thr3ads.net - Rails - HABTM join table quirk [Dec 2006]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Steve Keener

2006-Dec-08 02:58 UTC

HABTM join table quirk

I''ve been bringing up a good basica framework for applications at work.
To give decent security I''ve been implementing the Rails Recipie for
Authorization of function calls modeled on the book''s implementation.
(Changes for our environment were added..but are minor.)

Since I initially let Rails create the join table between two data
tables with a HABTM relationship....I assumed it would know HOW to do it
correctly.  Oh well...maybe not.  My tables looked like this:

Rights
   ID
   name

Roles
   ID
   rolename

Rights_Roles
   ID
   right_id
   role_id

The ID field is basically unneeded since this table is only for the many
to many relationship.  I was getting a problem when trying to add a
second record to the table.  It turns out the HABTM relationship was
adding one of the foreign keys as the ID field as well as it''s true
field....causing a key constraint conflict.

My solution was to use a migration to alter the table and drop the ID
field.  My rights_roles relationship now seems to be working just fine.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Steve Keener

2006-Dec-08 03:01 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Oh yeah...I had been running on the stable version of Rails 1.1.  I 
thought that I might have a bug and decided to upgrade to Edge Rails. 
(Since I''ve heard Rails 1.2 isn''t far off...it should be
fairly close
and I might get a fix for this.) Nope....no dice.  Just FYI.

Hope this helps somebody else in this situation.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Justin Mazzi

2006-Dec-08 03:32 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Steve Keener wrote:> 
> Oh yeah...I had been running on the stable version of Rails 1.1.  I 
> thought that I might have a bug and decided to upgrade to Edge Rails. 
> (Since I''ve heard Rails 1.2 isn''t far off...it should be
fairly close
> and I might get a fix for this.) Nope....no dice.  Just FYI.
> 
> Hope this helps somebody else in this situation.
although it doesn''t specify it in the docs, you are NOT suppose to have
an ID field in the join table.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Ed Hickey

2006-Dec-08 03:39 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

i''ve had this same problem recently.  if you use migrations, the ID
field is created automatically.  there is a way to bypass the ID
primary key creation in the migration but I don''t remember where I
read about it - anyone?

ed


On 12/7/06, Justin Mazzi
<rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org>
wrote:>
> Steve Keener wrote:
> >
> > Oh yeah...I had been running on the stable version of Rails 1.1.  I
> > thought that I might have a bug and decided to upgrade to Edge Rails.
> > (Since I''ve heard Rails 1.2 isn''t far off...it
should be fairly close
> > and I might get a fix for this.) Nope....no dice.  Just FYI.
> >
> > Hope this helps somebody else in this situation.
>
> although it doesn''t specify it in the docs, you are NOT suppose to
have
> an ID field in the join table.
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
> >
>

-- 
Ed Hickey
Developer
Litmus Media
816-533-0409
ehickey-A4HEbNdjHgMmlAP/+Wk3EA@public.gmane.org
A Member of Think Partnership, Inc
www.ThinkPartnership.com
Amex ticker symbol: THK

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Steve Keener

2006-Dec-08 03:39 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Justin Mazzi wrote:> although it doesn''t specify it in the docs, you are NOT suppose to
have
> an ID field in the join table.
I kinda figured that out.  Hence the reason I figured I''d post it so 
somebody else doesn''t have to go through the mental gymnastics I did.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Justin Mazzi

2006-Dec-08 03:40 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Steve Keener wrote:> Justin Mazzi wrote:
>> although it doesn''t specify it in the docs, you are NOT
suppose to have
>> an ID field in the join table.
> 
> I kinda figured that out.  Hence the reason I figured I''d post it
so
> somebody else doesn''t have to go through the mental gymnastics I
did.
yeah, im just confirming that this isnt a work around or something. this 
is how its suppose to work,

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Steve Keener

2006-Dec-08 03:41 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Justin Mazzi wrote:> Steve Keener wrote:
>> Justin Mazzi wrote:
>>> although it doesn''t specify it in the docs, you are NOT
suppose to have
>>> an ID field in the join table.
>> 
>> I kinda figured that out.  Hence the reason I figured I''d post
it so
>> somebody else doesn''t have to go through the mental gymnastics
I did.
> 
> yeah, im just confirming that this isnt a work around or something. this 
> is how its suppose to work,
Damn.  I must be smarter than I look.  :-)

(I''d kinda have to be....heheh)

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Justin Mazzi

2006-Dec-08 03:44 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Ed Hickey wrote:> i''ve had this same problem recently.  if you use migrations, the
ID
> field is created automatically.  there is a way to bypass the ID
> primary key creation in the migration but I don''t remember where I
> read about it - anyone?
> 
> ed
> 
> 

create_table "join_table", :id => false

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Steve Keener

2006-Dec-08 03:45 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Found the wiki reference to the join table issue:

http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/has_and_belongs_to_many


This is the example given on how to create the join table - The :id => 
false prevents the ID field from being created.


class TranzactionRelations < ActiveRecord::Migration
  def self.up
    create_table :tranzaction_relations, :id => false do |t|
      t.column :invoice_id, :integer
      t.column :payment_id, :integer
    end
    add_index :tranzaction_relations, [:invoice_id]
    add_index :tranzaction_relations, [:payment_id]

  end

  def self.down
    drop_table :tranzaction_relations
  end
end

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Jeremy Evans

2006-Dec-09 18:42 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

On 12/7/06, Steve Keener
<rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org>
wrote:>
> I''ve been bringing up a good basica framework for applications at
work.
> To give decent security I''ve been implementing the Rails Recipie
for
> Authorization of function calls modeled on the book''s
implementation.
> (Changes for our environment were added..but are minor.)
>
> Since I initially let Rails create the join table between two data
> tables with a HABTM relationship....I assumed it would know HOW to do it
> correctly.  Oh well...maybe not.  My tables looked like this:
>
> Rights
>    ID
>    name
>
> Roles
>    ID
>    rolename
>
> Rights_Roles
>    ID
>    right_id
>    role_id
>
> The ID field is basically unneeded since this table is only for the many
> to many relationship.  I was getting a problem when trying to add a
> second record to the table.  It turns out the HABTM relationship was
> adding one of the foreign keys as the ID field as well as it''s
true
> field....causing a key constraint conflict.
>
> My solution was to use a migration to alter the table and drop the ID
> field.  My rights_roles relationship now seems to be working just fine.
This is a long standing bug in Rails that I don''t think they plan on
fixing.  See http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/1031.  The suggested
workaround if you want to use a primary key in a join table is to
change to has_many :through.  There is a plugin for Rails 1.1 that
works around the bug:
http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/Allow+HABTM+Primary+Key+Plugin.

Jeremy

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Steve Keener

2006-Dec-09 19:00 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Yeah...I just didn''t find anything quickly and figured somebody would 
find this as annoying as I did.  It''s trivial to fix, but figuring out 
what''s going on, researching to see if I was delusional, and then just 
trying it without the ID field....took more time than I want to admit. 
:-)




-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Parker Thompson

2006-Dec-09 20:16 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

This is a my #1 most hated rails bug.  The framework should not make
you choose between good db design and simple code.  Further this is as
about as far from the principle of least surprise as you can get.

The workaround is to add :select => ''table.*''  to your
habtm declaration.

Also FWIW, I highly recommend you always add primary keys to all your
tables.  This will make it much easier (as opposed to horribly
painful)  later when they do (and they often do) become first class
model objects and costs you basically nothing.

pt.

On 12/7/06, Steve Keener
<rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org>
wrote:>
> I''ve been bringing up a good basica framework for applications at
work.
> To give decent security I''ve been implementing the Rails Recipie
for
> Authorization of function calls modeled on the book''s
implementation.
> (Changes for our environment were added..but are minor.)
>
> Since I initially let Rails create the join table between two data
> tables with a HABTM relationship....I assumed it would know HOW to do it
> correctly.  Oh well...maybe not.  My tables looked like this:
>
> Rights
>    ID
>    name
>
> Roles
>    ID
>    rolename
>
> Rights_Roles
>    ID
>    right_id
>    role_id
>
> The ID field is basically unneeded since this table is only for the many
> to many relationship.  I was getting a problem when trying to add a
> second record to the table.  It turns out the HABTM relationship was
> adding one of the foreign keys as the ID field as well as it''s
true
> field....causing a key constraint conflict.
>
> My solution was to use a migration to alter the table and drop the ID
> field.  My rights_roles relationship now seems to be working just fine.
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
> >
>

-- 
Parker Thompson
http://www.parkert.com/
510.541.0125

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Isak Hansen

2006-Dec-10 18:18 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

On 12/9/06, Jeremy Evans
<jeremyevans0-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:>
> This is a long standing bug in Rails that I don''t think they plan
on
> fixing.  See http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/1031.  The suggested
> workaround if you want to use a primary key in a join table is to
> change to has_many :through.  There is a plugin for Rails 1.1 that
> works around the bug:
> http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/Allow+HABTM+Primary+Key+Plugin.
>
It''s not a bug, habtm join tables are working as intended. If a join
model is what you want, use has_many :through.

Adding a surrogate key to a pure join table _certainly_ isn''t good db
design. You''ll probably want a composite primary key from the two
columns to avoid duplicates.


Isak

> Jeremy
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Steve Keener

2006-Dec-10 18:41 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Isak Hansen wrote:
> It''s not a bug, habtm join tables are working as intended. If a
join
> model is what you want, use has_many :through.
You say Tomato....

:-)
> Adding a surrogate key to a pure join table _certainly_ isn''t good
db
> design. You''ll probably want a composite primary key from the two
> columns to avoid duplicates.
Obviously it''s not the best design.  And I''d rather NOT add
complexity
by
either using the surrogate key....or adding the composite key''s
gem....when I really should need it to make this work.

So far just removing the ID field has allowed my code to work.  Keeping
it simple because I''m not that bright.  :-)

When you start adding fields or gems to make a simple concept work then
you are NOT following the simplest idea behind RoR....to work AS
EXPECTED.  When you do it the ''right'' way you start sounding
like a
java guru.

JMNSHO

MudDawg

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Steve Keener

2006-Dec-10 18:42 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Steve Keener wrote:> either using the surrogate key....or adding the composite key''s
> gem....when I really SHOULDN''T need it to make this work.
Edit for typo....

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Parker Thompson

2006-Dec-10 19:32 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

On 12/10/06, Isak Hansen
<isak.hansen-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:>
> On 12/9/06, Jeremy Evans
<jeremyevans0-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is a long standing bug in Rails that I don''t think they
plan on
> > fixing.  See http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/1031.  The suggested
> > workaround if you want to use a primary key in a join table is to
> > change to has_many :through.  There is a plugin for Rails 1.1 that
> > works around the bug:
> >
http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/Allow+HABTM+Primary+Key+Plugin.
> >
>
> It''s not a bug, habtm join tables are working as intended. If a
join
> model is what you want, use has_many :through.
This is a bug.  Features can be turned off.

Regardless, this ''feature'' has surprised, confused, and
flustered many
a developer.  In this regard it minimally violates the spirit of the
framework.  Saying "it''s supposed to work that way" misses
the point.
The goal is to take the pain out of web development and this is
painful.
> Adding a surrogate key to a pure join table _certainly_ isn''t good
db
> design. You''ll probably want a composite primary key from the two
> columns to avoid duplicates.
I beg to differ.  I (and many others) would argue tables should always
have a primary key that has no other use (i.e. don''t use composite
keys or keys like SSNs which you *think* won''t change but sometimes
do, are harder to index, etc).  If you don''t you will almost certainly
have messy data problems later.

pt.
>
>
> Isak
>
>
> > Jeremy
> >
> > >
> >
>
> >
>

-- 
Parker Thompson
http://www.parkert.com/
510.541.0125

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Isak Hansen

2006-Dec-10 21:11 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

On 12/10/06, Steve Keener
<rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org>
wrote:>
> Steve Keener wrote:
> > either using the surrogate key....or adding the composite
key''s
> > gem....when I really SHOULDN''T need it to make this work.
>
I never mentioned a composite key gem, HABTM associations work fine
out of the box..

I think I was being fairly specific about why I''d add a db level pk
constraint, but if you don''t believe in those things, by all means
leave it out.


Isak


> Edit for typo....
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Wes Gamble

2006-Dec-29 05:18 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

I just ran into this as well.  See this thread:

http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/92440

Sigh.

Thanks for all of the discussion - it''s very helpful.

Wes


-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Wes Gamble

2006-Dec-29 05:33 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Parker Thompson wrote:> This is a my #1 most hated rails bug.  The framework should not make
> you choose between good db design and simple code.  Further this is as
> about as far from the principle of least surprise as you can get.
> 
> The workaround is to add :select => ''table.*''  to your
habtm
> declaration.
> 
Do you literally mean add :select => ''table.*'' to the
declaration or
does "table" represent something?

How does this help and why does it fix the inserts into the join table?

Thanks,
Wes

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Wes Gamble

2006-Dec-29 05:53 UTC

head link

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Wes Gamble wrote:> Parker Thompson wrote:
>> This is a my #1 most hated rails bug.  The framework should not make
>> you choose between good db design and simple code.  Further this is as
>> about as far from the principle of least surprise as you can get.
>> 
>> The workaround is to add :select => ''table.*''  to
your habtm
>> declaration.
>> 
> 
> Do you literally mean add :select => ''table.*'' to the
declaration or
> does "table" represent something?
> 
> How does this help and why does it fix the inserts into the join table?
> 
> Thanks,
> Wes
OK, I''m a dummy - of course you meant to put actual table names. 
However, this does not change the behavior that Steve describes.

Wes

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reasonably Related Threads

Search for more reasonably related threads

Rails - Dec 2006 - HABTM join table quirk

HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Re: HABTM join table quirk

Reasonably Related Threads