Search Results

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

Page 32/70 | < Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >

  • Adding a LIKE criteria to a Rails Conditions block

    - by Neil Middleton
    Consider the following code which is to be thrown at an AR find: conditions = [] conditions[:age] = params[:age] if params[:age].present? conditions[:gender] = params[:gender] if params[:gender].present? I need to add another condition which is a LIKE criteria on a 'profile' attribute. How can I do this, as obviously a LIKE is usually done via an array, not a hash key.

    Read the article

  • Pattern for unidirectional has_many join?

    - by Kris
    It occurred to me that if I have a has_many join, where the foreign model does not have a belongs_to, and so the join is one way, then I don't actually need a foreign key. We could have a column, category_ids, which stores a marshaled Array of IDs which we can pass to find. So here is an untested example: class page < AR def categories Category.find(self.category_ids) end def categories<<(category) # get id and append to category_ids save! end def category_ids @cat_ids ||= Marshal.load(read_attribute(:category_ids)) rescue [] end def category_ids=(ids) @cat_ids = ids write_attribute(:category_ids, ids) end end page.category_ids = [1,4,12,3] page.categories = Array of Category Is there accepted pattern for this already? Is it common or just not worth the effort?

    Read the article

  • mysql to codeigniter active record help

    - by JoeM05
    Active record is a neet concept but sometimes I find it difficult to get more complicated queries to work. I find this is at least one place the CI docs are lacking. Anyway, This is the sql I wrote. It returns the expected results of quests not yet completed by the user that are unlocked and within the users level requirements: SELECT writing_quests . * FROM `writing_quests` LEFT OUTER JOIN members_quests_completed ON members_quests_completed.quest_id = writing_quests.id LEFT OUTER JOIN members ON members.id = $user_id WHERE writing_quests.unlocked =1 AND writing_quests.level_required <= $userlevel AND members_quests_completed.user_id IS NULL This is the codeigniter active record query, it returns all quests that are unlocked and within the users level requirement: $this->db->select('writing_quests.*'); $this->db->from('writing_quests'); $this->db->join('members_quests_completed', 'members_quests_completed.quest_id = writing_quests.id', 'left outer'); $this->db->join('members', "members.id = $user_id", 'left outer'); $this->db->where('writing_quests.unlock', 1); $this->db->where('writing_quests.level_required <=', $userlevel); $this->db->where('members_quests_completed.user_id is null', null, true); I'm guessing there is something wrong with the way I am asking for Nulls. To be thorough, I figured I'd include everything.

    Read the article

  • How to handle ids and polymorphic associations in views if compound keys are not supported?

    - by duncan
    I have a Movie plan table: movie_plans (id, description) Each plan has items, which describe a sequence of movies and the duration in minutes: movie_plan_items (id, movie_plan_id, movie_id, start_minutes, end_minutes) A specific instance of that plan happens in: movie_schedules (id, movie_plan_id, start_at) However the schedule items can be calculated from the movie_plan_items and the schedule start time by adding the minutes create view movie_schedule_items as select CONCAT(p.id, '-', s.id) as id, s.id as movie_schedule_id, p.id as movie_plan_item_id, p.movie_id, p.movie_plan_id, (s.start_at + INTERVAL p.start_minutes MINUTE) as start_at, (s.start_at + INTERVAL p.end_minutes MINUTE) as end_at from movie_plan_items p, movie_schedules s where s.movie_plan_id=p.movie_plan_id; I have a model over this view (readonly), it works ok, except that the id is right now a string. I now want to add a polymorphic property (like comments) to various of the previous tables. Therefore for movie_schedule_items I need a unique and persistent numeric id. I have the following dilemma: I could avoid the id and have movie_schedule_items just use the movie_plan_id and movie_schedule_id as a compound key, as it should. But Rails sucks in this regard. I could create an id using String#hash or a md5, thus making it slower or collision prone (and IIRC String#hash is no longer persistent across processes in Ruby 1.9) Any ideas on how to handle this situation?

    Read the article

  • Rails 2.3.5: How does one add an error when it doesn't make sense to put it in a validation?

    - by randombits
    I recently was trying to add errors.add_to_base code in the middle of some model logic and was wondering why it wasn't showing up in my view that was iterating over all errors. I then ran across this e-mail which explains why: http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk/browse_thread/thread/e045ec1dead1ff06?pli=1 The question is then, how does one add errors with add_to_base if it doesn't make sense to put them into a validate method? I have some complex logic. The model needs to talk to a has_many relationship which has its own relationships that go through a myriad of conditionals to figure out if a request makes sense. It's nothing that can be tied to a validate method easily. How does one add errors then accordingly?

    Read the article

  • pass parameter from controller to models condition

    - by Alex
    I'm trying to bind a param to a join via a named scope., but I'm getting an error. What is the correct way to do that? has_one :has_voted, :class_name => 'Vote', :conditions => ['ip = :userIp'] # named scopes scope :with_vote, lambda {|ip| { :include => [:has_voted], # like this ?? :conditions => [:has_voted => {:conditions => {:userIp => ip}} ] }} Idea.with_vote(request.ip).all I believe I need the condition definition in the model for it to appear in the ON clause of a JOIN, rather then in the WHERE one. Edit I'm trying to get the following query select Ideas.*, Votes.* from Ideas left outer join Votes on Votes.Idea_id = Idea.id AND Votes.ip = {request.ip}

    Read the article

  • Rails saving data to model that has multiple has_many

    - by Ajey
    So I have a product model that looks like belongs_to :seller has_many :coupons And coupon model that looks like belongs_to :seller belongs_to :product And in my Products controller I use @seller = current_user @coupon = @seller.coupons.create(params[:coupon]) to create the coupons for the seller While the coupon is being created, I need to associate it with the product too, i.e When a new coupon is created it should be saved for the seller AS WELL AS for the product.

    Read the article

  • basic database design table on rails

    - by runcode
    I am confuse on a concept. I am doing this on rails. Is that Entity set equal to a table in the database? Is that Relationship set equal to a table in the database? Let say we have Entity set "USER" and Entity set "POST" and Entity set "COMMENT" User- can post many posts and comments as they want Post- belong to users Comments-belong to posts ,users, so comment is weak entity. SCHEMA ====== USER -id -name POST -id -user_id(FK) -comment_id (FK) COMMENT -id -user_id (FK) -post_id (FK) so USER,POST,COMMENT are tables I think. And what else is a table? And do I need a table for the relationship??

    Read the article

  • Accessing two sides of a user-user relationship in rails

    - by Lowgain
    Basically, I have a users model in my rails app, and a fanship model, to facilitate the ability for users to become 'fans' of each other. In my user model, I have: has_many :fanships has_many :fanofs, :through => :fanships In my fanship model, I have: belongs_to :user belongs_to :fanof, :class_name => "User", :foreign_key => "fanof_id" My fanship table basically consists of :id, :user_id and :fanof_id. This all works fine, and I can see what users a specific user is a fan of like: <% @user.fanofs.each do |fan| %> #things <% end %> My question is, how can I get a list of the users that are a fan of this specific user? I'd like it if I could just have something like @user.fans, but if that isn't possible what is the most efficient way of going about this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • In Rails, how to respect :scope when using validates_uniqueness_of in an embedded object form?

    - by mkirk
    I have a Book model, which has_many Chapters (which belong_to a Book). I want to ensure uniqueness of Chapter titles, but only within the scope of a single book. The catch is that the form for creating chapters is embedded in the Book model's form (The Book model accepts_nested_attributes_for :chapters). Within the Chapter model: validates_uniqueness_of( :chapter_title, :scope = :book_id, :case_sensitive = false, :message = "No book can have multiple chapters with the same title.") However, when I submit the Book creation form (which also includes multiple embedded Chapter forms), if the chapter title exists in another chapter for a different book, I fail the validation test. Book.create( :chapters => [ Chapter.new(:title => "Introduction"), Chapter.new(:title => "How to build things") => Book 1 successfully created Book.create( :chapters => [ Chapter.new(:title => "Introduction"), Chapter.new(:title => "Destroy things") => Book 2 fails to validate second_book = Book.create( :chapters => [ Chapter.new(:title => "A temporary Introduction title"), Chapter.new(:title => "Destroy things") => Book 2 succesfully created second_book.chapters[0].title= "Introduction" => success second_book.chapters.save => success second_book.save => success Can anyone shed some light on how to do this? Or why it's happening?

    Read the article

  • Field name being converted in Unit Tests [rails]?

    - by yar
    I am noting this strange behavior where one of my fields -- receive_empresa_test_info -- has worked fine though it's always been referred to as receive_empresa_info. In Functional Tests, though, the real field name is receive_empresa_test_info. What is going on here? Might this be some part of the Rails environment that I'm missing during testing?

    Read the article

  • NULL value in :conditions =>

    - by Horace Ho
    Contract.all(:conditions => ['voided == ?', 0]).size => 364 Contract.all(:conditions => ['voided != ?', 0]).size => 8 Contract.all.size => 441 the 3 numbers does not added up (364 + 8 != 441). What's the proper way write the :conditions to count the rows which the voided column value is NULL or equal to zero?

    Read the article

  • Rails: Thread won't affect database unless joined to main Thread

    - by hatboysam
    I have a background operation I would like to occur every 20 seconds in Rails given that some condition is true. It kicked off when a certain controller route is hit, and it looks like this def startProcess argId = self.id t = Thread.new do while (Argument.isRunning(argId)) do Argument.update(argId) Argument.markVotes(argId) puts "Thread ran" sleep 20 end end end However, this code does absolutely nothing to my database unless I call "t.join" in which case my whole server is blocked for a long time (but it works). Why can't the read commit ActiveRecords without being joined to the main thread? The thread calls methods that look something like def sample model = Model.new() model.save() end but the models are not saved to the DB unless the thread is joined to the main thread. Why is this? I have been banging my head about this for hours.

    Read the article

  • Rails: How to have dynamic association

    - by Aaron Dufall
    I'll use an example to explain what behaviour I would like to achieve. If you had a project management app and you added a task, but not all the contributors are users of the app. So when you adding contributors to the task you can enter a user name or email address. Here is the part that I'm finding a little tricky. The task model has many contributors which are linked through the user model, but from this point on I want to achieve 2 things. Store the non members email(this would obviously be quite simple) If that email address was to create an account it would then link that user to the task and remove the temporally saved email. This way, when that user creates an account all the related tasks will already be associated with their email. Is this something that i could achieve with a polymorphic association? or is there something else I should be looking at?

    Read the article

  • [Rails] Accessing error_messages on form_tag

    - by aaronrussell
    I have built a custom form for creating a joining model on a has_many :through relationship. The models look roughly like this: class Team has_many :team_members has_many :members, :through => :team_members end class Member has_many :team_members has_many :teams, :through => :team_members end class TeamMember belongs_to :team belongs_to :member # and this model has some validations too end The form I have built is for selecting which members should be in a team. I won't paste the form, but it uses the form_tag method and basically sends an array of hashes which contain a member_id and a squad_number. I then update the database with an action that looks roughly like this (simplified a bit, but you get the jist): @team.transaction do @team.team_members = params[:team_members].collect{|tm| @team.team_members.new(tm)} if @team.save redirect_to ... else render :action => :members end end Everything works great but I am validating the squad_number for uniqueness and numerically. So, when any of those validations fail, how do I get access to them in my view, and how do I ascertain which of the many members it has failed on?

    Read the article

  • Find record whose field 'name' not contained within any other record

    - by charlie
    I have a model Foo with a String bar and a String name. Some records' bar contain the name of other records in them. This is intentional. I want to find the "root Foo" records - that is, the ones where their name do not appear in the bar records of any other Foo records. Example: Foo id: 1 name: 'foo1' bar: 'something something' id: 2 name: 'foo2' bar: 'foo1 something' id: 3 name: 'foo3' bar: 'foo1, foo4' My method root_foos would return foo2 and foo3 since their names do not appear in any bar string. edit: I don't want to use a relation or foreign key here - just this method.

    Read the article

  • Can i use a model object directly in a find

    - by user340100
    Hi, Can i pass a_teacher directly into the find? or do i have to compare each of its attributes as i have done here? thanks a_teacher = Techer.new(:name => "Bob", :age => 30) self.classes.all(:conditions => ["teacher.name = ? AND teacher.age = ?", a_teacher.name,a_teacher.age], :joins => :teacher)

    Read the article

  • remove field name from object validation message

    - by Colin G
    I've got a simple active record validation on an object using this within a form: form.error_messages({:message => '', :header_message => ''}) This in turn outputs something like "FieldName My Custom message" What i need to do is remove the field name from the error message but leave my custom message. Can anyone point me in the right direction for this.

    Read the article

  • How to set up two models having a has_many association with each other

    - by daz13
    I'm looking for a suggestion on how to set up two models, Teacher and Subject. A Teacher can have many Subjects, and a Subject can have many Teachers. Another thing to consider in the relationship between the two models is that a Teacher can create a Subject and add other Teachers to the Subject. I think I'm solid on the basics of the set up for each model: for teacher.rb: has_many :subjects for subject.rb: has_many :teachers and the teachers table should have a subject_id column and the subject table should have a teacher_id column. What I'm not sure about is how to set up the views (and corresponding controller methods) to allow the addition of a Teacher to a Subject. Any suggestions (or links to examples) are greatly appreciated. I haven't been able to find anything on this exact case.

    Read the article

  • Rails find all with association

    - by aaronrussell
    I have what I think is a very simple problem (famous last words)... I have a Category model that has_and_belongs_to_many Events. I want to construct a simple and efficient query that finds all categories that have 1 or more events. (using Rails 3) I'm sure I'm having a dumb moment here - any help appreciated :)

    Read the article

  • Model association changes in production environment, specifically converting a model to polymorphic?

    - by dustmoo
    Hi everyone, I was hoping I could get feedback on major changes to how a model works in an app that is in production already. In my case I have a model Record, that has_many PhoneNumbers. Currently it is a typical has_many belongs_to association with a record having many PhoneNumbers. Of course, I now have a feature of adding temporary, user generated records and these records will have PhoneNumbers too. I 'could' just add the user_record_id to the PhoneNumber model, but wouldn't it be better for this to be a polymorphic association? And if so, if you change how a model associates, how in the heck would I update the production database without breaking everything? .< Anyway, just looking for best practices in a situation like this. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • mysql codeigniter active record m:m deletion

    - by sea_1987
    Hi There, I have a table 2 tables that have a m:m relationship, what I can wanting is that when I delete a row from one of the tables I want the row in the joining table to be deleted as well, my sql is as follow, Table 1 CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `job_feed` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `body` text NOT NULL, `date_posted` int(10) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=3 ; Table 2 CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `job_feed_has_employer_details` ( `job_feed_id` int(11) NOT NULL, `employer_details_id` int(11) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`job_feed_id`,`employer_details_id`), KEY `fk_job_feed_has_employer_details_job_feed1` (`job_feed_id`), KEY `fk_job_feed_has_employer_details_employer_details1` (`employer_details_id`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; So what I am wanting to do is, if the a row is deleted from table1 and has an id of 1 I want the row in table to that also has that idea as part of the relationship also. I want to do this in keeping with codeigniters active record class I currently have this, public function deleteJobFeed($feed_id) { $this->db->where('id', $feed_id) ->delete('job_feed'); return $feed_id; }

    Read the article

  • Extending the CI_DB_active_record class in codeigniter 2.0

    - by ctrane
    I am writing my first program with Codeigniter, and have run into a problem. I will start with a focused description of the problem and can broaden it if I need to: I need to write a multi-dimensional array to the DB and want to use the insert_batch function from the CI_DB_active_record class to do so. The problem is that I need to write empty values as NULL for some fields while other fields need to be empty strings. The current function wraps all values with single quotes, and I cannot find a way to write null values to the database for specified fields. I would also like to increase the number of records per batch. I see how to extend models, libraries, etc., but is there a way to extend the CI_DB_active_record class without modifying core classes? The minimal amount of core class modification to make this work that I have found is modifying the following lines in the DB.php file (changing the require_once file to the new file that extends the CI_DB_active_record class and changing the CI_DB_active_record class name to the new class name): require_once(BASEPATH.'database/DB_active_rec'.EXT); if ( ! class_exists('CI_DB')) { eval('class CI_DB extends CI_DB_active_record { }'); } Can I do better?

    Read the article

  • Ruby on Rails: temporarily update an attribute into cache without saving it?

    - by randombits
    I have a bit of code that depicts this hypothetical setup below. A class Foo which contains many Bars. Bar belongs to one and only one Foo. At some point, Foo can do a finite loop that lapses 2+ iterations. In that loop, something like the following happens: bar = Bar.find_where_in_use_is_zero bar.in_use = 1 Basically what find_where_in_use_is_zero does something like this in as far as SQL goes: SELECT * from bars WHERE in_use = 0 Now the problem I'm facing is that I cannot run the following line of code after bar.in_use =1 is invoked: bar.save The reason is clear, I'm still looping and the new Foo hasn't been created, so we don't have a foo_id to put into bars.foo_id. Even if I set to allow foo_id to be NULL, we have a problem where one of the bars can fail validation and the existing one was saved to the database. In my application, that doesn't work. The entire request is atomic, either all succeeds or fails together. What happens next, is that in my loop, I have the potential to select the same exact bar that I did on a previous iteration of the loop since the in_use flag will not be set to 1 until @foo.save is called. Is there anyway to work around this condition and temporarily set the in_use attribute to 1 for subsequent iterations of the loop so that I retrieve an available bar instance?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >