I have in my model
class Card < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :idioms, dependent: :destroy
end
class Idiom < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :card
end
In my schema, Idiom has an integer column kind. Given a certain card, I
would like to have all associated idioms, but sorted in descending order
according to the ‘kind’ column.
I could do a
@card.idioms.sort { … }
but would prefer doing the sorting by the time the data is retrieved
from the database. I googled two suggestions:
(1) @card.idioms(:order => ‘kind DESC’)
This doesn’t seem to have any effect.
(2) @card.idioms.all(:order => ‘kind DESC’)
This gives the error “wrong number of arguments (1 for 0)”.
I think I could do a
Idiom.where(…)
and put an order restriction there, but I feel that Rails must have a
way to specify sorting when following associations, and maybe I just
made some silly mistake. Any ideas?
On Jun 17, 2014, at 8:34 AM, Ronald F. wrote:
In my schema, Idiom has an integer column kind. Given a certain card, I
(1) @card.idioms(:order => ‘kind DESC’)
and put an order restriction there, but I feel that Rails must have a
way to specify sorting when following associations, and maybe I just
made some silly mistake. Any ideas?
It sounds to me as though maybe all of your idioms have the same value
(or null) in their kind column. What does the database itself believe
about these idioms? Have you tested that different values are being set
for each? Also, what amount of data do you have?
Walter
On 17 June 2014 13:34, Ronald F. [email protected] wrote:
In my schema, Idiom has an integer column kind. Given a certain card, I
(1) @card.idioms(:order => ‘kind DESC’)
This doesn’t seem to have any effect.
What do you mean by not having any effect? It did not find anything,
or they were not sorted correctly?
If you have a look in log/development.log you will see the query being
run and check that it looks ok.
Colin
Walter D. wrote in post #1149912:
On Jun 17, 2014, at 8:34 AM, Ronald F. wrote:
It sounds to me as though maybe all of your idioms have the same value
(or null) in their kind column.
No, they have correct values (1, 2 and 3). Actually, the logic of the
application ensures that there are only those values (I should this
place into the model too).
Does it mean that in your opinion, my attempt to sort them would be
correct?
Ronald
Colin L. wrote in post #1149914:
On 17 June 2014 13:34, Ronald F. [email protected] wrote:
In my schema, Idiom has an integer column kind. Given a certain card, I
(1) @card.idioms(:order => ‘kind DESC’)
This doesn’t seem to have any effect.
What do you mean by not having any effect?
It means that they always come out in the same order (which,
accidentally, is ascending according to the kind values, which is
likely a consequence, that I create the Idiom objects with ascending
kind values, and so the probability is high that - with my small
development database - I just get them back in the order they were
created.
BTW, I looked at the result by running .inspect on the returned data,
and from this I found that it’s not sorted descendingly.
If you have a look in log/development.log you will see the query being
run and check that it looks ok.
Oh, of course, I should have thought of this myself! I’ll do that next
time I’m on the development host!
Ronald
On Jun 17, 2014, at 9:30 AM, Ronald F. wrote:
correct?
Your code is correct: some_reference.order(‘kind DESC’) is the correct
way to get the order you are asking for. Remember that if you only have
three possible values, the implicit sort of the members within each kind
will probably be the ID, all other things being equal. You should see
the same behavior as if you entered this explicitly:
some_reference.order(‘kind DESC, id ASC’)
Walter
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 6:38 AM, Walter Lee D. [email protected]
wrote:
Your code is correct: some_reference.order(‘kind DESC’) is the correct way to
get the order you are asking for.
?? Not, the OP originally posted:
@card.idioms(:order => ‘kind DESC’)
which is 1) not equivalent, and 2) won’t work.
–
Hassan S. ------------------------ [email protected]
twitter: @hassan
On Jun 17, 2014, at 7:38 AM, Walter Lee D. [email protected]
wrote:
Your code is correct: some_reference.order(‘kind DESC’) is the correct way to
get the order you are asking for. Remember that if you only have three possible
values, the implicit sort of the members within each kind will probably be the ID,
all other things being equal.
There is no “implicit” sort in SQL, the order within each kind will be
indeterminate.
–
Scott R.
[email protected]
http://www.elevated-dev.com/
(303) 722-0567 voice
Ooh, sorry, missed that whole side of the problem! Was that ever the way
to do this, like say in Rails 1.5?
Walter
Thanks to all contributors! Hassan S.'s sharp eye finally spotted
the culprit.
Hassan S. wrote in post #1149926:
?? Not, the OP originally posted:
@card.idioms(:order => ‘kind DESC’)
which is 1) not equivalent, and 2) won’t work.
Oops!!! I think that’s it! Will check it on the next occasion.
(The OP is herewith ashamed)
Ronald
On Tuesday, 17 June 2014 07:35:05 UTC-5, Ruby-Forum.com User wrote:
(1) @card.idioms(:order => ‘kind DESC’)
This doesn’t seem to have any effect.
This doesn’t do anything, because the association uses that single
argument
for something different (deciding whether to reload if already loaded).
way to specify sorting when following associations, and maybe I just
made some silly mistake. Any ideas?
There are a couple ways to do this, depending on how often you need the
data sorted in a particular way:
- adding an
order onto your relation call will order the records:
@some_card.idioms.order(kind: :desc)
- adding a scope will do the same thing:
class Idiom < ActiveRecord::Base
scope :by_kind, → { order(kind: :desc) }
end
@some_card.idioms.by_kind
- or you can add the order directly to the association (building on the
scope above):
class Card < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :idioms, → { by_kind }, dependent: :destroy
end
@some_card.idioms # still sorted now
–Matt J.