I have a USER model and a TAG model and they have a has_and_belongs_to relationships between them. I want to Tag.find(:all) ... but I only want to return tags that have at least one association with at user. Bonus geek points for the one who could improve on that by returning the top 50 tags (i.e. the most associations with users) but don''t return any that do not have at least one association with a user. :-) (Will happen if only 30 tags in DB and only 25 have associations) Thanks guys and gals :-) -- John Kopanas john-Iau1QiYlxLpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
To find the tags associated with a particular user, you could simple
do:
user = User.find(id) #or whatever parameter you''re using to find
it.
tags = user.tags
This way you will only get the tags associated with the user.
To get the top 50, maybe you could have a "tagged" field in your
table,
that counts the times the user has been associated with a specific tag
(this is just an idea.. I don''t the DB schema). If you have a field
like that, then you could do:
tags = user.tags.find(:all, :order =>"tagged DESC")
Hope this can help.
Fernanda Aispuro
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I missed something...
To limit the number of results to 50, just add:
:limit => 50
after the :order key.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Could you change the habtm to a has_many :through and set up counter caches for the users and tags? On 9/6/06, Fernanda <fernanda.aispuro-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > > I missed something... > To limit the number of results to 50, just add: > :limit => 50 > after the :order key. > > > > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On 9/7/06, John Kopanas <kopanas-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > I have a USER model and a TAG model and they have a has_and_belongs_to > relationships between them. > > I want to Tag.find(:all) ... but I only want to return tags that have > at least one association with at user. >I am assuming you are trying to do something like Tag.find(:all, :include=>:user] :include will generate a left outer join, which means tags without users are returned as well. Try using a :join statement and make it an INNER JOIN. You''ll want to read up on the naming scheme for table aliases that AR uses, the Rdoc is under ActiveRecord::Associations. Cheers, Max --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Thanks everyone for you input. Sometimes SQL is just the nicest solution. I found an almost perfect solution using Railsisms but it just did not read as well as SQL. But I did wrap the SQL into a method that I call from the controller so at least I am just upgrading the dsl of my app. :-) On 9/6/06, Max Muermann <ruby-DC/T6mWKptNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > On 9/7/06, John Kopanas <kopanas-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > I have a USER model and a TAG model and they have a has_and_belongs_to > > relationships between them. > > > > I want to Tag.find(:all) ... but I only want to return tags that have > > at least one association with at user. > > > I am assuming you are trying to do something like > > Tag.find(:all, :include=>:user] > > :include will generate a left outer join, which means tags without > users are returned as well. Try using a :join statement and make it an > INNER JOIN. You''ll want to read up on the naming scheme for table > aliases that AR uses, the Rdoc is under ActiveRecord::Associations. > > Cheers, > Max > > > >-- John Kopanas john-Iau1QiYlxLpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 John Kopanas wrote:> Thanks everyone for you input. Sometimes SQL is just the nicest > solution. I found an almost perfect solution using Railsisms but it > just did not read as well as SQL. But I did wrap the SQL into a > method that I call from the controller so at least I am just upgrading > the dsl of my app. :-)I think inner join support should be added to the _find_ method options. I will gladly add it to the ActiveRecord Extensions if anyone else would find this useful. What are your thoughts on the API of the following to do an INNER JOIN? Tag.find :all, :include=>[ :users_must_exist ] OR Tag.find :all, :finclude=>:users The :finclude would be short for ''force include'', meaning it would force that records existed in both tables, hence the INNER JOIN. Thoughts? Zach Dennis Michigan Ruby Users Group - http://www.gr-ruby.org ActiveRecord Extensions - http://blogs.mktec.com/zdennis/pages/ARE -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE/7NEMyx0fW1d8G0RAsSVAJ9ajdRAhPphQrvG5q9+X2AeBAgdQQCeK89+ dTFza/hfKrOvb3sqx2bfNOc=F22y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> John Kopanas wrote: > I think inner join support should be added to the _find_ method options. > I will gladly add it to the ActiveRecord Extensions if anyone else would > find this useful. > > What are your thoughts on the API of the following to do an INNER JOIN? > Tag.find :all, :include=>[ :users_must_exist ] > OR > Tag.find :all, :finclude=>:users > > The :finclude would be short for ''force include'', meaning it would force > that records existed in both tables, hence the INNER JOIN. Thoughts?How about: Tag.find :all, :must_include => :users Jason Anderson thenewjhp-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
ok i would use an association table like users_tags
so getting tags would be
User_tag.find(:all, :include => {:user, :tag})
getting the top x tags would be easy, just use a DISTINCT and order desc on
first column
--
Heri R.
http://sprinj.com
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---