On 5 Feb, 01:09, kevinpfromnm <[email protected]> wrote:
> How many customers per page?
30 customers per page
> Can you get by with the N+1 db
> calls from not including either?
I can't understand this bit.. sorry.. do you intend performing a
Customer.find(:all) then trying to filter rails side?
> If not, might be a case for a
> find_by_sql call.
>
Hmmm! Don't think so, testing the SQL query directly in mysl console,
I get 6 seconds, thus is really a query problem, if I can concatenate
the Scopes, without losing them as scopes, the time would Drop to
55ms... the query is:
SELECT `customers`.* FROM `customers` LEFT OUTER JOIN `cellphones` ON
cellphones.customer_id = customers.id LEFT OUTER JOIN `emails` ON
emails.customer_id = customers.id WHERE ((cellphones.active = 1 AND
cellphones.customer_id = customers.id) OR (emails.active = 1 AND
emails.customer_id = customers.id))
> One thing, you don't need to use hobo_index necessarily. You can get
> similar results by doing your own pagination.
hmmm, can I apply the will_paginate to the array that result from
concatenation? Must investigate...
>
> On Feb 4, 5:01 pm, Gabriele Tassoni <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > From what I can see, chaining them is not like saying "either ...
> > or ..." i.e. I have 2600 customers with cellphones, and 4 with emails,
> > with 3 that have both, What I want is obtain 2601 records so far (it
> > would be good even to have 2604, I can add a :group condition...), but
> > what I obtain is 3 records, the customers that have both an email and
> > a cellphone... so, chaining is like intersection, not concatenation...
>
> > On 5 Feb, 00:50, kevinpfromnm <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > You can't just chain your named_scopes?
> > > Customer.with_cellphones.with_emails
>
> > > On Feb 4, 4:11 pm, Gabriele Tassoni <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Hi,
> > > > I try to explain better, I wrote a named scope like that:
>
> > > > named_scope :with_cellphones_or_emails, {:include =>
> > > > [:cellphones, :emails], :conditions => ["(cellphones.active = ? AND
> > > > cellphones.customer_id = customers.id) OR (emails.active = ? AND
> > > > emails.customer_id = customers.id)", true, true]}
>
> > > > for the Customer model, calling Customer.with_cellphones_or_emails
> > > > takes about 6 seconds on my macbook unibody with 2GB Ram, I've made
> > > > some tests, I wrote two more named_scopes:
>
> > > > named_scope :with_emails, {:joins => :emails, :conditions =>
> > > > {"emails.active" => true}}
> > > > named_scope :with_cellphones, {:joins => :cellphones, :conditions =>
> > > > {"cellphones.active" => true}}
>
> > > > running Customer.with_cellphones takes approx. 50ms,
> > > > Customer.with_emails takes approx 5ms (yeah, my customers have more
> > > > cellphones than emails! ^_^)... 55ms vs 6s! °_° (these are mysql
> > > > calculated times)...
>
> > > > Trying to minimize the time spent on db query, by single query, I
> > > > thought it could be great if I can concatenate the two results, indeed
> > > > I can do it:
>
> > > > @customers = Customer.with_cellphones + Customer.with_emails
>
> > > > but the resulting object is an Array, the index action of the
> > > > controller is like this one:
>
> > > > hobo_index @customers, :order => :name, :group => "customers.id"
>
> > > > is there a way to obtain an ActiveRecord::NamedScope::Scope object
> > > > from that concatenation or to let hobo_index accept the Array?
>
> > > > Thank you for the answer.
>
> > > > G.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hobo
Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/hobousers?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
