has_many

User a block to extend your associations

You can use blocks to extend your associations with extra methods.

code sample

has_many :children, :dependent => :destroy do
  def at(time)
    proxy_owner.children.find_with_deleted :all, :conditions => [
      "created_at <= :time AND (deleted_at > :time OR deleted_at IS NULL)", { :time => time }
    ]        
  end      
end

Model.children.each # do stuff
Model.children.at( 1.week.ago ).each # do old stuff

you must use ‘proxy_owner’ to link back to your model.

Gotcha when defining :finder_sql or :counter_sql

When setting custom SQL statements in the :finder_sql or :counter_sql queries, if you need to inject attributes from the current object, such as the ID, make sure to disable string interpolation of the statement by using single quotes or %q().

Example:

has_many :relationships, :class_name => 'Relationship', :finder_sql => %q(
  SELECT DISTINCT relationships.*
  FROM relationships
  WHERE contact_id = #{id}
)

Surrounding this SQL with double-quotes or %Q() will expand #{id} too early, resulting in a warning about Object#id being deprecated and general brokenness.

Undocumented :inverse_of option

Support for the :inverse_of option was backported to 2.3.6+.

Here’s the description from the original commit: http://github.com/rails/rails/commit/ccea98389abbf150b886c9f964b1def47f00f237

You can now add an :inverse_of option to has_one, has_many and belongs_to associations. This is best described with an example:

class Man < ActiveRecord::Base
  has_one :face, :inverse_of => :man
end

class Face < ActiveRecord::Base
  belongs_to :man, :inverse_of => :face
end

m = Man.first
f = m.face

Without :inverse_of m and f.man would be different instances of the same object (f.man being pulled from the database again). With these new :inverse_of options m and f.man are the same in memory instance.

Currently :inverse_of supports has_one and has_many (but not the :through variants) associations. It also supplies inverse support for belongs_to associations where the inverse is a has_one and it’s not a polymorphic.

Named scope better than conditions

In modern versions of Rails, in most cases a named_scope is a better alternative to using :conditions on your has_many relations. Compare:

class User
  has_many :published_posts, :conditions => {:published => true}
end
user.published_posts

with:

class Post
  named_scope :published, :conditions => {:published => true}
end
class User
  has_many :posts
end
user.posts.published

It’s better because the Post’s logic (“am I published?”) should not be coupled within User class. This makes it easier to refactor: e.g. if you wanted to refactor the boolean :published field into a :status field with more available values, you would not have to modify User class. Having to modify User when you refactor some implementation detail of Post class is clearly a code smell.

This also applies to :order, :group, :having and similar options.

Explanation about :dependent option

It may seem that :dependent option is only used when the object that has the collection is destroyed, but it is also used every time a associated object is deleted, so if you use

object.collection.delete(associated_object)

your object will be deleted, destroyed or nullified, depending on the value of :dependent option.

With has_many :through associations this option is ignored at least in versions up to 2.1.0, so even if you set :dependent option to :destroy, your join objects will be deleted, not firing any callbacks you have set on destroy events.

If you need to act when your join model is deleted you can use a sweeper or an observer and the association callbacks like this:

# product.rb
class Product
  has_many :categorizations
  has_many :categories, :through => :categorizations,
    :before_remove => :fire_before_remove_in_categorizations

private
  def fire_before_remove_in_categorizations(category)
    categorization = self.categorizations.find_by_category_id(category.id)
    categorization.class.changed
    categorization.class.notify_observers(:before_remove, categorization)
  end
end

# categorization_sweeper.rb
# do not forget to load this sweeper during initialization
class CategorizationSweeper < ActionController::Caching::Sweeper
  observe Categorization

  def before_remove(categorization)
    # expire_cache, expire_fragment, whatever
  end
end

One thing you should be aware of it is that you are using before_remove, so you have to be careful because your record may be not be removed (another callback raising an exception or the database not deleting the record) so you can not be sure your object will be delete. Expiring caches is safe because even if your record is not destroyed your cache will be regerated correctly.

You can not use after_remove, because at that point the join model do not exists anymore, so you can not fire its callbacks. But you have the model id and the associated model id, so if you do not need expiring caches maybe you can use this approach (expiring caches can be only done in a sweeper or in a controller, but with after_remove you are bound to your model).

Undocumented callbacks

Not sure why this isn’t documented… there are callbacks for before/after_add and before/after_remove. Example

has_many :things, :after_add => :set_things, :after_remove => :remove_things

def set_things(thing)
  ...
end
def remove_things(thing)
  ...
end

Polymorphic has_many within inherited class gotcha

Given I have following classes

class User < ActiveRecord::Base
end

class ::User::Agent < ::User
 has_many :leads,  :as => :creator
end

I would expect, that running

User::Agent.first.leads

will result in following query

SELECT "leads".* FROM "leads" WHERE ("leads".creator_id = 6 AND "leads".creator_type = 'User::Agent')

however it results in

SELECT "leads".* FROM "leads" WHERE ("leads".creator_id = 6 AND "leads".creator_type = 'User')

Possible solutions:

• Make User class use STI - polymorphic relations will then retrieve correct class from :type field (however in my situation it was not an option)

• If You do never instantiate User class itself, mark it as abstract

class User < ActiveRecord::Base
 self.abstract_class = true
end

• If You do instantiate User class, as last resort You can overwrite base_class for User::Agent

class ::User::Agent < ::User
 has_many :leads,  :as => :creator

 def self.base_class
  self
 end
end

• If none of above is an option and You do not care that You will lose some of relation’s features, You can always

class User::Agent < ::User
 has_many :leads,
          :as => :creator,
          :finder_sql => %q(SELECT "leads".* FROM "leads" WHERE ("leads".creator_id = #{id} AND "leads".creator_type = 'User::Agent'))
end

collection update

in the FirmsController

@firm.people.update(params[:people].keys,params.values)

in the View

<% form_for(@firm) do |f| %>

<%= f.error_messages %>
<%= f.text_field :name %>
<%@firm.people.each do |person|%>
<%fields_for "people[]", person do |pf|%>
      <%= pf.text_field :name %>
<%end%>
<%= f.submit "Save" %>

<%end%>

You can't have many :through with habtm

Imagine the following

a has_many b
b has_and_belongs_to_many c
a has_many c :through => b

a.b works fine

b.c works fine

a.c throws an error!

has_many :through where the through association is a habtm is not supported in Rails. The error is:

ActiveRecord::HasManyThroughSourceAssociationMacroError: Invalid source reflection macro :has_and_belongs_to_many for has_many :stories, :through => :subcategories. Use :source to specify the source reflection

Specifying the source reflection still won’t help you though, because this kind of has_many :through isn’t supported at all.