Shouldn't XXX.all mean no more queries?

Rails
1

Hey

I thought if I did “Pages.all” in the controller that would load all
rows?

Since, in my view if I later do “Pages.find(1)” that causes another
query… ?

I did try doing “@pages = Pages.all” and then querying
“@pages.find(1)” … but no luck

any ideas?

cheers

2

Since, in my view if I later do “Pages.find(1)” that causes another
query… ?

That’s normal behavior.

You can’t expect Rails to be clever enough to read into your mind that
way. You could write your own method to search for a Page with id of 1
inside your array.

3

On 7 August 2010 15:46, [email protected] [email protected]
wrote:

any ideas?

(Assuming you’re on Rails 2:)

Essentially, when you call a finder method (e.g. .all or .find),
ActiveRecord executes the SQL, turns the result into ActiveRecord
objects, and hands them back. That’s all. It doesn’t store the results
internally. So when you call another finder method, it’ll just do the
same thing for that method, including hitting the database again.

There is one special exception to this, which is the ‘query cache’.
This caches the results of a particular SQL SELECT query, and if you
run that exact same SQL SELECT query again then it’ll return the
same results to you without hitting the database again. But that’s all
it does: it just caches the results of one particular SQL query; it’s
not smart enough to figure out that Page.all and Page.find(1) are
going to contain the same row.

In your case, Page.all returns a normal Ruby array, so you could use
normal Ruby methods like Array#select [1] to pull out objects directly
from that array, without hitting the database again. That’s not the
most elegant thing in the world, though.

Hope that helps,
Chris

[1] class Array - RDoc Documentation