Search Results

Search found 1739 results on 70 pages for 'castle activerecord'.

Page 25/70 | < Previous Page | 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  | Next Page >

  • Rails Associations Question

    - by Mutuelinvestor
    I'm new to rails and have volunteered to help out the local High School Track team with a simple database that tracks the runners performances. For the moment, I have three models: Runners, Race_Data and Races. I have the following associations. Runners have_many Race_Data Races have_many Race_Data I also want create the association Runners Have_Many Races Through Race_Data, but as my look at the diagram I have drawn, there is already a many to one relationship from Race_data to Races. Does the combination of Runners having many Race_Data and Race_Data having one Race imply a Many_to_Many relationship between Runners and Races?

    Read the article

  • rails associations - How would you represent this relationship?

    - by truthSeekr
    Hello All, I am trying to figure out a best way to represent the following relationship. Newspaper-->has_many-->Articles Newspaper-->has_many--->Subscribers Subscribers are allowed to save the articles for their personal page. Two Questions: 1) How would the relationship look like in rails? How would the action 'save' look like? The following using has_many does not seem right to me: ArticleController < ApplicationController def save a = Article.find(101) @user.saved_articles << a end 2) Do I need a join table Saved_Articles that looked like this? Saved_Articles ---------------- user_id, article_id I am not sure how the has_many_through works. any advice is appreciated. thanks

    Read the article

  • Dynamic find methods Vs conditional statements

    - by piemesons
    Student.find(:all, :conditions => [‘name = ? and status = ?’ ‘mohit’, 1]) Vs Student.find_all_by_name_and_status(‘mohit’, 1) Both the queries will result the same set of row but first one is preferable cause in the second way there will be exception generated method_missing and then rails will try to relate it as dynamic method. if fine then result set to returned. Can any body explain me this in a good manner. What exactly is happening behind the screen. Please correct me if i am wrong.

    Read the article

  • Codeigniter active record select, left join, count

    - by sea_1987
    Hi There, I have a form that shows results from a database query, these results can have many other assets ajoined to them and I wanting to find a way of showing how many assets each elemement has. For example my table is of areas of england an other table has where the users live I current have this code, $this->db->select('*'); $this->db->from('places'); $this->db->join('users, places.place_id = user.place_id, left'); $this->db->get(); The issue I am having is getting the query to return the place name and the number of users living in that place, it is possible?

    Read the article

  • A rails migration that specifies the distance between two months..?

    - by Trip
    I would like to make two drop downs. a start time, and an end time. Specifically, I only need months. I would like to, for example, choose January, and then March, and then have the database read that it is the these two months plus February. Is there any out of the box migration that could work? I'm guessing.. script/generate migration AddMonthsToClass beginDate:datetime #through endDate:datetime I apologize ahead of time if my question sounds retarded! Sorry! :D

    Read the article

  • Rails validation "failing when succeeding"

    - by Fredrik
    I have this in my user.rb: attr_accessor :old_password def validate unless password.nil? errors.add_to_base("Old password entered incorrect") unless self.valid_password? old_password end end I have old_password as a a virtual attribute that has to be validated as matching with the current before updating to a new password. My problem is that upon correct entering ( password == password confirmation and self.valid_password? old_password ) an error will yield and pass me back to the form. The strange part is that the data will actually be updated in the database, and it will not on wrong input; although it will yield the very same error ("Old password entered incorrect"). What on earth am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • has_many :through on self?

    - by Glex
    I have a User model. A user can be either a dj, a club, or a clubber (this is controlled by the User#account_type attribute). A club can have many djs, and a dj can have many users: enumerated_attribute :account_type, %w(^clubber dj club), :nil => false do label :clubber => "Clubber" label :dj => "DJ" label :club => "Club" end has_many :dj_club_relationships, :class_name => "User", :dependent => :destroy has_many :dj_user_relationships, :dependent => :destroy has_many :djs, :through => :dj_club_relationships, :class_name => "User" has_many :users, :through => :dj_user_relationships However, this doesn't work as well as expected, since Rails doesn't know, for example, that it needs to destroy all dj_club_relationships with club_id when the user being destroyed is a club, and with dj_id when the user is a dj. How can I help rails know about it?

    Read the article

  • In NHIbernate, why does SaveOrUpdate() update the Version, but SaveOrUpdateCopy() doesn't?

    - by Daniel T.
    I have a versioned entity, and this is what happens when I use SaveOrUpdate() vs. SaveOrUpdateCopy(): // create new entity var entity = new Entity{ Id = Guid.Empty }); Console.WriteLine(entity.Version); // prints out 0 // save the new entity GetNewSession(); entity.SaveOrUpdate(); Console.WriteLine(entity.Version); // prints out 1 GetNewSession(); // loads the persistent entity into the session, so we have to use // SaveOrUpdateCopy() to merge the following transient entity var dbEntity = Database.GetAll<Entity>(); // new, transient entity used to update the persistent entity in the session var newEntity = new Entity{ Id = Guid.Empty }); newEntity.SaveOrUpdateCopy(); Console.WriteLine(entity.Version); // prints out 1, but should be 2 Why is the version number is not updated for SaveOrUpdateCopy()? As I understand it, the transient entity is merged with the persistent entity. The SQL calls confirm that the data is updated. At this point, shouldn't newEntity become persistent, and the version number incremented?

    Read the article

  • Main pricing and support for custom client pricing (Database Architecture ideas help - Rails)

    - by slythic
    Hi all, I have a personal project I'm planning and I came to a small hurdle. I want to have an item with price that will be the default for all clients/users. However, in my business I have some clients that are grandfathered in to some special pricing. In the case of these grandfathered in cases, I'll manually plug their special price in my admin section. Then all they will see is their special pricing while the regular users/clients see the default price. What is the best and simplest way to design the back-end for this? FYI - I'll be using rails as my framework. Many thanks! -Tony

    Read the article

  • Way to view Rails Migration output

    - by Ganesh Shankar
    Is there an easy way to see the actual SQL generated by a rails migration? I have a situation where a migration to change a column type worked on my local development machine by partially failed on the production server. My postgreSQL versions are different between local and production (7 on production, 8 on local) so I'm hoping by looking at the SQL generated on the successful migration locally I can work out a SQL statement to run on production to fix things....

    Read the article

  • Rails 2.3 uniqueness validation - how can I capture the value causing the error

    - by sa125
    Hi - I'm trying to capture the value that's throwing a uniqueness error (or for that matter, any other type of built-in validation) to display it in the :message option. Here's what I tried (didn't work) # inside the model validate_uniqueness_of :name, :message => "#{name} has already been taken" # also tried using #{:name} I could use a custom validation, but this beats the point of using something that's already integrated into AR. Any thoughts? thanks.

    Read the article

  • Codeigniter: Select from multiple tables

    - by Kevin Brown
    How can I select rows from two or more tables? I'm setting default fields for a form, and I need values from two tables... My current code reads: $this->CI->db->select('*'); $this->CI->db->from('user_profiles'); $this->CI->db->where('user_id' , $id); $user = $this->CI->db->get(); $user = $user->row_array(); $this->CI->validation->set_default_value($user);

    Read the article

  • rails - named scoped help

    - by sameera207
    Hi All, I want to write a named scoped to get a record from its id. Ex: I have a model called Event and its same as doing Event.find(id) (I dont want to use find inside my controller and I want my controller to use a named scoped (for future flexibility)) So I have written a named scoped named_scope :from_id, lambda { |id| {:conditions = ['id= ?', id] } } and I'm calling it from my controller like Event.from_id(id) But my problems is it returns Event object array not only one object Ex: if I want to get event name I have to write event = Event.from_id(id) event[0].name instead I want to write event = Event.from_id(id) event.name Am I doing something wrong here.. thanks in advance cheers sameera

    Read the article

  • Rails 2.3.x, named_scope chaining with INNER JOIN complication

    - by randombits
    I have two hypothetical classes, Foo and Bar. Foo contains many Bars. Bar can only belong to one Foo. Ultimately the SQL query I'm trying to make happen looks like the following: SELECT * from bar INNER JOIN foo ON bar.foo_id = foo.id where bar.in_use = 0 and bar.customer_id = 1 and foo.category = 0 That query does what I need. Now I'm trying to break the problem down in Rails using chained named_scopes. First, the straight forward in_use and customer_id scopes I have set: named_scope :available, :conditions => { :in_use => 0 } named_scope :not_available, :conditions => { :in_use => 1 } named_scope :customer, lambda { |num| { :conditions => { :customer_id => num } } } Now the part I'm stuck at, is I'm trying to do something like this in my code: abar = Bar.available.customer(1).category(0) how and where do I put the category named_scope to make this work?

    Read the article

  • can't update rails model

    - by Tristan
    Hi there, I'm rather new to rails. I have a controller that's attempting to update a model using the following code: @test = Product.find(1) @test.increment!(:price) It does successfully retrieve the Product from the database, but does not update the price attribute. Does anyone know why this might be the case, or how I could get more feedback on what the problem is? Thanks a bunch! Tristan edit: price is an integer with value 0. I get the same problem when I set the price with @test.price=50 and then @test.save .

    Read the article

  • How to create migration in subdirectory with Rails?

    - by Adrian Serafin
    Hi! I'm writing SaaS model application. My application database consist of two logic parts: application tables - such as user, roles... user defined tables (he can generate them from ui level) that can be different for each application instance All tables are created by rails migrations mechanism. I would like to put user defined tables in another directory: db/migrations - application tables db/migrations/custom - tables generated by user so i can do svn:ignore on db/migrations/custom, and when I do updates of my app on clients servers it would only update application tables migrations. Is there any way to achieve this in rails?

    Read the article

  • How do I add a condition to all ActiveRecords Queries for a particular model?

    - by Kyle West
    I am using the sentient_user gem to have access to the current_user object in my application. I want to override the default ActiveRecordBase queries to scope them to the current user. For instance, I don't want my users looking at, deleting, modifying other user's orders. I feel like I should be able to override a single (or couple) ActiveRecordBase methods to accomplish this, but I don't know which or how. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Ruby on Rails: Model.all.each vs find_by_sql("SELECT * FROM model").each ?

    - by B_
    I'm fairly new to RoR. In my controller, I'm iterating over every tuple in the database. For every table, for every column I used to call SomeOtherModel.find_by_sql("SELECT column FROM model").each {|x| #etc } which worked fine enough. When I later changed this to Model.all(:select => "column").each {|x| #etc } the loop starts out at roughly the same speed but quickly slows down to something like 100 times slower than the the find_by_sql command. These calls should be identical so I really don't know what's happening. I know these calls are not the most efficient but this is just an intermediate step and I will optimize it more once this works correctly. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • 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

< Previous Page | 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  | Next Page >