All of the tutorials I've seen so far for RoR have shown me generating models like:
rails generate User name:string placeofbirth:string
This generates a class for the model, and only actually references an attribute if I apply a validation of some kind.
So my question is, how do I use a 'code' first approach when creating my models. Or is it the rails way to just right down on paper the attributes you want, run the generate command with each attribute you want and it's type, then run the rake db:migrate command?
I'd love some more proven patterns on this subject because so far the way I've seen seems too empty.
Yes, this is the rails way- migration comes first and generates the code and the database- and the model class inspects the database to see what fields are there and make accessible via methods.
You can do gem install annotate_models if you want to get some comments in your model class with the attribute names and types.
See here for an example: https://github.com/ctran/annotate_models
Rails uses an active record pattern for models which basically means that a model object will automatically map each DB column to an attribute so you don't have to specify all attributes in the model. It's a feature, but I agree that it might not be perfect for everyone. If you're using Rails 3 it should be easy to use another ORM of your choice if ActiveRecord's approach doesn't suit you. Here are some alternative ORMs that you could use.
Usually when you are developing some database backed web application, you know the database design(name of the tables, name of the columns in those tables and associations between different tables) beforehand.
Rails, as mentioned by maarons in his answer, uses Active Record pattern. Your models are classes that represent a table in your database, an instance of your model class a row in that table and different attributes of an object represent values under different columns in the same table.
When you create a model, usually, you are creating a class that represents one of the tables in your database. And while you are creating a model, you are also going to create a table in your database. That means knowing the name of the table and columns within that table.
So to answer your question, you must know all the columns, required for the time being, that will be in your tables. And hence available as attribute methods for your model objects. You specify these columns to added in the table in the migration generated by rails generator while generating this model. This is what usually everyone does.
You can take a code first approach by creating a class, without running the rails model generator,under app/models/ but not inheriting it from ActiveRecord::Base. As you move forward in your development, you can generate migrations by $ rails generate migration MigrationName and creating table and adding columns using [add_column][2]to that table as required. Once you have created a table for this model, you will have to inherit that model from ActiveRecord::Base so that you can get all the Rails magic in your application.
Related
I've been reading about Rails Migrations to help me start building a rails project.
I'm a bit confused on the generation of the files in db/migrate.
The way I've been designing my application is by starting with the models... outlining all of the objects that I'm going to have in the system as best I can. I would like to generate the migration files FROM these models automatically with the rails migration generator.
Yes, I know "creating migrations manually is easy." And I know I could do it manually, but what I don't understand is why the tool is separated from the pre-created models.
Based on my understanding from the article and other migration questions on SO, I can generate a migration like so:
rails generate migration SomeObj field:string some_other_field:integer
What I don't get is why I need to pass in the fields when my model already exists for SomeObj? Couldn't Rails detect it from the some_obj.rb and create the migration from there?
Also, when I have a more complex model, with has_many, belongs_to, and has_to_and_belongs_to_many relationships, it would be really nice if it autocreated the JOIN tables and fields with the correct names (e.g. foreign_obj_id, foreign_obj_ids)
In a previous project I didn't have to deal with migrations because I used Mongo+Mongoid - and collections were automatically generated due to the nature of how Mongo works (collections that doesn't exist get automatically created upon inserting or updating). Now with this Rails app I'm using Postgres (but I'm sure the same thing would happen with MySQL or any other relational database).
Anyway, is there no helper for this kind of thing? Do I have to create all these migrations manually?
You've got this backwards. You need to build your migrations first, and your models second. Migrations advance the state of the database. Your models reflect the current state of the database. There is not a 1-to-1 mapping of models to migrations.
I would like to generate the migration files FROM these models automatically with the rails migration generator.
Can't be done.
You use rails generate migration to generate the migration, which, almost as a side-effect, generates a stub model file. You cannot use your existing model file to generate the model's migration, because the model doesn't contain any information about the actual columns that make up the model. Rails would have to extract and imply all the necessary information from your associations/validations, and even then it would get most of the columns wrong.
Also, when I have a more complex model,... it would be really nice if it autocreated the JOIN tables and fields with the correct names
Again, you can't. You're responsible for defining your database schema, and the way you do so is by building migrations. You can do so manually, or via rails generate, but the process you should be following is building your migrations first, and your models second.
By way of example, here is a complete model, ready for production:
class MyModel < ActiveRecord::Base
end
That model definition might wrap a table that contains 10 columns or 1000 columns; you (and Rails) have absolutely no way of knowing based on the model definition.
Here's another model, which contains at least one column, but again, you have no way of knowing what kind of column:
class MyModel < ActiveRecord::Base
validates :code, presence: true, uniqueness: true
end
Is code a string or a number? Should there be an index on the column? There is absolutely no way of knowing.
I have a need for a certain model to contain a reference to a document. Most of the model could be stored in postgres. The model is for a "level" in a game. I'd like to store the level data itself inside of a document, which makes more sense than making a complex tree in sql.
I am able to use postgres with mongoid installed; however, after installing the mongoid gem I seem to only be able to scaffold mongoid (non active record) documents.
The problem is that I have references to other tables, and I don't neccesarily know how to link that up within a mongoid model.
Questions:
How can I force scaffolding to occur with active record instead of mongoid or vice versa. Edit: partly answered here: Using Active Record generators after Mongoid installation? (2nd answer works, but I don't know how to go back and forth easily)
Is there an easy way to reference a document from an active record model (I know the documentation said don't mix them, but it is ideal for what I am trying to do).
If it is not possible to mix them, then how should I make a document be referenced from a postgres/active record table. In other words how can I get both pieces of data at the same time?
Thanks!
Regarding your first question, the ideal solution would be something along the lines of the first answer in the referenced post. However, instead of a generating a migration, generate a model instead. So when you want an Active Record model simply run:
rails g active_record:model
As for your second and third questions, to associate an Active Record model with a Mongoid document simply store the ObjectId as a string in the model. Then, when you get retrieve a record make a new ObjectId out of the string and use that to query for the related document.
You can create object ids out of the strings like this:
BSON::ObjectId.from_string("object_id_string")
There isn't really an easy way to easily follow intra-orm relations when mixing and matching between ActiveRecord and Mongoid though so I'm afraid that will have to be done via Ruby code.
The models you define in rails either extend one ORM's base class or the other and they don't know about one another. There may be projects out there that act as a layer on top of these ORMs but I am not familiar with any that exist at the moment.
I have a database with several tables, each one containing columns that may not follow the rails naming convention.
Is there a tool existing to create the ActiveRecord models from those tables or do I need to do this at hand, one by one ?
If I create the ActiveRecord model for one table by hand, would this be ok though ? (no hidden DB identifier needed on top of it ?)
UPDATE
I have tried magicmodels but cannot have it working (it has been a while since it was last modified) and does not seem to be compatible with rails 3.2
What I tried then:
- change the database.yml so it points towards my existing Postresql database
- manually create my models such as:
# app/models/user.rb
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
end
- run the console and tried
User.all
=> I end up with an error saying that contant User was not initialized.
Doesn't the console import the model automatically ? Or is that linked to the fact the configuration I did is not correct ?
http://magicmodels.rubyforge.org/magic_model_generator/ may be what you're looking for. I haven't heard of many tools that give this functionality, though, as many rails apps are designed from scratch instead of given a legacy db and then creating the models from that.
You can easily create models by hand and map them to pretty much any db table. Models have a "set_table_name 'name'" that lets you over-write the rails default convention of a single model mapping to a plural db table name.
ActiveRecord works OK with legacy databases. I did a back-end system that didn't use Rails with ActiveRecord as my ORM. "ActiveRecord Without Rails" got me started. "Using ActiveRecord outside Rails" is also useful. Search Google for "use activerecord without rails" and you'll find even more.
You don't need a fully fleshed out model. Just use a base class for the tables you want and ActiveRecord will query the database for what it needs. It won't know about table relationships, but for general queries it'll do fine. Build the relationships as you go and need them.
I'm working through the Ruby on Rails tutorial and just made a Comment model with three properties.
rails generate model Comment commenter:string body:text post:references
It generated an ActiveRecord class with post but not commenter and body.
class Comment < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :post
end
Why doesn't rails formally define the non-reference properties anywhere other than the DB migration scripts?
Rails dynamically loads attributes - specifically, the names of the columns and their types - based on the database schema. There is no need to define or declare them in your models. For apps running in production, it does this once, at load time. For development, it will reload them as often as every request, but only loads them when each model is used.
Rails does not infer other things from your database, though. For instance, if you were to place a unique index on a name column, it would not automatically add a validates_uniqueness_of :name to your model. Of course, the database would still enforce this constraint when you save the record, causing an exception to be raised should the name field contain a duplicate value. The recommendation, in this case, is to do both.
Why doesn't rails formally define the non-reference properties anywhere other than the DB migration scripts?
Well, where do you need them "defined" anyways? Migrations are the only place where these attributes matter coz its responsibility is to create database tables with those attributes.
If you do a scaffold on comments with similar parameters, it would also generate the views and it would be using the attributes. They don't need to be "defined" as such anywhere else.
The short answer to your question is "no". Even the migration is not a definitive place to look as there might be many migrations related to a model.
However, you may have a look at the generated "db/schema.rb" which is an aggregation of all migrations. It contains the schema definition of all activerecord models. This maybe your best bet.
Additionally, you may want to use the https://github.com/ctran/annotate_models plugin that inserts a comment in your model to help you keep track of all your model's attributes.
I have just started Rails and have a basic question.
I need to add customer properties(like email id etc) so that the Rails app can read them at runtime. How can I do this ?
Can I add them to development.rb and if so how can I read it ?
In java I would have created a properties file and read it from my app.
thank you,
firemonkey
Are you trying to do store and load configuration settings?
It's easy to store configuration settings in a yaml file and load them with initializers - loads better than littering your environment files.
This Railscast: http://railscasts.com/episodes/85-yaml-configuration-file shows you how.
I'm not sure exactly what you are asking. I'm guessing you want an initial set of data in the database that you can access when you actually run the app? If that is so check out this other SO question How (and whether) to populate rails application with initial data
It's a little unclear exactly what you're trying to do, but it sounds like maybe you have a model called Customer and you would like to add some attributes to it, such as email address, id, and so on?
Basically, with Active Record you don't need to do anything special to add a simple attribute (like a string or an integer). Just add a field called "email_address" to your customers table in the database, and all of your Customer objects will automagically get "email_address" and "email_address=" methods (not to mention the Customer class itself getting "find_by_email_address" and other useful methods as well). If you are adding a field containing another model, it's a bit more complicated - add a "something_id" field to the table, and an association to the class definition (eg, "has_one :something"). For more information, see the ActiveRecord api documentation.
You don't have to use any particular means to add the field to your database, but you might want to consider Migrations. Migrations are a convenient way to keep your schema versioned and synchronized across multiple machines.
If you are building your model right now, there's a short cut built in to the generator to add fields. Instead of just saying...
script/generate scaffold customer
...you can say...
script/generate scaffold customer email:string name:string badge_number:integer
...and it will generate all the appropriate fields in your migration, as well as adding them to your generated views.