I have the following situation
class RecordA
has_many :recordbs
end
class RecordB
belongs_to :recorda
end
RecordA has many recordbs but only one of them may be an active recordb. I need something like myRecordA.active_recordb
If I add a new column like is_active to RecordB, then I have the potential problem of setting two records to is_active = true at the same time.
Which design pattern can I use?
Thanks!
Let's change your example. There's a LectureRoom, with many People and only one Person can be the instructor.
It'd be much easier to just have an attribute in the LectureRoom to indicate which Person is the instructor. That way you don't need to change multiple People records in order to swap the instructor. You just need to update the LectureRoom record.
I would use a named scope to find the active lecturer.
class Person
named_scope :currently_speaking, :conditions => {:active => true}
end
Then I would call that a lecturer in ClassRoom:
class ClassRoom
def lecturer
people.currently_speaking.first
end
end
The real problem is making sure that when you activate someone else, they become the only active person. I might do that like this:
class Person
belongs_to :class_room
before_save :ensure_one_lecturer
def activate!
self.active = true
save
end
def ensure_one_lecturer
if self.active && changed.has_key?(:active)
class_room.lecturer.update_attribute(:active, false)
end
end
end
This way everything is done in a transaction, it's only done if you've changed the active state, and should be pretty easily tested (I have not tested this).
You can define a class method on RecordB for this:
class RecordB < ActiveRecord::Base
def self.active
first(:conditions => { :active => true }
end
end
Related
I have a model RegularOpeningHour(dayOfWeek: integer) that is associated to a model OpeningTime(opens: time, closes: time). RegularOpeningHour has an 1:n relation to OpeningTime, so that a specific day can have many opening times.
(I know that I simply could have one entry with 'opens' and 'closes' included in RegularOpeningHour but for other reasons I need this splitting)
Now I want a open?-Method, that returns whether the business is opened or not. I tried the following in my model file regular_opening_hour.rb:
def open?
RegularOpeningHour.where(dayOfWeek: Time.zone.now.wday).any? { |opening_hour| opening_hour.opening_times.where('? BETWEEN opens AND closes', Time.zone.now).any? }
end
Unforutnately, that doesn't work. Any ideas to solve this?
How about this:
def open?
joins(:opening_times)
.where(dayOfWeek: Time.current.wday)
.where("opens <= :time AND closes >= :time", time: Time.current)
.any?
end
EDIT: Missing ':' in the join
You could create some scopes to make selecting open OpeningTimes and open RegularOpeningHours less clunky. This makes creating the given selection much easier.
class OpeningTime < ApplicationRecord
# ...
belongs_to :regular_opening_hour
def self.open
time = Time.current
where(arel_table[:opens].lteq(time).and(arel_table[:closes].gteq(time)))
end
# ...
end
class RegularOpeningHour < ApplicationRecord
# ...
has_many :opening_times
def self.open
where(
dayOfWeek: Time.current.wday,
id: OpeningTime.select(:regular_opening_hour_id).open,
)
end
# ...
end
def open?
RegularOpeningHour.open.any?
end
Since you have has_many association of RegularOpeningHour to OpeningTime you can use join query like below.:
RegularOpeningHour.joins(:opening_times).where(dayOfWeek: Time.zone.now.wday).where('? BETWEEN opening_times.opens AND opening_times.closes', Time.zone.now).any?
I have two different objects which can belong to one parent object. These child objects can both also belong to each other (many to many). What's the best way to ensure that child objects which belong to each other also belong to the same parent object.
As an example of what I'm trying to do I have a Kingdom which has both many People and Land. The People model would have a custom validate which checks each related Land and error.adds if one has a mismatched kingdom_id. The Land model would have a similar validate.
This seems to work, but when updating it allows the record to save the 'THIS IS AN ERROR' error is in people.errors, however the Land which raised the error has been added to the People collection.
kingdom = Kingdom.create
people = People.create(:kingdom => kingdom)
land = Land.create(:kingdom_id => 999)
people.lands << land
people.save
puts people.errors.inspect # #messages={:base=>["THIS IS AN ERROR"]
puts people.lands.inspect # [#<Land id: 1...
Ideally I'd want the error to cancel the record update. Is there another way I should be going about this, or am I going in the wrong direction entirely?
# Models:
class Kingdom < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :people
has_many :lands
end
class People < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :kingdom
has_and_belongs_to_many :lands
validates :kingdom_id, :presence => true
validates :kingdom, :associated => true
validate :same_kingdom?
private
def same_kingdom?
if self.lands.any?
errors.add(:base, 'THIS IS AN ERROR') unless kingdom_match
end
end
def kingdom_match
self.lands.each do |l|
if l.kingdom_id != self.kingdom_id
return false
end
end
end
end
class Land < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :kingdom
has_and_belongs_to_many :people
end
Firstly, the validation won't prevent the record from being added to the model's unpersisted collection. It will prevent the revised collection from being persisted to the database. So the model will be in an invalid state, and flagged as such with the appropriate errors. To see this, you can simply reload the people object.
You also have an error in your logic - the kingdom_match method will never return true even if no invalid kingdom_id's are found. You should add a line to fix this:
def kingdom_match
self.lands.each do |l|
return false if l.kingdom_id != self.kingdom_id
end
true
end
And you can make this validation a bit more concise and skip the kingdom_match method entirely:
def same_kingdom?
if self.lands.any?{|l| l.kingdom_id != self.kingdom_id }
errors.add(:base, 'THIS IS AN ERROR')
end
end
I am pretty new to rails (and development) and have a requirement to create a change log. Let's say you have an employees table. On that table you have an employee reference number, a first name, and a last name. When either the first name or last name changes, I need to log it to a table somewhere for later reporting. I only need to log the change, so if employee ref 1 changes from Bill to Bob, then I need to put the reference number and first name into a table. The change table can have all the columns that mnight change, but most only be populated with the reference number and the changed field. I don't need the previous value either, just the new one. hope that makes sense.
Looked at gems such as paper trail, but they seem very complicated for what I need. I don't ever need to manipulate the model or move versions etc, I just need to track which fields have changed, when, and by whom.
I'd appreciate your recommendations.
If you insist on building your own changelog, based on your requirements you can do so using a few callbacks. First create your log table:
def up
create_table :employee_change_logs do |t|
t.references :employee
# as per your spec - copy all column definitions from your employees table
end
end
In your Employee model:
class Employee < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :employee_change_logs
before_update :capture_changed_columns
after_update :log_changed_columns
# capture the changes before the update occurs
def capture_changed_columns
#changed_columns = changed
end
def log_changed_columns
return if #changed_columns.empty?
log_entry = employee_change_logs.build
#changed_columns.each{|c| log_entry.send(:"#{c}=", self.send(c))}
log_entry.save!
end
end
I recommend the gem vestal_versions.
To version an ActiveRecord model, simply add versioned to your class like so:
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
versioned
validates_presence_of :first_name, :last_name
def name
"#{first_name} #{last_name}"
end
end
And use like this:
#user.update_attributes(:last_name => "Jobs", :updated_by => "Tyler")
#user.version # => 2
#user.versions.last.user # => "Tyler"
The first thing we did was put an around filter in the application controller. This was how I get the current_employee into the employee model, which was the challenge, especially for a newbie like me!
around_filter :set_employee_for_log, :if => Proc.new { #current_account &&
#current_account.log_employee_changes? && #current_employee }
def set_employee_for_log
Thread.current[:current_employee] = #current_employee.id
begin
yield
ensure
Thread.current[:current_employee ] = nil
end
end
end
Next, in the employee model I defined which fields I was interested in monitoring
CHECK_FIELDS = ['first_name', 'last_name', 'middle_name']
then I added some hooks to actually capture the changes IF logging is enabled at the account level
before_update :capture_changed_columns
after_update :log_changed_columns, :if => Proc.new { self.account.log_employee_changes? }
def capture_changed_columns
#changed_columns = changed
#changes = changes
end
def log_changed_columns
e = EmployeeChangeLog.new
Employee::CHECK_FIELDS.each do |field|
if self.send("#{field}_changed?")
e.send("#{field}=", self.send(field))
end
end
if e.changed?
e.update_attribute(:account_id, self.account.id)
e.update_attribute(:employee_id, self.id)
e.update_attribute(:employee_ref, self.employee_ref)
e.update_attribute(:user_id, Thread.current[:current_employee])
e.save
else return
end
end
And that;s it. If the account enables it, the app keeps an eye on specific fields and then all changes to those fields are logged to a table, creating an simple audit trail.
I currently have the following controller method in a Rails app:
def index
#entries = []
#entries << QuickPost.where(:user_id.in => current_user.followees.map(&:ff_id) << current_user.id)
#entries << Infographic.where(:user_id.in => current_user.followees.map(&:ff_id) << current_user.id)
#entries.flatten!.sort!{ |a,b| b.created_at <=> a.created_at }
#entries = Kaminari.paginate_array(#entries).page(params[:page]).per(10)
end
I realise this is terribly inefficient so I'm looking for a better way to achieve the same goal but I'm new to MongoDB and wondering what the best solution would be.
Is there a way to make a sorted limit() query or a MapReduce function in MongoDB across two collections? I'm guessing there isn't but it would certainly save a lot of effort in this case!
I'm currently thinking I have two options:
Create a master 'StreamEntry' type model and have both Infographic and QuickPost inherit from that so that both data types are stored on the same collection. The issue with this is that I have existing data and I don't know how to move it from the old collections to the new.
Create a separate Stream/ActivityStream model using something like Streama (https://github.com/christospappas/streama). The issues I can see here is that it would require a fair bit of upfront work and due to privacy settings and editing/removal of items the stream would need to be rebuilt often.
Are there options I have overlooked? Am I over-engineering with the above options? What sort of best practices are there for this type of situation?
Any info would be greatly appreciated, I'm really liking MongoDB so far and want to avoid falling into pitfalls like this in the future. Thanks.
The inherit solution is fine, but when the inherited models are close.
For example :
class Post < BasePost
field :body, type: String
end
class QuickPost < BasePost
end
class BasePost
field :title, type: String
field :created_at, type: Time
end
But when the models grows, or are too different, your second solution is better.
class Activity
include Mongoid::Document
paginates_per 20
field :occurred_at, :type => Time, :default => nil
validates_presence_of :occurred_at
belongs_to :user
belongs_to :quick_post
belongs_to :infographic
default_scope desc(:occurred_at)
end
and for example :
class QuickPost
include Mongoid::Document
has_one :activity, :dependent => :destroy
end
The dependant destroy make the activity destroyed when the QuickPost is destroyed. You can use has_many and adapt.
And to create the activities, you can create an observer :
class ActivityObserver < Mongoid::Observer
observe :quick_post, :infographic
def after_save(record)
if record.is_a? QuickPost
if record.new_record?
activity = record.build_activity
activity.user = record.user
# stuff when it is new
else
activity = record.activity
end
activity.occurred_at = record.occurred_at
# common stuff
activity.save
end
end
end
I'm having some issues in RoR with some model methods I am setting. I'm trying to build a method on one model, with an argument that gets supplied a default value (nil). The ideal is that if a value is passed to the method, it will do something other than the default behavior. Here is the setup:
I currently have four models: Market, Deal, Merchant, and BusinessType
Associations look like this:
class Deal
belongs_to :market
belongs_to :merchant
end
class Market
has_many :deals
has_many :merchants
end
class Merchant
has_many :deals
belongs_to :market
belongs_to :business_type
end
class BusinessType
has_many :merchants
has_many :deals, :through => :merchants
end
I am trying to pull some data based on Business Type (I have greatly simplified the return, for the sake of brevity):
class BusinessType
def revenue(market=nil)
if market.nil?
return self.deals.sum('price')
else
return self.deals(:conditions => ['market_id = ?',market]).sum('price')
end
end
end
So, if I do something like:
puts BusinessType.first.revenue
I get the expected result, that is the sum of the price of all deals associated with that business type. However, when I do this:
puts BusinessType.first.revenue(1)
It still returns the sum price of all deals, NOT the sum price of all deals from market 1. I've also tried:
puts BusinessType.first.revenue(market=1)
Also with no luck.
What am I missing?
Thanks!
Try this:
class BusinessType
def revenue(market=nil)
if market.nil?
return self.deals.all.sum(&:price)
else
return self.deals.find(:all, :conditions => ['market_id = ?',market]).sum(&:price)
end
end
end
That should work for you, or at least it did for some basic testing I did first.
As I have gathered, this is because the sum method being called is on enumerable, not the sum method from ActiveRecord as you might have expected.
Note:
I just looked a bit further, and noticed you can still use your old code with a smaller tweak than the one I noted:
class BusinessType
def revenue(market=nil)
if market.nil?
return self.deals.sum('price')
else
return self.deals.sum('price', :conditions => ['market_id = ?', market])
end
end
end
Try this!
class BusinessType
def revenue(market=nil)
if market.nil?
return self.deals.sum(:price)
else
return self.deals.sum(:price,:conditions => ['market_id = ?',market])
end
end
end
You can refer this link for other functions. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ruby_on_Rails/ActiveRecord/Calculations