Search Results

Search found 13241 results on 530 pages for 'ruby ide'.

Page 359/530 | < Previous Page | 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366  | Next Page >

  • How to balance load in a Apache + Mongrel application

    - by Will
    I was wondering if someone can explain how can a rails application be balanced. Two questions: Does it even help having separate rails applications reading from the same database in the same dedicated server? I understand Apache can balance load installing some extra modules? am i right? how can we accomplish this? (please provide explanation for dummies)

    Read the article

  • No action responded to search

    - by gazza58
    i have defined a method called 'search' in my RecipesController which is not private. in routes.rb i have the following: map.connect 'recipes/search', :controller => :recipes, :action => :search i get the following error: No action responded to search. Actions: ... where my method 'search' does not appear in the actions list. if i change the method name from 'search' to 'searchthings' and the action in routes to 'searchthings' then this seems to work. what am i missing here?

    Read the article

  • Sorting an array of structs

    - by keruilin
    I have an array of structs called leaders. The struct class looks like this, for contextual info: class Leader < Struct.new(:rank, :user); end Two questions: How do I sort the array of structs by rank? How do I sort the array of structs by rank and by user.created_at?

    Read the article

  • How can I dynamically define the named route in a :partial in rails?

    - by Angela
    I have the following partial. It can be called from three different times in a view as follows: <%= render :partial => "contact_event", :collection => @contacts, :locals => {:event => email} %> Second time: <%= render :partial => "contact_event", :collection => @contacts, :locals => {:event => call} %> Third time: <%= render :partial => "contact_event", :collection => @contacts, :locals => {:event => letter} %> In each instance, call, email, letter refer to a specific instance of a Model Call, Email, or Letter. Here is the content of the partial "contact_event": <%= link_to_remote "Skip #{event} Remote", :url => skip_contact_email_url(contact_event, event), :update => "update-area-#{contact_event.id}-#{event.id}" %> <span id='update-area-<%="#{contact_event.id}-#{event.id}"%>'> </span> </p> My challenge: skip_contact_email_url only works when the event refers to an email. How can I dynamically define skip_contact_email_url to be skip_contact_letter_url if the local variable is letter? Even better, how can I have a single named route that would do the appropriate action?

    Read the article

  • Calculate difference in days ActiveSupport:TimeWithZone in the most "rubyish" style?

    - by Nick
    I have a feeling someone is going to point me to another question that answers this but I've been searching with no luck over this simple issue. I have a Activerecord with a datetime property. It returns as an ActiveSupport:TimeWithZone. I know I can't compare that to DateTime.now because that doesn't include a zone so I need to use Time.zone. Makes sense. What I'm wondering is stylewise is there a "cleaner" way to do this than subtracting and dividing the result by 86400? Here's what I do: ((Time.zone.now - myActiveRecord.visit_date)/86400).to_i Works but seems un-rubyish and I feel like I'm missing something. Should I be casting, comparing or converting some other route or is this really the typical way to do this in rails? Appreciate any tips or a link to a question that already covers this. Thank you

    Read the article

  • How to create a MySQL query for time based elements with a 'safe window'?

    - by pj4533
    I am no SQL expert, far from it. I am writing a Rails application, and I am new at that as well. I come from a desktop programming background. My application has a table of data, one of the columns is the time at which the data was logged. I want to create a query with a 'safe window' around EACH row. By that I mean, it returns the first row, then for X minutes (based on the timelogged column) it won't return any data, once X minutes is up, it will return the next row. For example: ID | TimeLogged 1 | 3/5/2010 12:01:01 2 | 3/5/2010 12:01:50 3 | 3/5/2010 12:02:03 4 | 3/5/2010 12:10:30 5 | 3/5/2010 01:30:03 6 | 3/5/2010 01:31:05 With a 'safe window' of 5 minutes I want to create a query to return: 1 | 3/5/2010 12:01:01 4 | 3/5/2010 12:10:30 5 | 3/5/2010 01:30:03 (It skipped the 12:01:50 and 12:02:03 items because they occurred within 5 minutes of the first item.) Another example, with a 'safe window' of 15 minutes I want to return: 1 | 3/5/2010 12:01:01 5 | 3/5/2010 01:30:03 Perhaps I have to just return all data and parse it myself?

    Read the article

  • Rails routing aliasing and namespaces

    - by kain
    Given a simple namespaced route map.namespace :api do |api| api.resources :genres end how can I reuse this block but with another namespace? Currently I'm achieving that by writing another routes hacked on the fly map.with_options :name_prefix => 'mobile_', :path_prefix => 'mobile' do |mobile| mobile.resources :genres, :controller => 'api/genres' end But it seems less than ideal.

    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

  • This is right way for database?

    - by ciss
    Hello, i have some issue with database. Okay, i have two models - Page and Item. Page for displaying some content. Item - this is item discription. So, i work on small ecommerce shop. Okay, all of this models can have some comments. So, this is my Comments model at this moment: Comments - string : id text : body integer : page_id integer : item_id So when some one add comment to page - page_id will be filled with current Page id. And if some one add comment to item - item_id will be filled. Okay, i know what the best way is to create STI or Polymorphic assoc, but does i really need this way for my situation? Sorry for my bad english, i'm from Russia.=)

    Read the article

  • Rails show view of one model with form for adding one child - nested attributes vs seperate controll

    - by SWR
    I have a basic two tiered model structure: Articles - Comments with one Article having many comments. What is the best way to add a "Add a comment" form to the bottom of the Articles show page? nested_attributes is overkill as I don't want to be able to edit all of the comments on the page, just to add one more. Is the best way even with Rails 2.3 still to make a separate controller and embed a form_for pointing to the other controller into the Articles show view? If so, how do I get validation errors to return to the article display page? I don't want to make a separate comment page/view... thanks

    Read the article

  • Rails Routes :requirements

    - by Chris Kilmer
    I want to set a route :requirements on an array that verifies a particular parameter is included in an array: atypes = [:culture, :personality, :communication] map.with_options(:path_prefix = ':atype', :requirements = {:atype = atypes.include?(:atype)}) do |assessment| ... end I haven't been able to find any documentation on how to accomplish this. Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Rspec: "array.should == another_array" but without concern for order

    - by nicholaides
    I often want to compare arrays and make sure that they contain the same elements, in any order. IS there a consise way to do this in RSpec? Here are methods that aren't acceptable: #to_set For example: array.to_set.should == another_array.to_set This fails when the arrays contain duplicate items. #sort For example: array.sort.should == another_array.sort This fails when the arrays elements don't implement #<=> #size and #to_set For example: array.to_set.should == another_array.to_set array.size.should == another_array.size This would work, but there's got to be a better way.

    Read the article

  • Activerecord default accessors & unusual requirements

    - by JP
    I have an ActiveRecord::Base class which needs to have a field that is automatically generated when a new instance is made. How should I go about doing this? By defining an initialize function? class Thing < ActiveRecord::Base # 'special' (integer) needs to be set to lowest unused number (above 0) # considering that random rows will be removed via other processes end This is as far as I've got! Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Mocking view helpers with rspec-rails 2.0.0.beta.8

    - by snl
    I am trying to mock a view helper with rspec2. The old way of doing this throws an error, complaining the template object is not defined: template.should_receive(:current_user).and_return(mock("user")) Am I missing something here, or is this not implemented in rspec2 (yet)?

    Read the article

  • Rails creating and updating 2 model records simultaneously

    - by LearnRails
    I have 2 tables product and history product table id name type price location 1 abc electronics $200 aisle1 history table id product_id status 1 1 price changed from $200 to $180 Whenever the product price or location is updated by a user by hitting the update button, 1) the changes should be automatically be reflected in the history status column without the user having to enter that manually. if the price is updated from 200 to 180 then a new history row will be created with new id and the status column will say ' price changed from $200 to $180' if the location is updated from aisle1 to aisle 2 then status displays ' loc changed from ailse1 to aisle 2' I tried to @product = Product.new(params[:product]) @history= History.new(params[:history]) if @product.save @history.new(attributes) == I am not sure of whether this approach is correct I would really appreciate if someone could tell me how the history can be automatically updated in this case.

    Read the article

  • form_for called in a loop overloads IDs and associates fields and labels incorrectly

    - by Katy Levinson
    Rails likes giving all of my fields the same IDs when they are generated in a loop, and this causes trouble. <% current_user.subscriptions.each do |s| %> <div class="subscription_listing"> <%= link_to_function s.product.name, "toggle_delay(this)"%> in <%= s.calc_time_to_next_arrival %> days. <div class="modify_subscription"> <%= form_for s, :url => change_subscription_path(s) do |f| %> <%= label_tag(:q, "Days to delay:") %> <%= text_field_tag(:query) %> <%= check_box_tag(:always) %> <%= label_tag(:always, "Apply delay to all future orders") %> <%= submit_tag("Change") %> <% end %> <%= link_to 'Destroy', s, :confirm => 'Are you sure?', :method => :delete %> </div> </div> <% end %> Produces <div class="subscription_listing"> <a href="#" onclick="toggle_delay(this); return false;">Pasta</a> in 57 days. <div class="modify_subscription"> <form accept-charset="UTF-8" action="/subscriptions/7/change" class="edit_subscription" id="edit_subscription_7" method="post"><div style="margin:0;padding:0;display:inline"><input name="utf8" type="hidden" value="&#x2713;" /><input name="_method" type="hidden" value="put" /><input name="authenticity_token" type="hidden" value="s5LJffuzmbEMkSrez8b3KLVmDWN/PGmDryXhp25+qc4=" /></div> <label for="q">Days to delay:</label> <input id="query" name="query" type="text" /> <input id="always" name="always" type="checkbox" value="1" /> <label for="always">Apply delay to all future orders</label> <input name="commit" type="submit" value="Change" /> </form> <a href="/subscriptions/7" data-confirm="Are you sure?" data-method="delete" rel="nofollow">Destroy</a> </div> </div> <div class="subscription_listing"> <a href="#" onclick="toggle_delay(this); return false;">Gummy Bears</a> in 57 days. <div class="modify_subscription"> <form accept-charset="UTF-8" action="/subscriptions/8/change" class="edit_subscription" id="edit_subscription_8" method="post"><div style="margin:0;padding:0;display:inline"><input name="utf8" type="hidden" value="&#x2713;" /><input name="_method" type="hidden" value="put" /><input name="authenticity_token" type="hidden" value="s5LJffuzmbEMkSrez8b3KLVmDWN/PGmDryXhp25+qc4=" /></div> <label for="q">Days to delay:</label> <input id="query" name="query" type="text" /> <input id="always" name="always" type="checkbox" value="1" /> <label for="always">Apply delay to all future orders</label> <input name="commit" type="submit" value="Change" /> </form> <a href="/subscriptions/8" data-confirm="Are you sure?" data-method="delete" rel="nofollow">Destroy</a> </div> </div> And that's a problem because now no matter which "Apply delay to all future orders" I select it always very helpfully checks the first box for me. How can I override the ID without doing something ugly and un-rails-like?

    Read the article

  • cache_counter for habtm

    - by piemesons
    Hello How can use cache_counter in a habtm. For example a question has many tags and a tag can belong to many questions. question habtm tags Now i want to find out number of questions belonging to every tag. One way is counting everytime. But, in case of one_to_many i done same thing in this way. Like one question has many answers. then in answer model i specified belongs_to :question,:cache_counter=>true It solved my problem. So how to do the same in habtm.

    Read the article

  • To use an api or store a large dataset in a rails app?

    - by Dave
    Hi all- I am working on a site that has the potential to need a LOT of space. Basically we hope to have every video game every created stored in a database along with an image of the cover. There are some api's out there that might be able to help, like GiantBomb's (www.giantbomb.com). We are trying to decide whether to store the data locally and if so where to find that comprehensive a list, or make calls to the api on demand. The problem with the latter is likely latency and also downtime problems. Assuming we want to store it locally here are the questions: 1) Where can we find this kind of data (yes, I looked on google, and no I couldnt find anything:)) 2) What is the most efficient way to encode and store the images? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Double join with habtm in ActiveRecord

    - by Daniel Huckstep
    I have a weird situation involving the need of a double inner join. I have tried the query I need, I just don't know how to make rails do it. The Data Account (has_many :sites) Site (habtm :users, belongs_to :account) User (habtm :sites) Ignore that they are habtm or whatever, I can make them habtm or has_many :through. I want to be able to do @user.accounts or @account.users Then of course I should be able to do @user.accounts < @some_other_account And then have @user.sites include all the sites from @some_other_account. I've fiddled with habtm and has_many :through but can't get it to do what I want. Basically I need to end up with a query like this (copied from phpmyadmin. Tested and works): SELECT accounts.* FROM accounts INNER JOIN sites ON sites.account_id = accounts.id INNER JOIN user_sites ON sites.id = user_sites.site_id WHERE user_sites.user_id = 2 Can I do this? Is it even a good idea to have this double join? I am assuming it would work better if users had the association with accounts to begin with, and then worry about getting @user.sites instead, but it works better for many other things if it is kept the way it is (users <- sites).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366  | Next Page >