| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Adds test case for failing issue
Moves set_value back to protected
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Reported at https://travis-ci.org/rails/rails/jobs/274370258
- `Post.find([1, 2])` generates this query below:
```sql
SELECT "posts".* FROM "posts" WHERE "posts"."id" IN ($1, $2) [["id", 1], ["id", 2]]
```
- `Post.where(id: 1).or(Post.where(id: 2)).to_a` generates this query below:
```sql
SELECT "posts".* FROM "posts" WHERE ("posts"."id" = $1 OR "posts"."id" = $2) [["id", 1], ["id", 2]]
```
Most of the time these two queries return the same result but the order of records are not guaranteed
from SQL point of view then added `sort` before comparing them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
`:authors` has a foreign key to `:author_addresses`.
If only `:authors` fixture loaded into the database which supports
foreign key and checks the existing data when enabling foreien keys
like Oracle, it raises the following error
`ORA-02298: cannot validate (ARUNIT.FK_RAILS_94423A17A3) - parent keys not found`
It is because there is no parent data exists in `author_addresses` table.
Here are how other database with foreign key support works:
- MySQL does not check the existing data when enabling foreign key by `foreign_key_checks=1`
https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/server-system-variables.html#sysvar_foreign_key_checks
> Setting foreign_key_checks to 1 does not trigger a scan of the existing table data. Therefore, rows added to the table while foreign_key_checks=0 will not be verified for consistency.
- PostgreSQL database itself has a feature to check existing data when
enabling foreign key and discussed at #27636, which is reverted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Note that the two relations must still have the same `includes` values
(which is the only time `references` actually does anything). It makes
sense for us to allow this, as `references` is called implicitly when
passing a hash to `where`.
Fixes #29411
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit 3420a14590c0e6915d8b6c242887f74adb4120f9, reversing
changes made to afb66a5a598ce4ac74ad84b125a5abf046dcf5aa.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Style/SpaceBeforeBlockBraces
Style/SpaceInsideBlockBraces
Style/SpaceInsideHashLiteralBraces
Fix all violations in the repository.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The current code base is not uniform. After some discussion,
we have chosen to go with double quotes by default.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
AR::Relation#or
- Previously it used to show error message
<"undefined method `limit_value' for {:title=>\"Rails\"}:Hash">
- Now it shows following error message.
>> Post.where.not(name: 'DHH').or(name: 'Tenderlove')
ArgumentError: You have passed Hash object to #or. Pass an ActiveRecord::Relation object instead.
- Fixes #23714.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When you are using scopes and you chaining these scopes it is hard to
know which are the values that are incompatible. This way you can read
the message and know for which values you need to look for.
[Herminio Torres]
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Post.where('id = 1').or(Post.where('id = 2'))
# => SELECT * FROM posts WHERE (id = 1) OR (id = 2)
[Matthew Draper & Gael Muller]
|