Validates uniqueness of :link - ruby-on-rails

I have a url field named link in my model with the following validation
validates_uniqueness_of :link, :case_sensitive => false
When I put "http://stackoverflow.com", it goes well.
Now when I put "https://stackoverflow.com/" (with the trailing slach), this is also accepted as unique.
But I want it to be invalid though there is "/" at the last?

I'd suggest that you normalize your URLs (add/strip trailing slash, etc. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URL_normalization) before storing them in the DB and even before validation.
validates_uniqueness_of :link, :case_sensitive => false
before_validation :normalize_urls
def normalize_urls
self.link.strip!
self.link.gsub!(/\/$/,'')
end
This isn't quite what you were asking for but if you don't store normalized URLs, you'll have to query your DB for all possible variations during validation and that could quickly get expensive.

You could always do a custom validator (by using the validate method, for example).
It might look something like this:
class MyModel < ActiveRecord::Base
validate :link_is_unique
def link_is_unique
#Clean up the current link (removing trailing slashes, etc)
link_to_validate = self.link.strip.gsub(/\/$/,'')
# Get the current count of objects having this link
count = MyModel.count(:conditions => ['link = ?', link_to_validate])
# Add an error to the model if the count is not zero
errors.add_to_base("Link must be unique") unless count == 0
end
end
You could then add other logic to clean up the link (i.e. check for http://, www, etc.)

You can customize validations. See this railscast.

Related

ActiveRecord, validates_uniqueness_of :name not catching non-uniquness if I have a capitalize method

I have a simple capitalize method so that when user submits a new band in the band page it returns it with the first letter capitalized.
Inside my Band class I also have a validates_uniqueness_of :band_name to see if there is already a band with the same entry. See code below:
class Band < ActiveRecord::Base
has_and_belongs_to_many :venues
validates :band_name, :presence => true
before_save :title_case
validates_uniqueness_of :band_name
private
def title_case
self.band_name.capitalize!
end
end
So if I type in someband, it creates it and displays it as Someband. If I type someband again, ActiveRecord sees it as unique and I'll get another Someband. The only way it works is if I type Someband. How would I remedy this situation?
I think what you want to do is this
validates_uniqueness_of :band_name, :case_sensitive :false, allow_blank: false
Take a look at http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/Validations/ClassMethods.html
:case_sensitive - Looks for an exact match. Ignored by non-text
columns (true by default).
The reason your code doesn't work is because validations happen before the before_save callbacks are triggered. Check out the list of ActiveRecord::Callbacks for the order in which things are called.
MZaragoza's answer is a great option for making your validation work regardless of what casing your users might enter. It will prevent things like "someband" and "SomeBand" from being added. I recommend including that as part of your solution.
Another option very similar to the code you already have is to switch to using the before_validation callback:
before_validation :title_case
I highly recommend using the before_validation callbacks instead of before_save callbacks whenever data changes that may be relevant to your validation rules, regardless of what other changes you make. That ensures that you are checking that actual state of the model that you plan to save to the database.
You can use attribute setter instead of before_save callback to capitalize your value without postponing.
def band_name=(value)
self['band_name'] = value && value.mb_chars.capitalize
end

Rails merge duplicates if value is matching or nil

I'm trying to perform a clean up of some data.
I have details in various forms with various duplicates.
models/object.rb
attr_accessible :name, :email, :assoc_id
I want to merge duplicates where the name is matching and the email is either matching or nil, and the assoc_id is either matching or nil.
Not sure how I write the query to bring back groups of objects that are either matching or nil..
i.e.
grouped_objects = Object.group_by{|o| [o.name]}
brings me grouped just on the name
grouped_objects = Object.group_by{|o| [o.name, o.email]}
brings me grouped on name and email.
the issue is that many of the objects have missing data.
Just want a quick and dirty so that, in the absence of other information, I'll merge the records together.
However, if there's someone with a different email, or a different assoc_id I won't merge that. Appreciate that there'll be some false records, but what we'll end up with will be an improvement
How do I write that activerecord query?
grouped_objects = Object.group_by{|o| [o.name, o.email || o.email == nil]}
Hope that makes sense,
I think a better way is too make your model intolerant with duplication. You can prevent duplication directly in the model. So when your controller try to create an object, it checks before if it doesn't exist by some element you decide.
So if you want your object be unique by some element, better do something like that (assuming you want the uniqueness from name and email field) in MyModel.rb :
class MyModel < ActiveRecord::Base
attr_accessible :name, :email, :assoc_id
validates_uniqueness_of :name
validates_uniqueness_of :email, :allow_nil => true # or :allow_blank => true
# Your code...
end
You can also use :case_sensitive => false if you don't want upper case be differenciated from lower case.
Hope this is what you are looking for !

Validations that rely on associations being built in Rails

A Course has many Lessons, and they are chosen by the user with a JS drag-n-drop widget which is working fine.
Here's the relevant part of the params when I choose two lessons:
Parameters: {
"course_lessons_attributes"=>[
{"lesson_id"=>"43", "episode"=>"1"},
{"lesson_id"=>"44", "episode"=>"2"}
]
}
I want to perform some validations on the #course and it's new set of lessons, including how many there are, the sum of the lessons' prices and other stuff. Here's a sample:
Course Model
validate :contains_lessons
def contains_lessons
errors[:course] << 'must have at least one lesson' unless lessons.any?
end
My problem is that the associations between the course and the lessons are not yet built before the course is saved, and that's when I want to call upon them for my validations (using course.lessons).
What's the correct way to be performing custom validations that rely on associations?
Thanks.
looks like you don't need a custom validation here, consider using this one:
validates :lessons, :presence => true
or
validates :lessons, :presence => {:on => :create}
You can't access the course.lessons, but the course_lessons are there, so I ended up doing something like this in the validation method to get access to the array of lessons.
def custom validation
val_lessons = Lesson.find(course_lessons.map(&:lesson_id))
# ...
# check some things about the associated lessons and add errors
# ...
end
I'm still open to there being a better way to do this.

Validate only when

I need to validate a value's presence, but only AFTER the value is populated. When a User is created, it is not required to set a shortcut_url. However, once the user decides to pick a shorcut_url, they cannot remove it, it must be unique, it must exist.
If I use validates_presence_of, since the shortcut_url is not defined, the User isn't created. If I use :allowblank => true, Users can then have "" as a shortcut_url, which doesn't follow the logic of the site.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Here we are always making sure the shortcut_url is unique, but we only make sure it is present if the attribute shortcut_selected is set (or if it was set and now was changed)
class Account
validates_uniqueness_of :shortcut_url
with_options :if => lambda { |o| !o.new_record? or o.shortcut_changed? } do |on_required|
on_required.validates_presence_of :shortcut_url
end
end
You'll need to test to make sure this works well with new records.
Try the :allow_nil option instead of :allow_blank. That'll prevent empty strings from validating.
Edit: Is an empty string being assigned to the shortcut_url when the user is being created, then? Maybe try:
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
validates_presence_of :shortcut_url, :allow_nil => true
def shortcut_url=(value)
super(value.presence)
end
end
try conditional validations, something like:
validates_presence_of :shortcut_url, :if => :shortcut_url_already_exists?
validates_uniqueness_of :shortcut_url, :if => :shortcut_url_already_exists?
def shortcut_url_already_exists?
#shortcut_url_already_exists ||= User.find(self.id).shortcut_url.present?
end

In Rails, How do I validates_uniqueness_of :field with a scope of last 6 months

First Item
I Want to validate a field to make sure it is unique (in the last 6 months) before saving it to the database.
I am thinking I should use validates_uniqueness_of :field, case_sensitive => false, Scope => ...
For my application it only has to be unique if, it was used <6 months ago.
Thinking to compare it to created_at, but don't really know how to go about it.
Second Item
I think I should somehow use .strip to remove any spaces before or after the text that the use may have put in accidentally (I know that these extra spaces are used by default in rails and if they are there can make a filed unique.)
If anyone has any hints on how this should be done correctly I really would appreciate it.
validates_uniqueness_of works by checking if a record already exists with the same value of the given field within the given scope. :scope lets you define the scope (obviously) of the uniqueness; for instance, if I was creating blog software and wanted to only allow a post title to be used once per blog, I could say validates_uniqueness_of :title, :scope => :blog_id -- without the scope, I'd only be allowing each title to be used once across the entire system. :scope won't let you do a complex check, like that which you desire.
What you're probably need to do is create your own validation function to check the uniqueness of the field in question within the given timeframe (code goes within the model):
validate :field_must_be_unique_within_six_months
def field_must_be_unique_within_six_months
return if field.blank?
num_duplicates = self.class.count(:conditions => ["field = ? AND created_at < ?", self.field, 6.months.ago])
if num_duplicates > 0
errors.add(:field, :taken)
end
end
The field_must_be_unique_within_six_months method will work similarly to validates_uniqueness_of, in that it will add an error message if there is already a record with the same given field, but with the added condition that it will also check the date. The validate :field_must_be_unique_within_six_months will add the method to the validation process when a record is saved.
To validate multiple fields at the same time without violating DRY, you could use validates_each to do something like the following:
validates_each :field1, :field2 do |record, attr, value|
if record.class.exists?(["#{attr.to_s} = ? AND created_at < ?", value, 6.months.ago])
errors.add(attr, :taken)
end
end
In the above block, record is the record being validated, attr is the attribute (so field1, field2, etc.) and value is the value of that attribute.
You can probably do something like this:
def validate
errors.add(:field, 'blah blah') if is_used_recently && !has_unique_field?
end
def has_unique_field?
Model.exists?(['field = ? and created_at > ?', self.field, 6.months.ago])
end
def is_used_recently
self.created_at < 6.months.ago || self.new? # i don't know if created_at would be set by this point
end
Alternatively you might want to create a new validation handler, or extend the existing one to pass in a :within option if that's something you're going to be doing often.
To get rid of leading and trailing white space the method you want is 'strip'. You can run this on all your fields by doing something like:
before_validation :clean_up_whitespace
def clean_up_whitespace
self.some_field.strip! # this does the strip in place
end
I hope this helps, let me know if I've made any mistakes!

Resources