"undefined method `interests' for nil:NilClass", Is there something wrong with my syntax or my logic?
You're problem is that either #user or #event is undefined. Even if you define them, before executing this statement, the conditions option supplied is invalid, [#user.interests = #event.interests].
This named scope on events should do the trick
class Event < ActiveRecord::Base
...
named_scope :shares_interest_with_user, lambda {|user|
{ :joins => "LEFT JOIN events_interests ei ON ei.event_id = events.id " +
"LEFT JOIN users_intersets ui ON ui.interest_id = ei.interest_id",
:conditions => ["ui.user_id = ?", user], :group_by => "events.id"
}
end
#events = Event.shares_interest_with_user(#user)
Given Event <-> Interest <-> User query all the Events where the users interests match the events interests (so the following will find all such Events that this event's interest are also interests of at least one user).
First try, the simplest thing that could work:
#events = []
Interest.all.each do |i|
i.events.each do |e|
#events << e if i.users.any?
end
end
#events.uniq!
Highly inefficient, very resource hungry and cpu intensive. Generates lots of sql queries. But gets the job done.
Second try should incorporate some complicated join, but the more I think about it the more I see how vague your problem is. Be more precise.
Not sure I completely follow what you are trying to do. If you have one user and you want all events that that user also has interest in then something like:
Event.find(:all, :include => [:events_interests], :conditions => ['events_interests.interest_id in (?)', #user.interests.collect(&:id)])
should probably work.
I want to grab the most recent entry from a table. If I was just using sql, you could do
Select top 1 * from table ORDER BY EntryDate DESC
I'd like to know if there is a good active record way of doing this.
I could do something like:
table.find(:order => 'EntryDate DESC').first
But it seems like that would grab the entire result set, and then use ruby to select the first result. I'd like ActiveRecord to create sql that only brings across one result.
You need something like:
Model.first(:order => 'EntryDate DESC')
which is shorthand for
Model.find(:first, :order => 'EntryDate DESC')
Take a look at the documentation for first and find for details.
The Rails documentation seems to be pretty subjective in this instance. Note that .first is the same as find(:first, blah...)
From:http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/Base.html#M002263
"Find first - This will return the first record matched by the options used. These options can either be specific conditions or merely an order. If no record can be matched, nil is returned. Use Model.find(:first, *args) or its shortcut Model.first(*args)."
Digging into the ActiveRecord code, at line 1533 of base.rb (as of 9/5/2009), we find:
def find_initial(options)
options.update(:limit => 1)
find_every(options).first
end
This calls find_every which has the following definition:
def find_every(options)
include_associations = merge_includes(scope(:find, :include), options[:include])
if include_associations.any? && references_eager_loaded_tables?(options)
records = find_with_associations(options)
else
records = find_by_sql(construct_finder_sql(options))
if include_associations.any?
preload_associations(records, include_associations)
end
end
records.each { |record| record.readonly! } if options[:readonly]
records
end
Since it's doing a records.each, I'm not sure if the :limit is just limiting how many records it's returning after the query is run, but it sure looks that way (without digging any further on my own). Seems you should probably just use raw SQL if you're worried about the performance hit on this.
Could just use find_by_sql http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/Base.html#M002267
table.find_by_sql "Select top 1 * from table ORDER BY EntryDate DESC"