Im using rails for an app and I scaffolded the User database. I have a show.html.erb page for each user, but currently the URL's are /users/1 or /users/2, I want the URL's to be a random number, or the timestamp of creatation. So something like /users/201109123121 or even just a random;y generated number.
Is there a way to do this?
Yes, define to_param in your User model:
def to_param
timestamp
end
And define the timestamp attribute on your model and set it in a before_create:
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
before_create :set_timestamp
# model code goes here
def set_timestamp
self.timestamp = created_at.to_i
end
But if two users were created at precisely the same second, you will run into trouble. You may want to make this slightly more random than that. You will also now need to find them based on that field:
User.find_by_timestamp(params[:id])
Add this to your Gemfile
gem 'uuidtools'
Then do
#models/user.rb
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
before_create :set_uuid
# model code goes here
def set_uuid
self.uuid = UUIDTools::UUID.timestamp_create.to_s
end
end
Then you request it like so.
User.find_by_uuid(params[:id])
Unlike the above answer this should significantly reduce the likelihood of a race condition as that's the point of uuid (universal unique identifier)
Related
I am new to Rails and am currently learning strong parameters in Rails 4 and following the below example from the official documentation:
`class PeopleController < ActionController::Base
# Using "Person.create(params[:person])" would raise an
# ActiveModel::ForbiddenAttributes exception because it'd
# be using mass assignment without an explicit permit step.
# This is the recommended form:
def create
Person.create(person_params)
end
# This will pass with flying colors as long as there's a person key in the
# parameters, otherwise it'll raise an ActionController::MissingParameter
# exception, which will get caught by ActionController::Base and turned
# into a 400 Bad Request reply.
def update
redirect_to current_account.people.find(params[:id]).tap { |person|
person.update!(person_params)
}
end
private
# Using a private method to encapsulate the permissible parameters is
# just a good pattern since you'll be able to reuse the same permit
# list between create and update. Also, you can specialize this method
# with per-user checking of permissible attributes.
def person_params
params.require(:person).permit(:name, :age)
end
end`
Question 1:
What does current_account.people.find mean inside the update method?
Question 2:
Could someone please explain the person_params method. What is "params" inside the person_params method?
current_account is a most likely a private method that returns an Account instance. current_account.people.find(params[:id]) searches the people table for a person that belongs to the current_account and has an ID of params[:id]. Object#tap is a ruby method that yields a block with the current object, and then returns that object. In this case, the Person instance is updated inside the block and the returned from tap. Finally, redirect_to is a controller method that will redirect the request to a different path. redirect_to can take many different types of arguments, including an ActiveRecord model, a string, or a symbol. Passing it an ActiveRecord model will redirect the request to the model's resource path, which is defined in routes.rb. In this case, that path will most likely be /people/:id.
The params object is a hash containing parameter names and values. For example, the request /people?name=Joe&age=34 will result in the following params object: {name: 'Joe', age: '34'}.
I want to scan all records to check if there is not errors inside data.
How can I disable BadValueError to no break scan on lack of required field?
Consider that I can not change StringProperty to not required and such properties can be tenths in real code - so such workaround is not useful?
class A(db.Model):
x = db.StringProperty(required = True)
for instance in A.all():
# check something
if something(instance):
instance.delete()
Can I use some function to read datastore.Entity directly to avoid such problems with not need validation?
The solution I found for this problem was to use a resilient query, it ignores any exception thrown by a query, you can try this:
def resilient_query(query):
query_iter = iter(query)
while True:
next_result = query_iter.next()
#check something
yield next_result
except Exception, e:
next_result.delete()
query = resilient_query(A.query())
If you use ndb, you can load all your models as an ndb.Expando, then modify the values. This doesn't appear to be possible in db because you cannot specify a kind for a Query in db that differs from your model class.
Even though your model is defined in db, you can still use ndb to fix your entities:
# Setup a new ndb connection with ndb.Expando as the default model.
conn = ndb.make_connection(default_model=ndb.Expando)
# Use this connection in our context.
ndb.set_context(ndb.make_context(conn=conn))
# Query for all A kinds
for a in ndb.Query(kind='A'):
if a.x is None:
a.x = 'A more appropriate value.'
# Re-put the broken entity.
a.put()
Also note that this (and other solutions listed) will be subject to whatever time limits you are restricted to (i.e. 60 seconds on an App Engine frontend). If you are dealing with large amounts of data you will most likely want to write a custom map reduce job to do this.
Try setting a default property option to some distinct value that does not exist otherwise.
class A(db.Model):
x = db.StringProperty(required = True, default = <distinct value>)
Then load properties and check for this value.
you can override the _check_initialized(self) method of ndb.Model in your own Model subclass and replace the default logic with your own logic (or skip altogether as needed).
I'm wondering what the right pattern should be to update an existing datastore object using endpoints-proto-datastore.
For example, given a model like the one from your GDL videos:
class Task(EndpointsModel):
detail = ndb.StringProperty(required=True)
owner = ndb.StringProperty()
imagine we'd like to update the 'detail' of a Task.
I considered something like:
#Task.method(name='task.update',
path='task/{id}',
request_fields=('id', 'detail'))
def updateTask(self, task):
pass
However, 'task' would presumably contain the previously-stored version of the object, and I'm not clear on how to access the 'new' detail variable with which to update the object and re-store it.
Put another way, I'd like to write something like this:
def updateTask(self, task_in_datastore, task_from_request):
task_in_datastore.detail = task_from_request.detail
task_in_datastore.put()
Is there a pattern for in-place updates of objects with endpoints-proto-datastore?
Thanks!
See the documentation for details on this
The property id is one of five helper properties provided by default
to help you perform common operations like this (retrieving by ID). In
addition there is an entityKey property which provides a base64
encoded version of a datastore key and can be used in a similar
fashion as id...
This means that if you use the default id property your current object will be retrieved and then any updates from the request will replace those on the current object. Hence doing the most trivial:
#Task.method(name='task.update',
path='task/{id}',
request_fields=('id', 'detail'))
def updateTask(self, task):
task.put()
return task
will perform exactly what you intended.
Task is your model, you can easily update like this:
#Task.method(name='task.update',
path='task/{id}',
request_fields=('id', 'detail'))
def updateTask(self, task):
# Task.get_by_id(task.id)
Task.detail = task.detail
Task.put()
return task
dear all
Currently I'm using ndb API to store some statistic information. Unfortunately, this becomes the major source of my cost. I'm thinking it should be much cheaper if I only save them to memcache. It doesn't matter if data is lost due to cache expire.
After read the manual, I assume _use_datastore class variable can be used to configure this behaviour:
class StaticModel(ndb.Model):
_use_datastore = False
userid = ndb.StringProperty()
created_at = ndb.DateTimeProperty(auto_now_add=True)
May I know if above statement is the right solution?
Cheers!
I think there are three ways to achieve what you want.
The first is to set _use_datastore = False on the NDB model class as per your question.
The second would be to pass use_datastore=False whenever you put / get / delete a StaticModel. An example would be:
model = StaticModel(userid="foo")
key = model.put(use_datastore=False)
n = key.get(use_datastore=False)
The third option would be to set a datastore policy in the NDB Context which returns false for any StaticModel keys. Something like:
context.set_datastore_policy(lambda key: True if key.kind() == 'StaticModel' else False)
Was wondering if I'm unconsciously using the Put method in my last line of code ( Please have a look). Thanks.
class User(db.Model):
name = db.StringProperty()
total_points = db.IntegerProperty()
points_activity_1 = db.IntegerProperty(default=100)
points_activity_2 = db.IntegerProperty(default=200)
def calculate_total_points(self):
self.total_points = self.points_activity_1 + self.points_activity_2
#initialize a user ( this is obviously a Put method )
User(key_name="key1",name="person1").put()
#get user by keyname
user = User.get_by_key_name("key1")
# QUESTION: is this also a Put method? It worked and updated my user entity's total points.
User.calculate_total_points(user)
While that method will certainly update the copy of the object that is in-memory, I do not see any reason to believe that the change will be persisted to the the datastore. Datastore write operations are costly, so they are not going to happen implicitly.
After running this code, use the datastore viewer to look at the copy of the object in the datastore. I think that you may find that it does not have the changed total_point value.