Comments and changes to this ticket

• 

  Michael Koziarski September 23rd, 2008 @ 01:11 PM

  • Assigned user set to “Michael Koziarski”

  So silently removing the duplicates is always safe? There aren't any situations where we should be raising or warning the developer?

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  Joseph Palermo September 23rd, 2008 @ 05:46 PM

  Since the merged includes have to be string identical, it's just as safe or safer to always merge when possible.

• 

  Michael Koziarski September 23rd, 2008 @ 07:30 PM

  • Milestone cleared.

  OK, can you format the patch as per the guides:

  http://rails.lighthouseapp.com/p...

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  David Stevenson September 23rd, 2008 @ 09:42 PM

  Here you go. Thanks!

  • rails__passing_joins_as_an_array_removes_duplicates__correct_format.patch 7.3 KB
• 

  Repository September 24th, 2008 @ 12:35 PM

  • State changed from “new” to “committed”

  (from [487758b3b88a38da3a75900839aea03774904fe1]) Allowed passing arrays-of-strings to :join everywhere. Merge duplicate join strings to avoid table aliasing problems.

  Signed-off-by: Michael Koziarski michael@koziarski.com [#1077 state:committed] http://github.com/rails/rails/co...

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  JensC November 1st, 2008 @ 11:19 AM

  • Title changed from “Chaining scopes with duplicate joins causes alias problem” to “problems with aliased joins”

  Hi,

  I have two associations between two tables. One is a one to many and the other is many to may through. To be able to use named_scopes I must have aliased joins to address the right attribute. However if I do, rails avoids to have the two different joins because it thinks its a duplication of the joins.

  Here is an example:

  search members in one or many country

  scope = scope.scoped( :conditions => ["property_country.short IN (?)", country_keys], :joins => 'INNER JOIN countries AS property_country ON property_country.id = memberships.property_country_id' ) if country_keys.size > 0

  my_country

  scope = scope.scoped( :conditions => ["vacation_countries.short = ?", my_country], :joins => "INNER JOIN join_vacation_countries ON (memberships.id = join_vacation_countries.membership_id) INNER JOIN countries AS vacation_countries ON (vacation_countries.id = join_vacation_countries.country_id)" ) unless my_country.blank?

  I guess that is a limitation of the patch above and needs further refinement.

  Thanks Jens

• 

  Michael Koziarski November 1st, 2008 @ 11:23 AM

  • State changed from “committed” to “open”

  JensC: Can you provide us with a test case for active record which demonstrates this bug.

  David & Joseph: Any thoughts?

  Moving to block 2.2 final

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  David Stevenson November 1st, 2008 @ 07:00 PM

  Koz & Jens,

  I'm afraid I don't see the issue that Jens is trying to show us. The patch that we submitted simply removes two completely-string-identical joins. These two would be removed:

  
  scope = scope.scoped(:joins => "INNER JOIN countries AS country1 ON something")
  scope = scope.scoped(:joins => "INNER JOIN countries AS country1 ON something")
  

  These two would not be removed, as they are not string identical:

  
  scope = scope.scoped(:joins => "INNER JOIN countries AS country1 ON something")
  scope = scope.scoped(:joins => "INNER JOIN countries AS country2 ON something")
  

  It's a very conservative removal. If an association generates a join, and a named scope also includes a string identical join, they will of course be "uniq"d into a single join (which should not have any negative consequences, since one copy is still included). It even does not remove them in this case, when they should be obviously removed:

  
  scope = scope.scoped(:joins => "INNER JOIN countries AS country1 ON something")
  scope = scope.scoped(:joins => "INNER JOIN countries AS country1 ON something INNER JOIN something_else ON whatever")
  

  The "right" way to write the above so that they are uniq'd would be this:

  
  scope = scope.scoped(:joins => "INNER JOIN countries AS country1 ON something")
  scope = scope.scoped(:joins => ["INNER JOIN countries AS country1 ON something", "INNER JOIN something_else ON whatever"])
  

  Can I get some clarification, perhaps a failing test on what the issue is from Jens?

• 

  Michael Koziarski November 1st, 2008 @ 07:08 PM

  Neither, it seems it should work to me...

  Jens, can you please give us an example either in the rails tests or a simple stand-alone application?

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  JensC November 3rd, 2008 @ 10:55 AM

  Oh hell! After creating an example that should show exactly what doesn't work ... it worked! After some more digging I noticed in my environment.rb that I still had

  RAILS_GEM_VERSION = '2.1.2' unless defined? RAILS_GEM_VERSION

  defined. It works in 2.2.0 RC 1. I am soooo sorry for that :-/. Next time I promise to provide an example before starting a bug report.

  Once again sorry guys anf Thnx a lot. Jens

• 

  DHH November 4th, 2008 @ 05:41 PM

  • State changed from “open” to “invalid”

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  David Stevenson November 4th, 2008 @ 05:43 PM

  DHH - Why did you just mark this invalid? Jens said there was no actual bug, and he made a mistake in commenting on this at all?

• 

  DHH November 4th, 2008 @ 05:47 PM

  • State changed from “invalid” to “open”

  Ah, read it wrong. Reopened.

• 

  Michael Koziarski November 6th, 2008 @ 06:41 PM

  • State changed from “open” to “committed”