Hey guys,
What do you think about tracking habtm changes?
Apparently we can''t do that because when you change a habtm association
it
is changed immediately on database instead of waiting the save call (not
sure why and the problem may not be because of that).
Current behaviour:
profile.roles_ids
=> []
profile.update_attributes(:name => nil, :roles_ids => [...])
=> false
profile.changes
{ "name" => [''Admin'', nil] }
Expected behaviour:
profile.roles_ids
=> []
profile.update_attributes(:name => nil, :roles_ids => [...])
=> false
profile.changes
{ "name" => [''Admin'', nil], :roles_ids => [[],
[...]] }
Giving some problem context, I have an application that need to audit
almost every change and I can track everything using the changes method but
habtm changes.
We can write a solution like storing the initial state of roles_ids in an
after_initialize callback on the model and comparing it on a after_save but
I was thinking in a more "native" solution.
What do you think?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Not sure about how it will impact the application but this is the first shot: https://gist.github.com/sobrinho/6309391 On Thursday, August 22, 2013 12:56:27 PM UTC-3, Gabriel Sobrinho wrote:> > Hey guys, > > What do you think about tracking habtm changes? > > Apparently we can''t do that because when you change a habtm association it > is changed immediately on database instead of waiting the save call (not > sure why and the problem may not be because of that). > > Current behaviour: > > profile.roles_ids > => [] > > profile.update_attributes(:name => nil, :roles_ids => [...]) > => false > > profile.changes > { "name" => [''Admin'', nil] } > > > > Expected behaviour: > > profile.roles_ids > => [] > > profile.update_attributes(:name => nil, :roles_ids => [...]) > => false > > profile.changes > { "name" => [''Admin'', nil], :roles_ids => [[], [...]] } > > > > > Giving some problem context, I have an application that need to audit > almost every change and I can track everything using the changes method but > habtm changes. > > We can write a solution like storing the initial state of roles_ids in an > after_initialize callback on the model and comparing it on a after_save but > I was thinking in a more "native" solution. > > > What do you think? >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
On Aug 22, 2013, at 11:56 AM, Gabriel Sobrinho wrote:> Hey guys, > > What do you think about tracking habtm changes? > > Apparently we can''t do that because when you change a habtm association it is changed immediately on database instead of waiting the save call (not sure why and the problem may not be because of that). > > Current behaviour: > > profile.roles_ids > => [] > > profile.update_attributes(:name => nil, :roles_ids => [...]) > => false > > profile.changes > { "name" => [''Admin'', nil] } > > > Expected behaviour: > > profile.roles_ids > => [] > > profile.update_attributes(:name => nil, :roles_ids => [...]) > => false > > profile.changes > { "name" => [''Admin'', nil], :roles_ids => [[], [...]] } > > > > Giving some problem context, I have an application that need to audit almost every change and I can track everything using the changes method but habtm changes. > > We can write a solution like storing the initial state of roles_ids in an after_initialize callback on the model and comparing it on a after_save but I was thinking in a more "native" solution. > > > What do you think?Some quick thoughts: * using the _ids= method on has_many doesn''t show up in changes either * this could get really expensive if you have a lot of rows on the other end of the HABTM, since you cache the complete list of IDs in memory --Matt Jones -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.