Search Results

Search found 1416 results on 57 pages for 'activerecord'.

Page 20/57 | < Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >

  • autosave options in ruby on rails

    - by fregas
    is there a way to turn OFF autosave in rails? I dont' want modifications to an association to automatically save to the database UNTIL i call save on the parent object. some_parent.some_children << child #should not save, just adds to the association! some_parent.save #now parent and children are saved! It this possible or am i barking up the wrong tree?

    Read the article

  • Problems with :uniq => true/Distinct option in a has_many_through association w/ named scope (Rails)

    - by MikeH
    I had to make some tweaks to my app to add new functionality, and my changes seem to have broken the :uniq option that was previously working perfectly. Here's the set up: #User.rb has_many :products, :through = :seasons, :uniq = true has_many :varieties, :through = :seasons, :uniq = true #product.rb has_many :seasons has_many :users, :through = :seasons, :uniq = true has_many :varieties #season.rb belongs_to :product belongs_to :variety belongs_to :user named_scope :by_product_name, :joins = :product, :order = 'products.name' #variety.rb belongs_to :product has_many :seasons has_many :users, :through = :seasons, :uniq = true First I want to show you the previous version of the view that is now breaking, so that we have a baseline to compare. The view below is pulling up products and varieties that belong to the user. In both versions below, I've assigned the same products/varieties to the user so the logs will looking at the exact same use case. #user/show <% @user.products.each do |product| %> <%= link_to product.name, product %> <% @user.varieties.find_all_by_product_id(product.id).each do |variety| %> <%=h variety.name.capitalize %></p> <% end %> <% end %> This works. It displays only one of each product, and then displays each product's varieties. In the log below, product ID 1 has 3 associated varieties. And product ID 43 has none. Here's the log output for the code above: Product Load (11.3ms) SELECT DISTINCT `products`.* FROM `products` INNER JOIN `seasons` ON `products`.id = `seasons`.product_id WHERE ((`seasons`.user_id = 1)) ORDER BY name, products.name Product Columns (1.8ms) SHOW FIELDS FROM `products` Variety Columns (1.9ms) SHOW FIELDS FROM `varieties` Variety Load (0.7ms) SELECT DISTINCT `varieties`.* FROM `varieties` INNER JOIN `seasons` ON `varieties`.id = `seasons`.variety_id WHERE (`varieties`.`product_id` = 1) AND ((`seasons`.user_id = 1)) ORDER BY name Variety Load (0.5ms) SELECT DISTINCT `varieties`.* FROM `varieties` INNER JOIN `seasons` ON `varieties`.id = `seasons`.variety_id WHERE (`varieties`.`product_id` = 43) AND ((`seasons`.user_id = 1)) ORDER BY name Ok, so everything above is the previous version which was working great. In the new version, I added some columns to the join table called seasons, and made a bunch of custom methods that query those columns. As a result, I made the following changes to the view code that you saw above so that I could access those methods on the seasons model: <% @user.seasons.by_product_name.each do |season| %> <%= link_to season.product.name, season.product %> #Note: I couldn't get this loop to work at all, so I settled for the following: #<% @user.varieties.find_all_by_product_id(product.id).each do |variety| %> <%=h season.variety.name.capitalize %> <%end%> <%end%> Here's the log output for that: SQL (0.9ms) SELECT count(DISTINCT "products".id) AS count_products_id FROM "products" INNER JOIN "seasons" ON "products".id = "seasons".product_id WHERE (("seasons".user_id = 1)) Season Load (1.8ms) SELECT "seasons".* FROM "seasons" INNER JOIN "products" ON "products".id = "seasons".product_id WHERE ("seasons".user_id = 1) AND ("seasons".user_id = 1) ORDER BY products.name Product Load (0.7ms) SELECT * FROM "products" WHERE ("products"."id" = 43) ORDER BY products.name CACHE (0.0ms) SELECT "seasons".* FROM "seasons" INNER JOIN "products" ON "products".id = "seasons".product_id WHERE ("seasons".user_id = 1) AND ("seasons".user_id = 1) ORDER BY products.name Product Load (0.4ms) SELECT * FROM "products" WHERE ("products"."id" = 1) ORDER BY products.name Variety Load (0.4ms) SELECT * FROM "varieties" WHERE ("varieties"."id" = 2) ORDER BY name CACHE (0.0ms) SELECT * FROM "products" WHERE ("products"."id" = 1) ORDER BY products.name Variety Load (0.4ms) SELECT * FROM "varieties" WHERE ("varieties"."id" = 8) ORDER BY name CACHE (0.0ms) SELECT * FROM "products" WHERE ("products"."id" = 1) ORDER BY products.name Variety Load (0.4ms) SELECT * FROM "varieties" WHERE ("varieties"."id" = 7) ORDER BY name CACHE (0.0ms) SELECT * FROM "products" WHERE ("products"."id" = 43) ORDER BY products.name CACHE (0.0ms) SELECT count(DISTINCT "products".id) AS count_products_id FROM "products" INNER JOIN "seasons" ON "products".id = "seasons".product_id WHERE (("seasons".user_id = 1)) CACHE (0.0ms) SELECT "seasons".* FROM "seasons" INNER JOIN "products" ON "products".id = "seasons".product_id WHERE ("seasons".user_id = 1) AND ("seasons".user_id = 1) ORDER BY products.name CACHE (0.0ms) SELECT * FROM "products" WHERE ("products"."id" = 1) ORDER BY products.name CACHE (0.0ms) SELECT * FROM "products" WHERE ("products"."id" = 1) ORDER BY products.name CACHE (0.0ms) SELECT * FROM "varieties" WHERE ("varieties"."id" = 8) ORDER BY name I'm having two problems: (1) The :uniq option is not working for products. Three distinct versions of the same product are displaying on the page. (2) The :uniq option is not working for varieties. I don't have validation set up on this yet, and if the user enters the same variety twice, it does appear on the page. In the previous working version, this was not the case. The result I need is that only one product for any given ID displays, and all varieties associated with that ID display along with such unique product. One thing that sticks out to me is the sql call in the most recent log output. It's adding 'count' to the distinct call. I'm not sure why it's doing that or whether it might be an indication of an issue. I found this unresolved lighthouse ticket that seems like it could potentially be related, but I'm not sure if it's the same issue: https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/2189-count-breaks-sqlite-has_many-through-association-collection-with-named-scope I've tried a million variations on this and can't get it working. Any help is much appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Disabling model's after_find only when called from certain controllers

    - by Lynn C
    I have an after_find callback in a model, but I need to disable it in a particular controller action e.g. def index @people = People.find(:all) # do something here to disable after_find()? end def show @people = People.find(:all) # after_find() should still be called here! end What is the best way to do it? Can I pass something in to .find to disable all/particular callbacks? Can I somehow get the controller name in the model and not execute the callback based on the controller name (I don't like this)..? Help!

    Read the article

  • Why is my new ID always "1"

    - by normalocity
    I have a parent-child relationship between two objects. Parent :has_many :children Child :belongs_to :parent When creating a new parent, in the same controller, I'm creating the child. @mom = Parent.new @child = Child.new @mom.children << @child That all seems to go okay, but this parent has one more attribute - this parent has a favorite child @mom.favorite_child = @child Seems like this should work, except let's say that this is the 61st child in the database, so it gets an ID of 61 (and I know this is happening, because when I check the database, the child record has an ID of 61). For some reason, when I assign the @child to the parent's "favorite_child" attribute, "favorite_child" gets set to "1" - when I need it to be set to "61". Clues?

    Read the article

  • I need some help with either my SQL or my PHP I do not know which...

    - by sico87
    Hello I am creating a CMS and some of the functionality of it that the images that are within the content are managable. I currently trying to display a table that shows the the content title and then the associated images, ideally I would like a layout similar to this, Content Title Image 1 Image 2 Image 3 Content Title 2 Image 1 Image 2 Content Title 3 Image 1 The SQL the returns the data is actually formed using Codeigniters Active Record class, function getAllContentImages() { $this->db->select('*'); $this->db->from('contentImagesTable'); $this->db->join('contentTable', 'contentTable.contentId = contentImagesTable.contentId'); $this->db->join('categoryTable', 'categoryTable.categoryId = contentTable.categoryId'); $query = $this->db->get(); return $query->result_array(); } The array that is returned is looks like this, I have cut the size down for readability. Array ( [0] => Array ( [contentImageId] => 25 [contentImageName] => green.png [contentImageType] => .png [contentImagePath] => /var/www/bangmarketing.bang/media/uploads/contentImages/2/green.png [isHeadlineImage] => 1 [contentImageDateUploaded] => 1265222654 [contentId] => 2 [dashboardUserId] => 0 [contentTitle] => sadsadsadassss [contentAbstract] => <p>Pllllleeeeeeeaaaaasssssseeeeee Work</p> [contentBody] => <p>Please work :-( please</p> [contentOnline] => 0 [contentAllowComments] => 0 [contentDateCreated] => 1265124038 [categoryId] => 1 [categoryTitle] => blogsss [categoryAbstract] => <p>asdsdsadasdsadfdsgdgdsgdsgssssssssssss</p> [categorySlug] => blog [categoryIsSpecial] => 0 [categoryOnline] => 1 [categoryDateCreated] => 1266588327 ) [1] => Array ( [contentImageId] => 28 [contentImageName] => yellow.png [contentImageType] => .png [contentImagePath] => /var/www/bangmarketing.bang/media/uploads/contentImages/7/yellow.png [isHeadlineImage] => 1 [contentImageDateUploaded] => 1265388055 [contentId] => 7 [dashboardUserId] => 0 [contentTitle] => Another Blog [contentAbstract] => <p>This is another blog and it is shit becuase this does not work</p> [contentBody] => <p>ioasfihfududfhdufhuishdfiudshfiudhsfiuhdsiufhusdhfuids</p> [contentOnline] => 1 [contentAllowComments] => 0 [contentDateCreated] => 1265388034 [categoryId] => 1 [categoryTitle] => blogsss [categoryAbstract] => <p>asdsdsadasdsadfdsgdgdsgdsgssssssssssss</p> [categorySlug] => blog [categoryIsSpecial] => 0 [categoryOnline] => 1 [categoryDateCreated] => 1266588327 ) [2] => Array ( [contentImageId] => 33 [contentImageName] => portaski.jpg [contentImageType] => .jpg [contentImagePath] => /var/www/bangmarketing.bang/media/uploads/contentImages/11/portaski.jpg [isHeadlineImage] => 1 [contentImageDateUploaded] => 1265714175 [contentId] => 11 [dashboardUserId] => 0 [contentTitle] => Portaski - new product and brand launch by Bang [contentAbstract] => <p>Bang's experience in new product development has helped launch PortaSki &ndash; the pocket-sized device which is set to revolutionise skiing.</p> [contentBody] => <p>After developing Portaski's brand identity and positioning, Bang re-designed the product and its packaging ahead of launch in late 2008.</p> <p>A media and PR strategy was devised and implemented using Bang's close relationship with two of the UK's most influential organisations in the Advertising and Media Buying industries. On-line advertising was supported with editorial reviews in the UK's leading broadsheets and tabloids, which combined with pin-point HTML direct mail to drive consumers to the new e-commerce site.</p> <p>Impressive month-on-month growth has been achieved since launch, and the direct marketing activity resulted in an unprecedented 2.71% of targets going on-line to purchase a PortaSki.</p> <p>For further information visit <a href="http://www.portaski.com" target="_blank">www.portaski.com</a></p> [contentOnline] => 1 [contentAllowComments] => 0 [contentDateCreated] => 1265718184 [categoryId] => 1 [categoryTitle] => blogsss [categoryAbstract] => <p>asdsdsadasdsadfdsgdgdsgdsgssssssssssss</p> [categorySlug] => blog [categoryIsSpecial] => 0 [categoryOnline] => 1 [categoryDateCreated] => 1266588327 ) [3] => Array ( [contentImageId] => 26 [contentImageName] => housingplus.jpg [contentImageType] => .jpg [contentImagePath] => /var/www/bangmarketing.bang/media/uploads/contentImages/5/housingplus.jpg [isHeadlineImage] => 1 [contentImageDateUploaded] => 1265284989 [contentId] => 5 [dashboardUserId] => 0 [contentTitle] => Bang launches Housing Plus [contentAbstract] => <p>Bang has launched Housing Plus, the new brand for the Central Borders Housing Group, along with new sub-brands Property Care and SSHA.</p> [contentBody] => <p>The Midlands based Group, with turnover in excess of &pound;21M, appointed Bang in 2008 following an open pitch of over 40 agencies. Bang's work began with an extensive marketing research strategy that challenged the Group's former positioning and brand structure.</p> <p>The research unveiled that the housing sector demanded a values-led Group. This led Bang to develop the brave &lsquo;Together for the Right Reasons' positioning for Housing Plus.</p> <p>Chris Garratt, Marketing Director at Bang explained "The housing sector has witnessed wholesale change in recent years. Much to tenant's dismay, many associations and Groups appear to be losing touch with their roots, we wanted to develop a Group for associations who place principles at the heart of their corporate strategy".</p> <p>The repositioned sub-brands also play an important role in the Group's revised brand by highlighting Housing Plus' willingness to embrace and nurture individual identities. Chris Garratt continued "By adopting a &lsquo;house of brands' hierarchy from the outset, Housing Plus has sent out a strong message to prospective strategic partners".</p> <p>Bang handled all aspects of work for the redevelopment of the three brands, including research, brand creation, naming, positioning, internal branding and communications, advertising, the brand launches, building the brands' on-line presence and the creation of a powerful brand film &ndash; which is already attracting significant interest from across the sector.</p> [contentOnline] => 1 [contentAllowComments] => 0 [contentDateCreated] => 1265285940 [categoryId] => 8 [categoryTitle] => News [categoryAbstract] => <p>The world at Bang Marketing moves fast, keep up to date w [categorySlug] => news [categoryIsSpecial] => 0 [categoryOnline] => 1 [categoryDateCreated] => 1265283717 ) I need a way that I can get all the content images associated with the same content title in one group and then display under the content title. Can anyone help?

    Read the article

  • Rails 2.3 session

    - by Sam Kong
    Hi, I am developing a rails 2.3.2 app. I need to keep session_id for an order record, retrieve it and finally delete the session_id when the order is completed. It worked when I used cookies as session store but it doesn't for active_record store. (I restarted my browser, so no cache issue.) I know rails 2.3 implements lazy session load. I read some info about it but am still confused. Can somebody clarify how I use session_id for such a case? What I am doing is... A user make an order going through several pages. There is no sign-up, neither login. So I keep session_id in the order record so that no other user can access the order. @order = Order.last :conditions = {:id = params[:id], :session_id = session[:session_id] } When the order is finished, I set nil to session_id column. How would you implement such a case in lazy session(and active_record store) environment? Thanks. Sam

    Read the article

  • rails: include statement with two ON conditions

    - by Markus
    Hi, I have tree tables books bookmarks users where there is a n to m relation from books to users trough bookmarks. Im looking for a query, where I get all the books of a certain user including the bookmarks. If no bookmarks are there, there should be a null included... my sql statement looks like: SELECT * FROM `books` LEFT OUTER JOIN `bookmarks ` ON bookmarks.book_id = books.id AND bookmarks.user_id = ? In rails I only know the :include statement, but how can I add the second bookmarks.user_id = ? statement in the ON section of this query? if I put it in the :conditions part, no null results would get returned! Thanks! Markus

    Read the article

  • How to cache queries in Rails across multiple requests

    - by m.u.sheikh
    I want to cache query results so that the same results are fetched "for more than one request" till i invalidate the cache. For instance, I want to render a sidebar which has all the pages of a book, much like the index of a book. As i want to show it on every page of the book, I have to load it on every request. I can cache the rendered sidebar index using action caching, but i also want to actually cache the the query results which are used to generate the html for the sidebar. Does Rails provide a way to do it? How can i do it?

    Read the article

  • Next, Previous Records Using Named Scope

    - by keruilin
    I have a model for which I want to retrieve the next record(s) and previous record(s). I want to do this via a named_scope on the model, and also pass in as an argument the X number of next/previous records to return. For example, let's say I have 5 records: Record1 Record2 Record3 Record4 Record5 I want to be able to call Model.previous or Model.previous(1) to return Record2. Similarly, I want to be able to call Model.next or Model.next(1) to return Record4. As another example I want to be able to call Model.previous(2) to return Record3. I think you get the idea. How can I accomplish this?

    Read the article

  • Storing old previous year data in Rails?

    - by Millisami
    Hi, I'm developing an app which has massive data entries. Its like Campaign which has attrs like rate_per_sq_feet, start_date, end_date. i.e it will have max date of around 30 days. Once the campaign is finished, its done and another starts. Now I'm confused that how to store those campaigns as reports so that its not accessed regurlarly. What I mean is to store in such a way that it will act like report on later years to come? Its something like fiscal year on accounts where the previous year reports are stored with all the calculations done so that when retrieved later, all the algorithms and calculations shouldn't be performed. Something like frozen data??

    Read the article

  • Query eror handling in CodeIgniter

    - by Sajith S Narayanan
    Hi All, I am trying to execute an MySql query using the CI Active methods. If the query is malformed, then CI invokes internal server error 500 and quits without processing the next steps.. I need to roll back all the other queries processed before that error statement, and the roll back is also not happening.. can you help pls. The code snippets is as below: function dbInsertInformationToDB($data_array) { $returnID = ""; $uniqueDataArray = array(); // I prepare a array of values here $uniqueTableList = filter_unique_tables($data_array[2]); $this->db->trans_begin(); // inserting is done here // when there is a query error in $this->db->insert().. it is not rolling back the previous query executed foreach($uniqueTableList as $table_name) { $uniqueDataArray = filterDataArray($data_array,$table_name,2); $this->db->insert($table_name,$uniqueDataArray); if ($this->db->_error_message()) { $error = "I am caught!!"; } $returnID = $this->db->affected_rows(); } if ($this->db->trans_status() === FALSE) { $this->db->trans_rollback(); } else { $this->db->trans_commit(); } return "ERROR"; }

    Read the article

  • How can I make named_scope in Rails return one value instead of an array?

    - by sameera207
    I want to write a [named scope] to get a record from its id. For example, I have a model called Event, and I want to simulate Event.find(id) with use of named_scope for future flexibility. I used this code in my model: named_scope :from_id, lambda { |id| {:conditions => ['id= ?', id] } } and I call it from my controller like Event.from_id(id). But my problem is that it returns an array of Event objects instead of just one object. Thus if I want to get event name, I have to write event = Event.from_id(id) event[0].name while what I want is event = Event.from_id(id) event.name Am I doing something wrong here?

    Read the article

  • Rails Multiple Models per Form, Optional FK Association

    - by ckarbass
    Given the following pseudo-code: Company has_many :jobs Job belongs_to :company I'm creating a form to post a new job. In the form, I want to have two fields for an optional company. On submission, if a company was entered, I want to either create or update the company and associate it with the new job. I know if the company exists by searching the companies table for the company's url. Is it possible to do this using form_for, fields_for, and accepts_nested_attributes_for given the company may not exist?

    Read the article

  • Rails transaction: save data in multiple models.

    - by smotchkkiss
    my models class Auction belongs_to :item belongs_to :user, :foreign_key => :current_winner_id has_many :auction_bids end class User has_many :auction_bids end class AuctionBid belongs_to :user end current usage An item is displayed on the page, the user enters an amount and clicks bid. Controller code might look something like this: class MyController def bid @ab = AuctionBid.new(params[:auction_bid]) @ab.user = current_user if @ab.save render :json => {:response => 'YAY!'} else render :json => {:response => 'FAIL!'} end end end desired functionality This works great so far! However, I need to ensure a couple other things happen. @ab.auction.bid_count needs to be incremented by one. @ab.user.bid_count needs to be incremented by one @ab.auction.current_winner_id needs to be set to @ab.user_id That is, the User and the Auction associated with the AuctionBid need values updated as well in order for the AuctionBid#save to return true.

    Read the article

  • Limit a user to view only associated records in rails

    - by trobrock
    I have an application with three Models (Profile - SubModel - SubSubModel) chained together with has many relationships. I am trying to limit a user, after logging in, to only retrieving records that are associated with their Profile. I am very new to rails and this is what I had been trying in the Profile model has_many :submodels, :conditions => {:profile_id => self.id} but this is returning an empty data set when calling with Profile.find_by_id(1).submodels, how else could I achieve what I am trying to do. Or should I handle this in the controller or view instead, I thought it sounded well suited for the model to handle this.

    Read the article

  • Case-insensitive find_or_create_by_whatever

    - by Horace Loeb
    I want to be able to do Artist.case_insensitive_find_or_create_by_name(artist_name)[1] (and have it work on both sqlite and postgreSQL) What's the best way to accomplish this? Right now I'm just adding a method directly to the Artist class (kind of ugly, especially if I want this functionality in another class, but whatever): def self.case_insensitive_find_or_create_by_name(name) first(:conditions => ['UPPER(name) = UPPER(?)', name]) || create(:name => name) end [1]: Well, ideally it would be Artist.find_or_create_by_name(artist_name, :case_sensitive => false), but this seems much harder to implement

    Read the article

  • Rails How to get all the grandchildren of an ojbect.

    - by adam
    I have 3 models User has_many :quetions has_many :corrections end Question has_one :correction belongs_to :user end Correction belongs_to :user belongs_to :question So if user Bob asks a question then user Terry can check it and if its wrong offer a correction. Lets stay with bob and assume he as kindly corrected 5 other users, i.e and lets assume he has been lucky to get 3 corrections from other users. I want to be able to do something like this @bob.corrections_offered = 5 correction objects @bob.corrections_received = 3 correction objects the first one is easy as its really just @bob.corrections under the hood. But i dont know how to implement the latter one. Can anyone help?

    Read the article

  • nHibernate multiple classes pointing to same table?

    - by Amitabh
    Is it a good idea to create a lighter version of an Entity in some cases just for performance reason pointing to same table but with fewer columns mapped. E.g If I have a Contact Table which has 50 Columns and in few of the related entities I might be interested in FirstName and LastName property is it a good idea to create a lightweight version of Contact table. E.g. public class LightContact { public int Id {get; set;} public string FirstName {get; set;} public string LastName {get; set;} } Also is it possible to map multiple classes to same table?

    Read the article

  • rails arguments to after_save observer

    - by ash34
    Hi, I want users to enter a comma-delimited list of logins on the form, to be notified by email when a new comment/post is created. I don't want to store this list in the database so I would use a form_tag_helper 'text_area_tag' instead of a form helper text_field. I have an 'after_save' observer which should send an email when the comment/post is created. As far as I am aware, the after_save event only takes the model object as the argument, so how do I pass this non model backed list of logins to the observer to be passed on to the Mailer method that uses them in the cc list. thanks

    Read the article

  • bidirectional habtm linking

    - by Alexey Poimtsev
    Hi, all. I have application with 2 groups of models - content based (news, questions) and "something" based (devices, applications etc). I need to link all models between groups - for example question may belongs to 3 different things - one application and 2 devices. The same - for news. From other side - i need to see all news articles and questions related to some application or device. Any idea how to develop this in rails? I have only one idea - mixins that will add methods content_id and thing_id to models and join table.

    Read the article

  • Rails: three most recent comments with unique users

    - by Dennis Collective
    what would I put in the named scope :by_unique_users so that I can do Comment.recent.by_unique_users.limit(3), and only get one comment per user? class User has_many :comments end class Comment belongs_to :user named_scope :recent, :order => 'comments.created_at DESC' named_scope :limit, lambda { |limit| {:limit => limit}} named_scope :by_unique_users end on sqlite named_scope :by_unique_user, :group = "user_id" works, but makes it freak out on postgres, which is deployed on production PGError: ERROR: column "comments.id" must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be used in an aggregate function

    Read the article

  • class method or named_scope?

    - by Hadi
    i would like to have your opinion in a project i am currently working on. class Product has_many :orders end class Order attr_accessor :deliverable # to contain temporary data on how many items can be delivered for this order belongs_to :product end somehow i want to have Order.all_deliverable that will calculate the Product's quantity, subtract from list of Orders until the Product is empty or there is no more Order for this Product to illustrate Product A, quantity: 20 Product B, quantity: 0 Order 1, require Product A, quantity: 12 Order 2, require Product B, quantity: 10 Order 3, require Product A, quantity: 100 so if i call Order.all_deliverable, it will give Order 1, deliverable:12 Order 3, deliverable: 8 #(20-12) i have been thinking on using named_scope, but i think the logic will be too complex to be put in a named_scope. Any suggestion? the pseudo code for all_deliverable will be something like this: go to each orders find the remaining quantity for specific product deduct the product to max amount of order, if product is not enough, add the maximum product add to the order end From what i read around in the web, named_scope deal mostly like find and have not many method calling and looping.

    Read the article

  • Castle Active Record - Working with the cache

    - by David
    Hi All, im new to the Castle Active Record Pattern and Im trying to get my head around how to effectivley use cache. So what im trying to do (or want to do) is when calling the GetAll, find out if I have called it before and check the cache, else load it, but I also want to pass a bool paramter that will force the cache to clear and requery the db. So Im just looking for the final bits. thanks public static List<Model.Resource> GetAll(bool forceReload) { List<Model.Resource> resources = new List<Model.Resource>(); //Request to force reload if (forceReload) { //need to specify to force a reload (how?) XmlConfigurationSource source = new XmlConfigurationSource("appconfig.xml"); ActiveRecordStarter.Initialize(source, typeof(Model.Resource)); resources = Model.Resource.FindAll().ToList(); } else { //Check the cache somehow and return the cache? } return resources; } public static List<Model.Resource> GetAll() { return GetAll(false); }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >