| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
... | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The last place that was assigning it was when `from` is called with a
relation to use as a subquery. The implementation was actually
completely broken, and would break if you called `from` more than once,
or if you called it on a relation, which also had its own join clause,
as the bind values would get completely scrambled. The simplest solution
was to just move it into its own array, since creating a `FromClause`
class for this would be overkill.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
All of its uses have been moved to better places
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This fixed an issue where `having` can only be called after the last
call to `where`, because it messes with the same `bind_values` array.
With this change, the two can be called as many times as needed, in any
order, and the final query will be correct. However, once something
assigns `bind_values`, that stops. This is because we have to move all
of the bind values from the having clause over to the where clause since
we can't differentiate the two, and assignment was likely in the form
of:
`relation.bind_values += other.bind_values`
This will go away once we remove all places that are assigning
`bind_values`, which is next on the list.
While this fixes a bug that was present in at least 4.2 (more likely
present going back as far as 3.0, becoming more likely in 4.1 and later
as we switched to prepared statements in more cases), I don't think this
can be easily backported. The internal changes to `Relation` are
non-trivial, anything that involves modifying the `bind_values` array
would need to change, and I'm not confident that we have sufficient test
coverage of all of those locations (when `having` was called with a hash
that could generate bind values).
[Sean Griffin & anthonynavarre]
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We've now removed all uses of them across the board. All logic lives on
`WhereClause`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The code assumes that non-single-value methods mean multi value methods.
That is not the case. We need to change the accessor name, and only
assign an array for multi value methods
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We're still using it in `where_unscoping`, which will require moving
additional logic.
|
|
|
|
| |
This will make it easy to add `having_clause` and `join_clause` later.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Yes, I know, I called it a factory so I'm basically the worst person
ever who loves Java and worships the Gang of Four.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Bind values are no longer a thing, so this is unnecessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This object being a black box, it knows the details of how to merge
itself with another where clause. This removes all references to where
values or bind values in `Relation::Merger`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The way that bind values are currently stored on Relation is a mess.
They can come from `having`, `where`, or `join`. I'm almost certain that
`having` is actually broken, and calling `where` followed by `having`
followed by `where` will completely scramble the binds.
Joins don't actually add the bind parameters to the relation itself, but
instead add it onto an accessor on the arel AST which is undocumented,
and unused in Arel itself. This means that the bind values must always
be accessed as `relation.arel.bind_values + relation.bind_values`.
Anything that doesn't is likely broken (and tons of bugs have come up
for exactly that reason)
The result is that everything dealing with `Relation` instances has to
know far too much about the internals. The binds are split, combined,
and re-stored in non-obvious ways that makes it difficult to change
anything about the internal representation of `bind_values`, and is
extremely prone to bugs.
So the goal is to move a lot of logic off of `Relation`, and into
separate objects. This is not the same as what is currently done with
`JoinDependency`, as `Relation` knows far too much about its internals,
and vice versa. Instead these objects need to be black boxes that can
have their implementations swapped easily.
The end result will be two classes, `WhereClause` and `JoinClause`
(`having` will just re-use `WhereClause`), and there will be a single
method to access the bind values of a `Relation` which will be
implemented as
```
join_clause.binds + where_clause.binds + having_clause.binds
```
This is the first step towards that refactoring, with the internal
representation of where changed, and an intermediate representation of
`where_values` and `bind_values` to let the refactoring take small
steps. These will be removed shortly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This will allow all types which require no additional handling to use
prepared statements. Specifically, this will allow for `true`, `false`,
`Date`, `Time`, and any custom PG type to use prepared statements. This
also revealed another source of nil columns in bind params, and an
inconsistency in their use.
The specific inconsistency comes from a nested query coming from a
through association, where one of the inversed associations is not
bi-directional.
The stop-gap is to simply construct the column at the site it is being
used. This should simply go away on its own once we use `Attribute` to
represent them instead, since we already have all of the information we
need.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is to help facilitate future refactorings, as the internal
representation is changed. I'm planning on having `where_values` return
an array that's computed on call, which means that mutation will have no
affect. This is the only remaining place that was mutating (tested by
replacing the method with calling `dup`)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Specifically, the issue is relying on `where_unscoping` mutating the
where values. It does not, however, mutate the bind values, which could
cause an error under certain circumstances. This was not exposed by the
tests, since the only place which would have been affected is unscoping
a boolean, which doesn't go through prepared statements. I had a hard
time getting better test coverage to demonstrate the issue.
This in turn, caused `merge` to go through proper logic, and try to
clear out the binds associated with the unscoped relation, which then
exposed a source of `nil` for the columns, as binds weren't expanding
`{ "posts.id" => 1 }` to `{ "posts" => { "id" => 1 } }`. This has been
fixed.
The bulk of `create_binds` needed to be moved to a separate method,
since the dot notation should not be expanded recursively.
I'm pretty sure this removes a subtle quirk that a ton of code in
`Relation::Merger` is working around, and I suspect that code can be
greatly simplified. However, unraveling that rats nest is no small task.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Fixes #18632
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
With the old implementation, the bind values were created, and then we
search the attributes for `Relation` objects, and merge them. This
completely ignores the order that the actual `where` clause will use. If
all non-relation where parameters are before the relations, it will
work. However, if we query on both a relation and a value, with the
value coming second, it breaks. The order of the hash should not affect
the final query (especially since hashes being ordered is an
implementation detail)
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I'm looking to introduce a `WhereClause` class to handle most of this
logic, and this method will eventually move over to there. However, this
intermediate refactoring should make that easier to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Looking through the blame, this logic used to be when we actually
created the bind tuple. My guess is that `nil` couldn't be handled there
at that time. It can, now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In order to better facilitate refactoring, most places that mutated
`bind_values` have already been removed. One last spot snuck through.
Since we're no longer mutating the array, it also does not need to be
duped in `initialize_copy`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is cropping up all over the place. After a brief dive, I'm really
not sure why we have `arel.bind_values` at all. A cursory grep didn't
reveal where they're actually being assigned (it's definitely in AR, not
in Arel). I'd like to dig further into it, as I'm fairly certain we
don't actually need it, we just need a way for the predicate builder to
communicate merged binds upstream.
Fixes #18414
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This adresses https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/1b7aa62b184c4410c99208f71b59bbac5c5f03be#commitcomment-9147803
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Tests should still pass after removing `require 'active_support/deprecation'`
from these files since the related deprecations have been removed.
|
|
|
|
| |
These requires were added only to change deprecation message
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is no longer required now that we are injecting a type caster
object into the Arel table, with the exception of uniqueness
validations. Since it calls `ConnectionAdapter#type_cast`, the value has
already been cast for the database. We don't want Arel to attempt to
cast it further, so we need to continue wrapping it in a quoted node.
This can potentially go away when this validator is refactored to make
better use of `where` or the predicate builder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This API will require much less consuming code to change to accomodate
the removal of automatic type casting from Arel. As long as the
predicates are constructed using the `arel_table` off of an AR subclass,
there will be no changes that need to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Part of the larger refactoring to remove type casting from Arel. We can
inform it that we already have the right type by wrapping the value in
an `Arel::Nodes::Quoted`. This commit can be reverted when we have
removed type casting from Arel in Rail 5.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Part of the larger refactoring to remove type casting from Arel. We can
inform it that we already have the right type by wrapping the value in
an `Arel::Nodes::Quoted`. This commit can be reverted when we have
removed type casting from Arel in Rail 5.1
|
|
|
|
| |
Part of the larger refactoring to remove type casting from Arel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Part of the larger refactoring to remove type casting from Arel. We can
inform it that we already have the right type by wrapping the value in
an `Arel::Nodes::Quoted`. This commit can be reverted when we have
removed type casting from Arel in Rail 5.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Part of a larger refactoring to remove type casting from Arel.
/cc @mrgilman
[Sean Griffin & Melanie Gilman]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
A custom object is required for this, as you cannot build a range
object out of `Arel::Nodes::Quoted` objects. Depends on the changes
introduced in
https://github.com/rails/arel/commit/cf03bd45e39def057a2f63e42a3391b7d750dece
/cc @mrgilman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
As part of the larger refactoring to remove type casting from Arel, we
need to do the casting of values eagerly. The predicate builder is the
closest place that knows about the Active Record class, and can
therefore have the type information.
/cc @mrgilman
[Sean Griffin & Melanie Gilman]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This class cares far too much about the internals of other parts of
Active Record. This is an attempt to break out a meaningful object which
represents the needs of the predicate builder. I'm not fully satisfied
with the name, but the general concept is an object which represents a
table, the associations to/from that table, and the types associated
with it. Many of these exist at the `ActiveRecord::Base` class level,
not as properties of the table itself, hence the need for another
object. Currently it provides these by holding a reference to the class,
but that will likely change in the future. This allows the predicate
builder to remain wholy concerned with building predicates.
/cc @mrgilman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I'm attempting to remove `klass` as a dependency of the predicate
builder, in favor of an object that better represents what we're using
it for. The only part of this which doesn't fit nicely into that picture
is the check for an association being polymorphic. Since I'm not yet
sure what that is going to look like, I've moved this logic into another
class in an attempt to separate things that will change from things that
won't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reduces the number of places which will need to care about single
value or range specific logic as we introduce type casting. The array
handler is only responsible for producing `in` statements.
/cc @mrgilman
[Sean Griffin & Melanie Gilman]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This will allow us to pass the predicate builder into the constructor of
these handlers. The procs had to be changed to objects, because the
`PredicateBuilder` needs to be marshalable. If we ever decide to make
`register_handler` part of the public API, we should come up with a
better solution which allows procs.
/cc @mrgilman
[Sean Griffin & Melanie Gilman]
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We're accidentally documenting `PredicateBuilder` and `ArrayHandler`
since there's a constant which is missing `# :nodoc:`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Construction of relations can be a hotspot, we don't want to create one
of these in the constructor. This also allows us to do more expensive
things in the predicate builder's constructor, since it's created once
per AR::Base subclass
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I find that `Specifies the starting point for the batch processing.`
does not give enough information for me to understand what this
parameter actually does.
|
| |
|
| |
|