Search Results

Search found 676 results on 28 pages for 'polymorphic associations'.

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 3/28 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Rails: Polymorphic User Table a good idea with AuthLogic?

    - by sscirrus
    Hi everyone, I have a system where I need to login three user types: customers, companies, and vendors from one login form on the home page. I have created one User table that works according to AuthLogic's example app at http://github.com/binarylogic/authlogic_example. I have added a field called "User Type" that currently contains either 'Customer', 'Company', or 'Vendor'. Note: each user type contains many disparate fields so I'm not sure if Single Table Inheritance is the best way to go (would welcome corrections if this conclusion is invalid). Is this a polymorphic association where each of the three types is 'tagged' with a User record? How should my models look so I have the right relationships between my User table and my user types Customer, Company, Vendor? Thanks very much!

    Read the article

  • Working with EO composition associations via ADF BC SDO web services

    - by Chris Muir
    ADF Business Components support the ability to publish the underlying Application Modules (AMs) and View Objects (VOs) as web services through Service Data Objects (SDOs).  This blog post looks at a minor challenge to overcome when using SDOs and Entity Objects (EOs) that use a composition association. Using the default ADF BC EO association behaviour ADF BC components allow you to work with VOs that are based on EOs that are a part of a parent-child composition association.  A composition association enforces that you cannot create records for the child outside the context of the parent.  As example when creating invoice-lines you want to enforce the individual lines have a relating parent invoice record, it just simply doesn't make sense to save invoice-lines without their parent invoice record. In the following screenshot using the ADF BC Tester it demonstrates the correct way to create a child Employees record as part of a composition association with Departments: And the following screenshot shows you the wrong way to create an Employee record: Note the error which is enforced by the composition association: (oracle.jbo.InvalidOwnerException) JBO-25030: Detail entity Employees with row key null cannot find or invalidate its owning entity.  Working with composition associations via the SDO web services  Shay Shmeltzer recently recorded a good video which demonstrates how to expose your ADF Business Components through the SDO interface. On exposing the VOs you get a choice of operation to publish including create, update, delete and more: For example through the SDO test interface we can see that the create operation will request the attributes for the VO exposed, in this case EmployeesView1: In this specific case though, just like the ADF BC Tester, an attempt to create this record will fail with JBO-25030, the composition association is still enforced: The correct way to to do this is through the create operation on the DepartmentsView1 which also lets you create employees record in context of the parent, thus satisfying the composition association rule: Yet at issue here is the create operation will always create both the parent Departments and Employees records.  What do we do if we've already previously created the parent Departments records, and we just want to create additional Employees records for that Department?  The create method of the EmployeeView1 as we saw previously doesn't allow us to do that, the JBO-3050 error will be raised. The solution is the "merge" operation on the parent Departments record: In this case for the Departments record you just need to supply the DepartmentId of the Department you want the Employees record to be associated with, as well as the new Employees record.  When invoked only the Employees record is created, and the supply of the DepartmentId of the Departments record satisfies the composition association without actually creating or updating the associated Department record that already exists in the database. Be warned however if you supply any more attributes for the Department record, it will result in a merge (update) of the associated Departments record too. 

    Read the article

  • Reset Photoshop File Associations

    - by Rev
    Is there a way to reset Photoshop's file associations without having to reinstall? I had CS6 and CS5.5 installed side by side, and when I uninstalled CS5.5 it removed the file associations. I tried searching around but everyone seems to have the opposite problem (wanting to remove Photosohp's file associations). Oh, and just doing Open Width - Photoshop and setting that as default doesn't really work right. It displays the wrong icons (which really gets on my nerves). Running Windows 8 RP (but the fix should be the same as in Windows 7).

    Read the article

  • Unidirectional One-to-Many Associations in Entity Framework 4?

    - by Eric J.
    Does EF 4 support unidirectional one-to-many associations, as in: public class Parent { public int Id { get; set; } public string Something { get; set; } public List<Child> AllMyChildren { get; set; } } public class Child { public int Id { get; set; } public string Anotherthing { get; set; } // I don't want a back-reference to the Parent! // public int ParentId { get; set; } } When I try to compile my project with an association between Parent and Child where End2 Navigation is blank (because I unchecked the End2 Navigation Property checkbox in the Add Association dialog), I get Error 2027: No mapping specified for the following EntitySet/AssociationSet - Child.

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between Unidirectional and Bidirectional associations?

    - by hguser
    Hi: What is the difference between Unidirectional and Bidirectional associations? Since the table generated in the db are all the same,so the only difference I found is that each side of the bidiretional assocations will have a refer to the other,and the unidirectional not. /////////// This is a Unidirectional association public class User { private int id; private String name; @ManyToOne @JoinColumn( name = "groupId") private Group group; } public class Group { private int id; private String name; } ////////////// The Bidirectional association public class User { private int id; private String name; @ManyToOne @JoinColumn( name = "groupId") private Group group; } public class Group { private int id; private String name; @OneToMany(mappedBy="group") private List<User> users; } The difference is wheather the group hold a refer of the user. So I wonder if this is the only difference? which is recommended?

    Read the article

  • Recommended way to test ActiveRecord associations?

    - by Sugerman
    I have written my basic models and defined their associations as well as the migrations to create the associated tables. I want to be able to test: The associations are configured as intended The table structures support the associations properly I've written FG factories for all of my models in anticipation of having a complete set of test data but I can't grasp how to write a spec to test both belongs_to and has_many associations. For example, given an Organization that has_many Users I want to be able to test that my sample Organization has a reference to my sample User. Organization_Factory.rb: Factory.define :boardofrec, :class => 'Organization' do |o| o.name 'Board of Recreation' o.address '115 Main Street' o.city 'Smallville' o.state 'New Jersey' o.zip '01929' end Factory.define :boardofrec_with_users, :parent => :boardofrec do |o| o.after_create do |org| org.users = [Factory.create(:johnny, :organization => org)] end end User_Factory.rb: Factory.define :johnny, :class => 'User' do |u| u.name 'Johnny B. Badd' u.email '[email protected]' u.password 'password' u.org_admin true u.site_admin false u.association :organization, :factory => :boardofrec end Organization_spec.rb: ... it "should have the user Johnny B. Badd" do boardofrec_with_users = Factory.create(:boardofrec_with_users) boardofrec_with_users.users.should include(Factory.create(:johnny)) end ... This example fails because the Organization.users list and the comparison User :johnny are separate instances of the same Factory. I realize this doesn't follow the BDD ideas behind what these plugins (FG, rspec) seemed to be geared for but seeing as this is my first rails application I'm uncomfortable moving forward without knowing that I've configured my associations and table structures properly.

    Read the article

  • Modeling a cellphone bill: should I use single-table inheritance or polymorphic associations?

    - by Horace Loeb
    In my domain: Users have many Bills Bills have many BillItems (and therefore Users have many BillItems through Bills) Every BillItem is one of: Call SMS (text message) MMS (multimedia message) Data Here are the properties of each individual BillItem (some are common): My question is whether I should model this arrangement with single-table inheritance (i.e., one "bill_items" table with a "type" column) or polymorphism (separate tables for each BillItem type), and why.

    Read the article

  • Recommendations for a C++ polymorphic, seekable, binary I/O interface

    - by Trevor Robinson
    I've been using std::istream and ostream as a polymorphic interface for random-access binary I/O in C++, but it seems suboptimal in numerous ways: 64-bit seeks are non-portable and error-prone due to streampos/streamoff limitations; currently using boost/iostreams/positioning.hpp as a workaround, but it requires vigilance Missing operations such as truncating or extending a file (ala POSIX ftruncate) Inconsistency between concrete implementations; e.g. stringstream has independent get/put positions whereas filestream does not Inconsistency between platform implementations; e.g. behavior of seeking pass the end of a file or usage of failbit/badbit on errors Don't need all the formatting facilities of stream or possibly even the buffering of streambuf streambuf error reporting (i.e. exceptions vs. returning an error indicator) is supposedly implementation-dependent in practice I like the simplified interface provided by the Boost.Iostreams Device concept, but it's provided as function templates rather than a polymorphic class. (There is a device class, but it's not polymorphic and is just an implementation helper class not necessarily used by the supplied device implementations.) I'm primarily using large disk files, but I really want polymorphism so I can easily substitute alternate implementations (e.g. use stringstream instead of fstream for unit tests) without all the complexity and compile-time coupling of deep template instantiation. Does anyone have any recommendations of a standard approach to this? It seems like a common situation, so I don't want to invent my own interfaces unnecessarily. As an example, something like java.nio.FileChannel seems ideal. My best solution so far is to put a thin polymorphic layer on top of Boost.Iostreams devices. For example: class my_istream { public: virtual std::streampos seek(stream_offset off, std::ios_base::seekdir way) = 0; virtual std::streamsize read(char* s, std::streamsize n) = 0; virtual void close() = 0; }; template <class T> class boost_istream : public my_istream { public: boost_istream(const T& device) : m_device(device) { } virtual std::streampos seek(stream_offset off, std::ios_base::seekdir way) { return boost::iostreams::seek(m_device, off, way); } virtual std::streamsize read(char* s, std::streamsize n) { return boost::iostreams::read(m_device, s, n); } virtual void close() { boost::iostreams::close(m_device); } private: T m_device; };

    Read the article

  • Polymorphic Queue

    - by metdos
    Hello Everyone, I'm trying to implement a Polymorphic Queue. Here is my trial: QQueue <Request *> requests; while(...) { QString line = QString::fromUtf8(client->readLine()).trimmed(); if(...)){ Request *request=new Request(); request->tcpMessage=line.toUtf8(); request->decodeFromTcpMessage(); //this initialize variables in request using tcpMessage if(request->requestType==REQUEST_LOGIN){ LoginRequest loginRequest; request=&loginRequest; request->tcpMessage=line.toUtf8(); request->decodeFromTcpMessage(); requests.enqueue(request); } //Here pointers in "requests" do not point to objects I created above, and I noticed that their destructors are also called. LoginRequest *loginRequest2=dynamic_cast<LoginRequest *>(requests.dequeue()); loginRequest2->decodeFromTcpMessage(); } } Unfortunately, I could not manage to make work Polymorphic Queue with this code because of the reason I mentioned in second comment.I guess, I need to use smart-pointers, but how? I'm open to any improvement of my code or a new implementation of polymorphic queue. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to create a view to manage associations between HABTM models? (Rails)

    - by Chris Hart
    Hello, I am using Ruby on Rails and need to create a view that allows the creation of records through a HABTM relationship to another model. Specifically, I have the following models: Customer and ServiceOverride, and a join table customers_serviceoverrides. Using the customer view for create/update, I need to be able to create, update and delete ServiceOverrides and manage the attributes of the associated model(s) from the same view. Visually I'd prefer to have something like a plus/minus sign to add/delete service overrides, and each serviceoverride record has two string entities which need to be displayed and editable as well. However, if I could just get the code (a kind of nested form, I'm assuming?) working, I could work out the UI aspects. The models are pretty simple: class ServiceOverride < ActiveRecord::Base has_and_belongs_to_many :customers end class Customer < ActiveRecord::Base has_and_belongs_to_many :serviceoverrides end The closest thing I've found explaining this online is on this blog but it doesn't really address what I'm trying to do (both manage the linkages to the other model, and edit attributes of that model. Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance. Chris

    Read the article

  • How do I setup model associations in an RSpec test?

    - by Eric M.
    I've pastied the specs I've written for the posts/show.html.erb view in an application I'm writing as a means to learn RSpec. I am still learning about mocks and stubbing. This question is specific to the "should list all related comments" spec. What I want is to test that the show view displays a post's comments. But what I'm not sure about is how to setup this test and then have the test iterate through with should contain('xyz') statements. Any hints? Other suggestions are also appreciated! Thanks. ---Edit Some more information. I have a named_scope applied to comments in my view (I know, I did this a bit backwards in this case), so @post.comments.approved_is(true). The code pastied responds with the error "undefined method `approved_is' for #", which makes sense since I told it stub comments and return a comment. I'm still not sure, however, how to chain the stubs so that @post.comments.approved_is(true) will return an array of comments.

    Read the article

  • How to avoid multiple, unused has_many associations when using multiple models for the same entity (

    - by mikep
    Hello, I'm looking for a nice, Ruby/Rails-esque solution for something. I'm trying to split up some data using multiple tables, rather than just using one gigantic table. My reasoning is pretty much to try and avoid the performance drop that would come with having a big table. So, rather than have one table called books, I have multiple tables: books1, books2, books3, etc. (I know that I could use a partition, but, for now, I've decided to go the 'multiple tables' route.) Each user has their books placed into a specific table. The actual book table is chosen when the user is created, and all of their books go into the same table. The goal is to try and keep each table pretty much even -- but that's a different issue. One thing I don't particularly want to have is a bunch of unused associations in the User class. Right now, it looks like I'd have to do the following: class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :books1, :books2, :books3, :books4, :books5 end class Books1 < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :user end class Books2 < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :user end First off, for each specific user, only one of the book tables would be usable/applicable, since all of a user's books are stored in the same table. So, only one of the associations would be in use at any time and any other has_many :bookX association that was loaded would be a waste. I don't really know Ruby/Rails does internally with all of those has_many associations though, so maybe it's not so bad. But right now I'm thinking that it's really wasteful, and that there may just be a better, more efficient way of doing this. Is there's some sort of special Ruby/Rails methodology that could be applied here to avoid having to have all of those has_many associations? Also, does anyone have any advice on how to abstract the fact that there's multiple book tables behind a single books model/class?

    Read the article

  • How to make Firefox file associations consistent with Ubuntu file associations?

    - by wbharding
    This seems to be a pretty commonly Google question, but one for which there are no answers. http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/firefox-download-mime-types-378902 http://www.birkit.com/content/kubuntu-linux/internet/firefox/fix-file-associations-in-firefox.html Being three links amongst the many. The gist of what I want to accomplish is to have Firefox understand the file associations I download without me having to manually map all of them myself. Gnome knows the file extensions, so I would have expected that Firefox could just use the already-known file mappings there to open the right stuff (as I presume Chrome does). But it doesn't. At least not for me, using Firefox 4, and not by default. When I click on a downloaded file right now, Firefox always has to ask me what application should be used to open the file. A handful of Google results tell me that I can reassociate my file extensions by deleting ~/.mozilla/firefox/[profile name]/mimeTypes.rdf, but while deleting that file does in fact result in a new mimeTypes file being generated, the new mimeTypes is just as barren as the old one had been. Based on the amount of unanswered Qs on the Googlesphere, I know this is a very common problem for Ubuntu users, but it seems to be one for which nobody has chimed in with a good solution. Maybe Superuser can finally be the panacea for us all?

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework associations killing performance

    - by Chris
    Here is the performance test i am looking at. I have 8 different entities that are table per type. Some of the entities contain over 100 thousand rows. This particular application does several recursive calculations on the client so I think it may be best to preload the data instead of lazy loading. If there are no associations I can load the entire database in about 3 seconds. As I add associations in any way the performance starts to drastically decline. I am loading all the data the same way (just calling toList() on the entity attached to the context). I ran the test with edmx generated classes and self tracking entities and had similar results. I am sure if I were to try and deal with the associations myself, similar to how I would in a dataset, the performance problem would go away. On the other hand I am pretty sure this is not how the entity framework was intended to being used. Any thoughts or ideas?

    Read the article

  • Best way to handle multiple tables to replace one big table in Rails? (e.g. 'Books1', 'Books2', etc.

    - by mikep
    Hello, I've decided to use multiple tables for an entity (e.g. Books1, Books2, Books3, etc.), instead of just one main table which could end up having a lot of rows (e.g. just Books). I'm doing this to try and to avoid a potential future performance drop that could come with having too many rows in one table. With that, I'm looking for a good way to handle this in Rails, mainly by trying to avoid loading a bunch of unused associations. (I know that I could use a partition for this, but, for now, I've decided to go the 'multiple tables' route.) Each user has their books placed into a specific table. The actual book table is chosen when the user is created, and all of their books go into the same table. I'm going to split the adds across the tables. The goal is to try and keep each table pretty much even -- but that's a different issue. One thing I don't particularly want to have is a bunch of unused associations in the User class. Right now, it looks like I'd have to do the following: class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :books1, :books2, :books3, :books4, :books5 end class Books1 < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :user end class Books2 < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :user end class Books3 < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :user end I'm assuming that the main performance hit would come in terms of memory and possibly some method call overhead for each User object, since it has to load all of those associations, which in turn creates all of those nice, dynamic model accessor methods like User.find_by_. But for each specific user, only one of the book tables would be usable/applicable, since all of a user's books are stored in the same table. So, only one of the associations would be in use at any time and any other has_many :bookX association that was loaded would be a waste. For example, with a user.id of 2, I'd only need books3.find_by_author('Author'), but the way I'm thinking of setting this up, I'd still have access to Books1..n. I don't really know Ruby/Rails does internally with all of those has_many associations though, so maybe it's not so bad. But right now I'm thinking that it's really wasteful, and that there may just be a better, more efficient way of doing this. So, a few questions: 1) Is there's some sort of special Ruby/Rails methodology that could be applied to this 'multiple tables to represent one entity' scheme? Are there any 'best practices' for this? 2) Is it really bad to have so many unused has_many associations for each object? Is there a better way to do this? 3) Does anyone have any advice on how to abstract the fact that there's multiple book tables behind a single books model/class? For example, so I can call books.find_by_author('Author') instead of books3.find_by_author('Author'). Thank you!

    Read the article

  • ActiveRecord has_many and polymorphic

    - by leomayleomay
    I've came into a problem while working with AR and polymorphic, here's the description, class Base < ActiveRecord::Base; end class Subscription < Base set_table_name :subscriptions has_many :posts, :as => :subscriptable end class Post < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :subscriptable, :polymorphic => true end in the console, >> s = Subscription.create(:name => 'test') >> s.posts.create(:name => 'foo', :body => 'bar') and it created a Post like: #<Post id: 1, name: "foo", body: "bar", subscriptable_type: "Base", subscriptable_id: 1, created_at: "2010-05-10 12:30:10", updated_at: "2010-05-10 12:30:10"> the subscriptable_type is Base but Subscription, anybody can give me a hand on this?

    Read the article

  • ActiveRecord, has_many, polymorphic and STI

    - by leomayleomay
    I've came into a problem while working with AR and polymorphic, here's the description, class Base < ActiveRecord::Base; end class Subscription < Base set_table_name :subscriptions has_many :posts, :as => :subscriptable end class Post < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :subscriptable, :polymorphic => true end in the console, >> s = Subscription.create(:name => 'test') >> s.posts.create(:name => 'foo', :body => 'bar') and it created a Post like: #<Post id: 1, name: "foo", body: "bar", subscriptable_type: "Base", subscriptable_id: 1, created_at: "2010-05-10 12:30:10", updated_at: "2010-05-10 12:30:10"> the subscriptable_type is Base but Subscription, anybody can give me a hand on this?

    Read the article

  • Rails uses wrong class in belongs_to

    - by macsniper
    I have an application managing software tests and a class called TestResult: class TestResult < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :test_case, :class_name => "TestCase" end I'm right now migrating from Rails 1.x to 2.3.5. In Rails 1.x everything works fine. When trying to access the association in Rails 2.3.5, I get the following error: NoMethodError: undefined method 'find' for ActiveRecord::TestCase:Class from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-2.3.5/lib/active_record/associations/belongs_to_association.rb:49:in 'send' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-2.3.5/lib/active_record/associations/belongs_to_association.rb:49:in 'find_target' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-2.3.5/lib/active_record/associations/association_proxy.rb:239:in 'load_target' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-2.3.5/lib/active_record/associations/association_proxy.rb:112:in 'reload' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-2.3.5/lib/active_record/associations.rb:1250:in 'test_case' My Question is: how can I tell Rails to use my TestCase-class instead of ActiveRecord::TestCase. TestCase class: class TestCase < ActiveRecord::Base set_table_name "test_case" has_many :test_results belongs_to :component, :foreign_key => "subsystem_id" belongs_to :domain, :foreign_key => "area_id" belongs_to :use_case, :foreign_key => "use_case_id" end

    Read the article

  • Remove associations with applications in VMWare Fusion

    - by Jim McKeeth
    One of the "features" of VMWare Fusion is that it associates files on the Mac host with programs in the VM. Unfortunately I uninstalled VMWare Fusion, and my Mac still has applications in VMWare Fusion associated with it. How can I remove the associations? I went to the Genius Bar, but they didn't know how to fix it (they cleared my cache, but that didn't do it.) I am running OSX Snow Leopard

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 FTP Connection Ignores File Type Associations

    - by Travis
    I have an FTP connection active through the Map Network Drive option in Windows 7 64-bit. When navigating the remote directory, I see no way to edit files. Windows is completely ignoring file-type associations and "opens" everything with my default browser. Is there any way that I can simply edit these files? I'm open to suggestions of other software as well, but from what I can see, NetDrive doesn't work with 64-bit.

    Read the article

  • Rails can't render polymorphic associations to XML?

    - by ambertch
    When I render XML with an :include clause for a polymorphic association I have, it doesn't work. I end up with the XML returning the object pointers instead of the actual objects, like: <posts> #<Comment:0x102ed1540>#<Comment:0x102ecaa38>#<Comment:0x102ec7fe0>#<Comment:0x102ec3cd8> </posts> Yet as_json works! When I render JSON with :include clause, the associations are rendered correctly and I get something like: posts":[ {"type":"Comment","created_at":"2010-04-20T23:02:30-07:00","id":7,"content":"fourth comment"}, {"type":"Comment","created_at":"2010-04-20T23:02:26-07:00","id":6,"content":"third comment"}] My current workaround is using XML builder, but I'm not too comfortable with that in the long run. Does anyone happen to know about this issue? I'm kind of in a catch-22 because while XML doesn't render the associations, as_json doesn't render in a kosher json format (returns an array rather than a list of hashes as proper json should) and the deserializer I'm using on the client side would require modification to parse the json correctly.

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework 4 omits some associations during model generation

    - by kzen
    After creating an EF4 model from a SQL Server database I noticed that all the relationships of my Users table were not imported into the model as associations. All the other relationships were imported fine. My Users table has a PK userId which is a char(7) field and it is integrated into several other tables in the database as an FK but for some reason EF4 does not import these relationships as associations during the model generation process... Does anyone have any ideas why this would be happening?

    Read the article

  • Authlogic with nested attributes and polymorphic associations

    - by ferparra
    Hi all! I'm having trouble with the following code: User < AR acts_as_authentic belongs_to :owner, :polymorphic => true end Worker < AR has_one :user, :as => :owner accepts_nested_attributes_for :user end Employer < AR has_one :user, :as => :owner accepts_nested_attributes_for :user end I'd like to create registration forms based on user types, and to include authentication fields such as username and password. I currently do this: UserRegistrationController < AC #i.e. a new Employer def new @employer = Employer.new @employer.build_user end ... end I then include User fields with fields_for. All views render fine, but here's the catch: I cannot build a User, it tells me :password is a wrong method, so I guess the authentication logic was bypassed. What should I do? Am I doing it wrong altogether? Should I drop polymorphic associations in favor of Single Table Inheritance? Whatever I do, I have to make sure it plays nicely with Authlogic.

    Read the article

  • Thinking sphinx: Problems with polymorphic associations

    - by auralbee
    Hello, I recently switched from ultrasphinx to thinking_sphinx for full-text search. I am trying to figure out how to index fields of polymorphic associations. I found some information but I still have some problems, although it seems to be easy. Here is my setup: class Info < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :mappable, :polymorphic => true define_index indexes mappable_type indexes mappable(:name), :as => :mappable_name end class A < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :infos, :as => :mappable end class B < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :infos, :as => :mappable end Amongst others, I want to do a search in the name column of A and B (both classes have this column), so I added the field to my index. When I do rake thinking_sphinx:index I get the following error: Generating Configuration to .../config/development.sphinx.conf rake aborted! undefined method `connection' for Object:Class .../.gem/ruby/1.8/gems/thinking-sphinx-1.3.16/lib/thinking_sphinx/ association.rb:149:in `casted_options' Any idea? Am I missing something? Thanks in advance. Tobi

    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 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >