Problem:
I am using the ransack gem to sort columns in a table. I have 2 models: Campaign and Course. A campaign has many courses, and a course belongs to one campaign. Each course has a number of total_attendees. My Campaigns table has a column for Total Attendees, and I want it to be sortable. So it would sum up the total_attendees field for each course that belongs to a single campaign, and sort based on that sum.
Ex. A campaign has 3 courses, each with 10 attendees. The Total Attendees column on the campaign table would show 30 and it would be sortable against total attendees for all the other campaigns.
I found ransackers:
https://github.com/activerecord-hackery/ransack/wiki/Using-Ransackers
and this SO question: Ransack sort by sum of relation
and from that put together a lot of what is below.
From Model - campaign.rb:
class Campaign < ApplicationRecord
has_many :courses
ransacker :sum_of_total_attendees do
query = "SELECT SUM(r.total_attendees)
FROM campaigns c
LEFT OUTER JOIN courses r
ON r.campaign_id = c.id
GROUP BY c.id"
Arel.sql(query)
end
end
From Model - course.rb:
class Course < ApplicationRecord
belongs_to :campaign, optional: true
end
View:
<th scope="col"><%= sort_link(#q, :sum_of_total_attendees, 'Total Attendees') %></th>
Controller - campaigns_controller.rb:
all_campaigns = Campaign.all
#q = all_campaigns.ransack(params[:q])
#campaigns = #q.result
Errors:
The ransacker query gives me the data I want, but I don't know what to do to get the right information .
Originally, when I clicked on the th link to sort the data, I got this error:
PG::CardinalityViolation: ERROR: more than one row returned by a
subquery used as an expression
I don't know what changed, but now I'm getting this error:
PG::SyntaxError: ERROR: syntax error at or near "SELECT"
LINE 1: SELECT "campaigns".* FROM "campaigns" ORDER BY SELECT SUM(r....
^
: SELECT "campaigns".* FROM "campaigns" ORDER BY SELECT
SUM(r.total_attendees)
FROM campaigns c
LEFT OUTER JOIN courses r
ON r.campaign_id = c.id
GROUP BY c.id ASC
This error seems to say that the ransack search parameter, #q and the ransacker query don't work together. There are two selects in this request, when there should definitely be only one, but the first one is coming from ransack, so I'm not sure how to address it.
How do I get my query to sort correctly with ransack?
Articles I've looked at but did not seem to apply to what I was looking to accomplish with this story:
Ransack Sort By Sum of Relation: This is the one I worked from a lot, but I'm not sure why it works for this user and not for me. They don't show what is changed, if anything, in the controller
Ransack Github Issue For Multiple Params: This doesn't cover the issue of summing table columns.
Rails Ransack Sorting Searching Based On A Definition In The Model: This didn't apply to my need to sort based on summed data.
Three Ways to Bend The Ransack Gem: This looks like what I was doing, but I'm not sure why theirs is working but mine isn't.
Related
I have two models
class User
has_many :subscriptions
end
and
class Subscription
belongs_to :user
end
one one of my pages I would like to display a list of all users ordered by the number of subscriptions each user has. I am not to good with sql queries but I think that
list = Users.all.joins(:subscriptions).group("user.id").order("count(subscriptions.id) DESC")
dose the job. Now to my problem, when I try to count the total number of objects in list, using list.count, I get a hash with user.id and subscription count, like this
{11 => 5,
8 => 7,
1 => 11,
...}
not the total number of users in list.. .count works fine if I have a list sorted by for example user name (which is in the user table). I would really like to use .count since it in a module for pagination thats in a gem but any ideas is great!
Thanks!
We can just use a single query to finish this:
User.joins("LEFT OUTER JOIN ( SELECT user_id, COUNT(*) as num_subscriptions
FROM subscriptions
GROUP BY user_id
) AS temp
ON temp.user_id = users.id")
.order("temp.num_subscriptions DESC")
Basically, my idea is to try to query the number of subscription for each user_id in the subquery, then join with User. I used LEFT OUTER JOIN, because there will be several users which don't have any subscriptions
Improve option: You can define a scope inside User, it would be more beautiful for later usage:
user.rb
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :subscriptions
scope :sorted_by_num_subscriptions, -> {
joins("LEFT OUTER JOIN ( SELECT user_id, COUNT(*) as num_subscriptions
FROM subscriptions
GROUP BY user_id
) AS temp
ON temp.user_id = users.id")
.order("temp.num_subscriptions DESC")
}
end
Then just use it:
User.sorted_by_num_subscriptions
When grouping, the count method changes it's behavior and indeed, instead of returning the total count of records, it returns a hash of the counts for each group (see the docs for more info). So what you get with list.count is simply a hash of the subscription counts for each user.
So, your query is correct and all you need is to sum up the individual counts in the groups. This can be done simply by:
total_count = list.count.values.sum
If it is the pagination code that calls just a bare count that makes the issue, usually the pagination code is able to accept a parameter with total count. For example, will_paginate accepts the total_entries parameter, so you should be able to pass it the total count like this:
list.paginate(page: 2, total_entries: list.count.values.sum)
I want to get the sum of the receipt items that are in a particular budget (same title) and from the current query I'm getting to many record and obvious wrong sum of amounts from the receipt items.
My current attempt is looking like that in ActiveRecord (AR):
ReceiptItem.includes(donation: [:budgets]).joins(:donation, :receipt).where(budgets: {title: "Some title 2015"}).sum(:amount)
and my SQL attempt was looking like that (its also wrong):
-- want to test just the outcome its not actually not summing up the amounts
SELECT "receipt_items"."amount"
FROM
"receipt_items" INNER JOIN "donations" ON "donations"."id" = "receipt_items"."donation_id"
RIGHT JOIN "receipts" ON "receipts"."receipt_id" = "receipt_items"."receipt_id"
LEFT OUTER JOIN "budgets" ON "budgets"."donation_id" = "donations"."id"
WHERE "budgets"."title" = 'Some title 2015';
Why I'm getting double records although I've joined the tables and set also the condition?
Here is the ER modell to understand the problem.
And here's the AR Assoziations:
class Budget < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :donation
class Donation < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :receipt_items
has_many :budgets
class ReceiptItem < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :donation
Because a budget can be linked to a reciept item multiple times, via different donations, it's appearing in the big join table multiple times, and thus being counted several times.
Let's try to think this through a step at a time. If you wanted to do it without worrying about eager loading, you would do:
Budget.where(title: "some title").all.collect(&:donation).collect(&:receipt_items).flatten.uniq.collect(&:amount).sum
is that right?
If so, you can tailor the eager loading to fit this chain of method calls:
Budget.where(title: "some title", include: {:donation => [:receipt_items]}).all.collect(&:donation).collect(&:receipt_items).uniq.collect(&:amount).sum
try that?
There are two models with our familiar one-to-many relationship:
class Custom
has_many :orders
end
class Order
belongs_to :custom
end
I want to do the following work:
get all the custom information whose age is over 18, and how many big orders(pay for 1,000 dollars) they have?
UPDATE:
for the models:
rails g model custom name:string age:integer
rails g model orders amount:decimal custom_id:integer
I hope one left join sql statement will do all my job, and don't construct unnecessary objects like this:
Custom.where('age > ?', '18').includes(:orders).where('orders.amount > ?', '1000')
It will construct a lot of order objects which I don't need, and it will calculate the count by Array#count function which will waste time.
UPDATE 2:
My own solution is wrong, it will remove customs who doesn't have big orders from the result.
Finding adult customers with big orders
This solution uses a single query, with the nested orders relation transformed into a sub-query.
big_customers = Custom.where("age > ?", "18").where(
id: Order.where("amount > ?", "1000").select(:custom_id)
)
Grab all adults and their # of big orders (MySQL)
This can still be done in a single query. The count is grabbed via a join on orders and sticking the count of orders into a column in the result called big_orders_count, which ActiveRecord turns into a method. It involves a lot more "raw" SQL. I don't know any way to avoid this with ActiveRecord except with the great squeel gem.
adults = Custom.where("age > ?", "18").select([
Custom.arel_table["*"],
"count(orders.id) as big_orders_count"
]).joins(%{LEFT JOIN orders
ON orders.custom_id = customs.id
AND orders.amount > 1000})
# see count:
adults.first.big_orders_count
You might want to consider caching counters like this. This join will be expensive on the database, so if you had a dedicated customs.big_order_count column that was either refreshed regularly or updated by an observer that watches for big Order records.
Grab all adults and their # of big orders (PostgreSQL)
Solution 2 is mysql only. To get this to work in postgresql I created a third solution that uses a sub-query. Still one call to the DB :-)
adults = Custom.where("age > ?", "18").select([
%{"customs".*},
%{(
SELECT count(*)
FROM orders
WHERE orders.custom_id = customs.id
AND orders.amount > 1000
) AS big_orders_count}
])
# see count:
adults.first.big_orders_count
I have tested this against postgresql with real data. There may be a way to use more ActiveRecord and less SQL, but this works.
Edited.
#custom_over_18 = Custom.where("age > ?", "18").orders.where("amount > ?", "1000").count
I'm trying to order a list of locations based on the number of times a user has viewed them. Am using the impressionist gem for the sake of it.
The problem I'm having is that my query completely excludes those locations the user's never viewed. I need to display these at the bottom of the results and order by the created_at timestamp.
I can do this to get a list of location_ids:
#location_ids = #user.impressions.
select('count(id) as counter, impressionable_id').
group(:impressionable_id).
order('counter DESC').
#location_ids.map(&:impressionable_id)
Which gives [3,5,8,44,99] and so on..
However, that doesn't get me far so I tried this:
#user.locations.
joins(:impressions).
select("count(impressions.id) as counter, impressionable_id, locations.location_name, locations.id").
group(:impressionable_id).
order("counter desc")
Which is better but it omits those locations with zero views.
How should I do this to get all the locations?
By default, Rails uses an inner join when you use .joins. That's why you don't see the locations with no associated impressions. You need to tell it to use a left join instead, probably like so:
#user.locations.
joins("left join impressions on impressions.impressionable_id = locations.id and impressions.impressionable_type = 'Location'").
select("count(impressions.id) as counter, impressionable_id, locations.location_name, locations.id").
group('locations.id').
order("counter desc")
I have a model offers and another historical_offers, one offer has_many historical_offers.
Now I would like to eager load the historical_offers of one given day for a set of offers, if it exists. For this, I think I need to pass the day to the ON clause, not the WHERE clause, so that I get all offers, also when there is no historical_offer for the given day.
With
Offer.where(several_complex_conditions).includes(:historical_offers).where("historical_offers.day = ?", Date.today)
I would get
SELECT * FROM offers
LEFT OUTER JOIN historical_offers
ON offers.id = historical_offers.offer_id
WHERE day = '2012-11-09' AND ...
But I want to have the condition in the ON clause, not in the WHERE clause:
SELECT * FROM offers
LEFT OUTER JOIN historical_offers
ON offers.id = historical_offers.offer_id AND day = '2012-11-09'
WHERE ...
I guess I could alter the has_many definition with a lambda condition for a specific date, but how would I pass in a date then?
Alternatively I could write the joins mysqlf like this:
Offer.where(several_complex_conditions)
.joins(["historical_offers ON offers.id = historical_offers.offer_id AND day = ?", Date.today])
But how can I hook this up so that eager loading is done?
After a few hours headscratching and trying all sorts of ways to accomplish eager loading of a constrained set of associated records I came across #dbenhur's answer in this thread which works fine for me - however the condition isn't something I'm passing in (it's a date relative to Date.today). Basically it is creating an association with the conditions I wanted to put into the LEFT JOIN ON clause into the has_many condition.
has_many :prices, order: "rate_date"
has_many :future_valid_prices,
class_name: 'Price',
conditions: ['rate_date > ? and rate is not null', Date.today-7.days]
And then in my controller:
#property = current_agent.properties.includes(:future_valid_prices).find_by_id(params[:id])