similar to: Is HABTM Dying?

So having just learned how to do has_many :through as opposed to HABTM, and then, being concerned that I wouldn''t get it to work, I started thinking about these two approaches. It seems to me that the _only_ problem that the HM:T (has_many :through) approach solves that HABTM doesn''t is the issue of the potential collision of id columns between your join table and one of

Hi, I have 3 tables with HABTM relation. USERS -> QUOTE_TO_USER <- QUOTES Table QUOTE_TO_USER has 3 attributes: quote_id, user_id, component. I have a form where I can tie multiple users to QUOTE. This is easy one, thru "user_ids" (@quote[:user_ids] = @params[:quote][:user_ids]). In this form I have all users and I just check those I want to tie to this quote, however

We have tables Users and Communities linked by has_an_belongs_to_many. The join table Communities_Users has additional fields [ is_active, is_blocked, join_date] etc. These are populated using @user.push_with_attributes(:is_active => true,...). Later on how do we update or retrieve the attributes in the link table for a given user or a community with doing it explicitly using SQL? Thanks,

I have successfully used HABTM to create a many-to-one-to-many set of rows in one step. Now, if two objects I want to associate already exist, how do I create the join row? The Agile book mentions the ''push_with_attributes'' method. The text says this method is useful for adding additional attributes to the join row (in the example a ''read_at'' timestamp). I

Heyo! I am setting up a self-referencial habtm relationship with the users of my app. I am using Chad Fowler''s "Rails Recipes" to get me started, and everything works great with the join table "people_friends". I add friends by doing somebody.friends << somebodyelse. However, with my app, there is an approval process so my join table has columns person_id,

Hi, Posting here since issue tracking isn''t the best place to discuss. I can understand habtm is moving towards deprecating support for extra attributes in join_table, and to use :through for those cases instead. To clarify, patch<http://dev.rubyonrails.org/attachment/ticket/5216/habtm_join_table_test.patch1.diff>for #5216 <http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/5216>

All, I''ve heard recently about has_many :through as a necessary alternative to HABTM (when the join table has it''s own id column, say, in a legacy schema). However, is the prevailing Rails wisdom now that one should use has_many :through in _all_ cases? If so, why? Thanks, Wes -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Hi, I''m trying to figure the most efficient way to model the following. I can think of at least two ways to relate the tables but from a client/server perspective! I''m wondering how to best (and elegantly)relate them from an AR perspective. A project has many people, A person can work on many projects at any time, A project has many roles, A role is performed by a person, A

Hi all I have the following models: class member has_and_belongs_to_many :disc_jockeys end class disc_jockey has_and_belongs_to_many :members end The relation table is called disc_jockeys_members and has the following fields: disc_jockeys_members(disc_jockey_id, member_id, status) So far, the field status can have values like valid, invalid, locked etc., but it is not regarded yet by

Hello, I have a has_and_belongs_to_many relationship that I''ve realized I need to add additional attributes to. So I''m converting it to a has_many :through (HMT) relationship. This is the first time I''ve used an HMT, and it seems like I''m using too much code. I couldn''t figure out how to get the join model objects to update automatically as a result of

Hello All, I am new to ROR, and can''t seem to get HABTM to cooperate entirely... however I might be abusing it! Before I try a different strategy I thought I''d ask here and see if I''m missing something simple. So say Projects and Companies are related. Projects can have multiple Companies, and Companies can be on multiple Projects. But, the same Company can also

I''ve been listening to the discussions regarding the plans to eliminate push_with_attributes. While I think it''s good practice to make join models if you''re developing a new system, I can''t help but think t hat push_with_attributes should be left around to deal with legacy databases. I might want to wrap my application around a database I don''t

Hi, I''ve got the following models: Company Package with a habtm relationship. In my controller, I have a ''dispatch'' action which does the following @companies.each do |company| @packages.each do |package| company.packages.push_with_attributes(package, :sent_on => Time.now) end end my table ''companies_packages'' therefore lists which

Does the new has_many :through and belongs_to :through obsolete (well, replace and essentially deprecate) has_and_belongs_to_many? Joe -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Is there a way to update attributes in a HABTM join table? Right now I am deleting the join and then recreating it with new attributes. I have a table "categories" and another table "items". They are both HABTM with the join table "categories_items" between them. If an item is joined to a category once, no problem, we create the join. But if an item is

In trying to add timestamp support to habtm, I''ve stumped on a question which I hope you all help me solve. And that is, when adding a record twice to the list of associations with push with attributes, should the following test succeed or not? def test_pushing_twice dev = Devel.new("name"=>"victor") p =

Hello *Gem* experts, Sorry for asking multiple questions in one post but they are both related to one problem. So far I have the following code: class Member < ActiveRecord::Base has_and_belongs_to_many :blogs, :uniq=>true ..... end class Blog < ActiveRecord::Base has_and_belongs_to_many :members, :uniq=>true ... end The issue is that

Hi, I''m somewhat of a Rails newbie and am trying to understand how to formulate n-way (3 or 4 way) joins in Rails (where the join tables contain extra data as well.) Let me give you my basic entities: foos id - pk name - unique bars id - pk name - unique bazs id - pk name - unique frozs id - pk name - unique then i have two separate join tables: foos_bars_bazs - 3 way join

I just took my HABTM and turned it into a :through since my join table has another "non-joiny" attribute. I went from this: has_many_and_belongs_to :jobs, :join_table => ''tablename'', :foreign_key => ''x'', :association_foreign_key => ''y'' to this: has_many :jobs, :through =>

Given the following class Programmer < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :assignments has_many :projects, :through => :assignments end if I call Programmer#projects.clear, it will delete_all the joining assignments; however, I have a situation where I''d like the assignments to get destroyed instead so that their after_destroy callbacks get called. It would be simple to