Search Results

Search found 12686 results on 508 pages for 'ruby on rails3 beta'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 251/508 | < Previous Page | 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258  | Next Page >

  • How to cache queries in Rails across multiple requests

    - by m.u.sheikh
    I want to cache query results so that the same results are fetched "for more than one request" till i invalidate the cache. For instance, I want to render a sidebar which has all the pages of a book, much like the index of a book. As i want to show it on every page of the book, I have to load it on every request. I can cache the rendered sidebar index using action caching, but i also want to actually cache the the query results which are used to generate the html for the sidebar. Does Rails provide a way to do it? How can i do it?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to undo Mocha stubbing of any_instance in Test::Unit

    - by Craig Walker
    Much like this question, I too am using Ryan Bates's nifty_scaffold. It has the desirable aspect of using Mocha's any_instance method to force an "invalid" state in model objects buried behind the controller. Unlike the question I linked to, I'm not using RSpec, but Test::Unit. That means that the two RSpec-centric solutions there won't work for me. Is there a general (ie: works with Test::Unit) way to remove the any_instance stubbing? I believe that it's causing a bug in my tests, and I'd like to verify that.

    Read the article

  • Is Rails default CSRF protection insecure

    - by schickb
    By default the form post CSRF protection in Rails creates an authenticity token for a user that only changes when the user's session changes. One of our customers did a security audit of our site and flagged that as an issue. The auditor's statement was that if we also had a XSS vulnerability that an attacker could grab another user's authenticity token and make use of it for CSRF attacks until the user's session expired. But is seems to me that if we had an XSS vulnerability like that an attacker could just as easily grab another user's session cookie and login as that user directly. Or even just make call to our REST Api as the user being attacked. No secondary CSRF attack needed. Have I missed something? Is there a real problem with the default CSRF protection in Rails?

    Read the article

  • Rails : fighting long http response times with ajax. Is it a good idea? Please, help with implementa

    - by baranov
    Hi, everybody! I've googled some tutorials, browsed some SO answers, and was unable to find a recipe for my problem. I'm writing a web site which is supposed to display almost realtime stock chart. Data is stored in constantly updating MySQL database, I wrote a find_by_sql query code which fetches all the data I need to get my chart drawn. Everything is ok, except performance - it takes from one second to one minute for different queries to fetch all the data from the database, this time includes necessary (My)SQL-server side calculations. This is simply unacceptable. I got the following idea: if the data is queried from the MySQL server one point a time instead of entire dataset, it takes only about 1-100ms to get an individual point. I imagine the data fetch process might be browser-driven. After the user presses the button in order to get a chart drawn, controller makes one request to the database and renders, say, a progress bar, say 1% ready. When the browser gets the response, it immediately makes an (ajax) request, and the server fetches the next piece of data and renders "2%". And so on, until all the data is ready and the server displays the requested chart. Could this be implemented in rails+js, is there a tutorial for solving a similar problem on the Web? I suppose if the thing is feasible at all, somebody should have already done this before. I have read several articles about ajax, I believe I do understand general principles, but never did nontrivial ajax programming myself. Thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • How do I insert an input's value into a separate form?

    - by ryan
    I'm making a tool for my university that allows students to create a list of classes by doing the following: Searching by course title for their course via an autocomplete input field. Adding that course to a separate form that upon being submitted creates a course list. I am trying to link the autocomplete and the course list form with an 'add to course list' button that inserts a hidden input field into the course list form which can subsequently be submitted by a 'create course list' button. My question is this: How do I take the value of the autocomplete input and insert it into the course list form without using AJAX? So far I have something like the following: <%= text_field_with_auto_complete :course, :title, :size => 40 %> <%= link_to_function "Add to Course List" do |page| page.insert_html :top, :course_list, hidden_field(:courses, :course, {:value => "$('course_title').value"}) %> <% form_for(@course_list) do |f|%> <div id="course_list">Insert selected courses here.</div> <% end %>

    Read the article

  • juggernaut error

    - by ZX12R
    i am trying to experiment with Juggernaut plugin using chat_sandbox example. i get this error message Juggernaut: There has been an error connecting on 127.0.0.1:5001 I have no idea what it means. my juggernaut.yml is as follows :hosts: - :port: 5001 :host: 127.0.0.1 :public_host: 127.0.0.1 :public_port: 5001 # :secret_key: your_secret_key # :environment: :development Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • What does BucketAlreadyOwnedByYou error (from Amazon S3) actually mean? I can't find any reason affe

    - by Phyo Wai Win
    Hi there, I am using Amazon S3 to back up my Rails app's mysql database. And I am using astrails-safe plugin to do that and I got the "Your previous request to create the named bucket succeeded and you already own it. (AWS::S3::BucketAlreadyOwnedByYou)" error back whenever I try to update it. I have checked that the folder in which I am going to back up is there in my account already. It's just that I can't upload the files from the code (using astrails-safe). Any help would be appreciated! Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Why am I getting an error on Heroku that suggests I need to migrate my app to Bamboo?

    - by user242065
    When I type: git push heroku master, this is what happens @68-185-86-134:sample_app git push heroku master Counting objects: 110, done. Delta compression using up to 2 threads. Compressing objects: 100% (94/94), done. Writing objects: 100% (110/110), 87.48 KiB, done. Total 110 (delta 19), reused 0 (delta 0) -----> Heroku receiving push -----> Rails app detected ! This version of Rails is only supported on the Bamboo stack ! Please migrate your app to Bamboo and push again. ! See http://docs.heroku.com/bamboo for more information ! Heroku push rejected, incompatible Rails version error: hooks/pre-receive exited with error code 1 To [email protected]:blazing-frost-89.git ! [remote rejected] master -> master (pre-receive hook declined) error: failed to push some refs to '[email protected]:blazing-frost-89.git' My .gems file: rails --version 2.3.8 My .git/config file: [core] repositoryformatversion = 0 filemode = true bare = false logallrefupdates = true ignorecase = true [remote "origin"] url = [email protected]:csmeder/sample_app.git fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* [remote "heroku"] url = [email protected]:blazing-frost-89.git fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/heroku/*

    Read the article

  • After passing a reference to an method, any mods using that reference are not visible outside the me

    - by Jason
    I am passing the reference of name to *mod_name*, I modify the referenced object from within the method but the change is not visible outside of the method, if I am referring to the same object from all locations how come the value is different depending on where I reference it? name = "Jason" puts name.object_id #19827274 def mod_name(name) puts name.object_id #19827274 name = "JasonB" end puts name.object_id #19827274 puts name #Jason String might be a bad example, but I get the same result even if I use a Fixnum.

    Read the article

  • Re-using unit tests for models using STI

    - by TenJack
    I have a number of models that use STI and I would like to use the same unit test to test each model. For example, I have: class RegularList < List class OtherList < List class ListTest < ActiveSupport::TestCase fixtures :lists def test_word_count list = lists(:regular_list) assert_equal(0, list.count) end end How would I go about using the test_word_count test for the OtherList model. The test is much longer so I would rather not have to retype it for each model. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Test for absence of an input tag's value attribute

    - by Jeff
    How can I confirm the absence of a HTML attribute in a Rails RSpec test? I can verify that an input tag has a value attribute and that it is an empty string like so: response.should have_tag("input[name=?][value=?]", "user[password]", "") response.should have_tag("input[name=?][value=?]", "user[password_confirmation]", "") But what I want to do is verify that my input fields do not have a value attribute at all (i.e., a blank field).

    Read the article

  • RoR associations through or not through?

    - by showFocus
    I have four models that are related to one another, the way I have it setup at the moment is I have to select a county, region and country when entering a new city. class Country < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :regions has_many :counties has_many :cities end class Region < ActiveRecord::Base has_one :country has_many :counties has_many :cities end class County < ActiveRecord::Base has_one :country has_one :region has_many :cities end class City < ActiveRecord::Base has_one :country has_one :region has_one :county end Would it be better to use the :through symbol in the association? So I could say the city: has_one :country, :through => :region Not sure if this is correct, I have read how :through works but I'm not sure if this is the best solution. I am a newbie and while I'm not struggling with the syntax and how things work, it would be good to get opinions on best practices and the way things should be done from some rails wizards! Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Supporting different locale regions using Rails i18n

    - by Olly
    I'm using the standard Rails I18n API to localise some of our views. This is working really well, but we now have a few use cases for regional changes to the en locale. The API guide mentions that this isn't supported directly, and other plugins should be used. However, I'm wondering whether there's a simpler way to do this. I already have en.yml, so in theory I could just create en-AU.yml and en-US.yml which are effectively clones of en.yml but with a few regional changes applied. I could then add additional English - American and English - Australian options to our configuration which would map to the new region-specific locales and allow users to use a region-specific locale. The only problem I can think of with this is that it isn't DRY -- I would have duplicate translations for all common English words. I can't see a way around this. Are there any other disadvantages to this approach, or should I just bite the bullet and dive into one of the plug-ins such as Globalize2 instead?

    Read the article

  • RESTfully Nesting Resource Routes with Single Identifiers

    - by Craig Walker
    In my Rails app I have a fairly standard has_many relationship between two entities. A Foo has zero or more Bars; a Bar belongs to exactly one Foo. Both Foo and Bar are identified by a single integer ID value. These values are unique across all of their respective instances. Bar is existence dependent on Foo: it makes no sense to have a Bar without a Foo. There's two ways to RESTfully references instances of these classes. Given a Foo.id of "100" and a Bar.id of "200": Reference each Foo and Bar through their own "top-level" URL routes, like so: /foo/100 /bar/200 Reference Bar as a nested resource through its instance of Foo: /foo/100 /foo/100/bar/200 I like the nested routes in #2 as it more closely represents the actual dependency relationship between the entities. However, it does seem to involve a lot of extra work for very little gain. Assuming that I know about a particular Bar, I don't need to be told about a particular Foo; I can derive that from the Bar itself. In fact, I probably should be validating the routed Foo everywhere I go (so that you couldn't do /foo/150/bar/200, assuming Bar 200 is not assigned to Foo 150). Ultimately, I don't see what this brings me. So, are there any other arguments for or against these two routing schemes?

    Read the article

  • Configure Rails app to retrieve ALL emails from inbox

    - by Kartik Rao
    I'm using the following code to retrieve emails from my Gmail inbox. def get_mail Net::POP3.enable_ssl(OpenSSL::SSL::VERIFY_NONE) Net::POP3.start('pop.gmail.com', 995, "uname","pass") do |pop| unless pop.mails.empty? pop.each_mail do |mail| email = TMail::Mail.parse(mail.pop) email_obj=EmailedQueries.new email_obj.save_email(email.from,email.subject,email.body_html) end end end end This works just fine, but it retrieves only new mails from the inbox. Instead, I want a seperate function that will retrieve ALL emails from the inbox. This function will be used rarely. I wont be retrieving all mails all the time. Only when necessary. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Should I stop redirecting after successful POST or PUT requests?

    - by Andres Jaan Tack
    It seems common in the Rails community, at least, to respond to successful POST, PUT or DELETE requests by redirecting instead of returning success. For instance, if I PUT a legal change to my user profile, the idiomatic response would be a 302 Redirect to the profile page. Isn't this wrong? Shouldn't we be returning 200 OK from the request? Or a 201 Created, in the case of a POST request? Either of those, in the HTTP/1.1 Status Definitions are allowed to (or required to) include a response, anyway. I guess I'm wondering, before I go and "fix" my application, whether there is there a darn good reason why the community has gone the way of redirects instead of successful responses.

    Read the article

  • Easier way to generate paths

    - by Horace Loeb
    Songs on Rap Genius have paths like /lyrics/The-notorious-b-i-g-ft-mase-and-puff-daddy/Mo-money-mo-problems which are defined in routes.rb as: map.song '/lyrics/:artist_slug/:title_slug', :controller => 'songs', :action => 'show' When I want to generate such a path, I use song_url(:title_slug => song.title_slug, :artist_slug => song.artist_slug). However, I'd much prefer to be able to type song_url(some_song). Is there a way I can make this happen besides defining a helper like: def x_song_path(song) song_path(:title_slug => song.title_slug, :artist_slug => song.artist_slug) end

    Read the article

  • Putting update logic in your migrations

    - by Daniel Abrahamsson
    A couple of times I've been in the situation where I've wanted to refactor the design of some model and have ended up putting update logic in migrations. However, as far as I've understood, this is not good practice (especially since you are encouraged to use your schema file for deployment, and not your migrations). How do you deal with these kind of problems? To clearify what I mean, say I have a User model. Since I thought there would only be two kinds of users, namely a "normal" user and an administrator, I chose to use a simple boolean field telling whether the user was an adminstrator or not. However, after I while I figured I needed some third kind of user, perhaps a moderator or something similar. In this case I add a UserType model (and the corresponding migration), and a second migration for removing the "admin" flag from the user table. And here comes the problem. In the "add_user_type_to_users" migration I have to map the admin flag value to a user type. Additionally, in order to do this, the user types have to exist, meaning I can not use the seeds file, but rather create the user types in the migration (also considered bad practice). Here comes some fictional code representing the situation: class CreateUserTypes < ActiveRecord::Migration def self.up create_table :user_types do |t| t.string :name, :nil => false, :unique => true end #Create basic types (can not put in seed, because of future migration dependency) UserType.create!(:name => "BASIC") UserType.create!(:name => "MODERATOR") UserType.create!(:name => "ADMINISTRATOR") end def self.down drop_table :user_types end end class AddTypeIdToUsers < ActiveRecord::Migration def self.up add_column :users, :type_id, :integer #Determine type via the admin flag basic = UserType.find_by_name("BASIC") admin = UserType.find_by_name("ADMINISTRATOR") User.all.each {|u| u.update_attribute(:type_id, (u.admin?) ? admin.id : basic.id)} #Remove the admin flag remove_column :users, :admin #Add foreign key execute "alter table users add constraint fk_user_type_id foreign key (type_id) references user_types (id)" end def self.down #Re-add the admin flag add_column :users, :admin, :boolean, :default => false #Reset the admin flag (this is the problematic update code) admin = UserType.find_by_name("ADMINISTRATOR") execute "update users set admin=true where type_id=#{admin.id}" #Remove foreign key constraint execute "alter table users drop foreign key fk_user_type_id" #Drop the type_id column remove_column :users, :type_id end end As you can see there are two problematic parts. First the row creation part in the first model, which is necessary if I would like to run all migrations in a row, then the "update" part in the second migration that maps the "admin" column to the "type_id" column. Any advice?

    Read the article

  • adding model validation errors in rescue

    - by ash34
    I have the following model with a virtual attribute class Mytimeperiod < ActiveRecord::Base validates presence of :from_dt validates_format_of :from_dt, :with => /\A\d{2}\/\d{2}\/\d{4}\Z/, :message => "format is mm/dd/yyyy" def from_dt self.from_date.strftime("%m/%d/%Y") if !self.from_date.blank? end def from_dt=(from_dt) self.from_date = Date.parse(from_dt) rescue self.errors.add_to_base("invalid from dt") end end I am using <%= f.error_messages %> to display the error messages on the form. I am using from_dt as a virtual attribute (string). The 'presence of' and 'format of' validation errors show up on the form, but when the user enters an invalid date format on the form and Date.Parse raises an exception I have a 'errors.add_to_base' statement in the rescue clause. Can anyone tell me why this error does not show up in the form error messages when I disable the 'format of' validation. thanks.

    Read the article

  • Complex Rails queries across multiple tables, unions, and will_paginate. Solved.

    - by uberllama
    Hi folks. I've been working on a complex "user feed" type of functionality for a while now, and after experimenting with various union plugins, hacking named scopes, and brute force, have arrived at a solution I'm happy with. S.O. has been hugely helpful for me, so I thought I'd post it here in hopes that it might help others and also to get feedback -- it's very possible that I worked on this so long that I walked down an unnecessarily complicated road. For the sake of my example, I'll use users, groups, and articles. A user can follow other users to get a feed of their articles. They can also join groups and get a feed of articles that have been added to those groups. What I needed was a combined, pageable feed of distinct articles from a user's contacts and groups. Let's begin. user.rb has_many :articles has_many :contacts has_many :contacted_users, :through => :contacts has_many :memberships has_many :groups, :through => :memberships contact.rb belongs_to :user belongs_to :contacted_user, :class_name => "User", :foreign_key => "contacted_user_id" article.rb belongs_to :user has_many :submissions has_many :groups, :through => :submissions group.rb has_many :memberships has_many :users, :through => :memberships has_many :submissions has_many :articles, :through => :submissions Those are the basic models that define my relationships. Now, I add two named scopes to the Article model so that I can get separate feeds of both contact articles and group articles should I desire. article.rb # Get all articles by user's contacts named_scope :by_contacts, lambda {|user| {:joins => "inner join contacts on articles.user_id = contacts.contacted_user_id", :conditions => ["articles.published = 1 and contacts.user_id = ?", user.id]} } # Get all articles in user's groups. This does an additional query to get the user's group IDs, then uses those in an IN clause named_scope :by_groups, lambda {|user| {:select => "DISTINCT articles.*", :joins => :submissions, :conditions => {:submissions => {:group_id => user.group_ids}}} } Now I have to create a method that will provide a UNION of these two feeds into one. Since I'm using Rails 2.3.5, I have to use the construct_finder_sql method to render a scope into its base sql. In Rails 3.0, I could use the to_sql method. user.rb def feed "(#{Article.by_groups(self).send(:construct_finder_sql,{})}) UNION (#{Article.by_contacts(self).send(:construct_finder_sql,{})})" end And finally, I can now call this method and paginate it from my controller using will_paginate's paginate_by_sql method. HomeController.rb @articles = Article.paginate_by_sql(current_user.feed, :page => 1) And we're done! It may seem simple now, but it was a lot of work getting there. Feedback is always appreciated. In particular, it would be great to get away from some of the raw sql hacking. Cheers.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258  | Next Page >