Great! Is TS 3 compatible with Flying Sphinx?
On Friday, January 4, 2013 9:02:01 PM UTC-8, Pat Allan wrote:
>
> Hi John
>
> There wasn't, but there is now in the edge branch (3.x releases).
>
> --
> Pat
>
> On 04/01/2013, at 11:34 AM, John Barker wrote:
>
> > Hi Pat,
> >
> > So bottom line is, I can't have the conditions on the relationship
> model, they have to remain on the user/organization model as it breaks the
> creation of relationships. Is there a way to explicitly define the join in
> the index/attribute definition?
> >
> > On Thursday, January 3, 2013 2:50:19 AM UTC-6, Pat Allan wrote:
> > Hi John
> > Perhaps there's details I've forgotten (also: I'm a little short on
> sleep), but you can keep those conditions you've commented out. It's just
> that you can't use the has_many :through associations reliably in Thinking
> Sphinx index definitions - and I had noticed that you had conditions on
> those that perhaps weren't on the underlying associations.
> >
> > If you've got conditions on non-:through associations and you want to
> use those associations with Thinking Sphinx, that should be fine.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > --
> > Pat
> >
> > On 03/01/2013, at 2:43 AM, John Barker wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Pat,
> > >
> > > So, to begin, I have an application that is membership-centric; users
> can have 'memberships' to both 'groups' and 'organizations', which is
> handled through a 'relationships' table/model to handle all the
> associations/relationships.
> > >
> > > The relationships table handles all the relationships for the user for
> both organization and group, and simply distinguishes between which by the
> 'type' column. For example, here's my current 'Relationship' model (you'll
> see I have the conditioned commented out):
> > >
> > > class Relationship < ActiveRecord::Base
> > > belongs_to :role
> > > belongs_to :user
> > > belongs_to :organization, foreign_key: 'relationship_id'#,
> conditions: { relationships: { type: 'Organization', active: true } }
> > > belongs_to :group, foreign_key: 'relationship_id'#, conditions: {
> relationships: { type: 'Group', active: true } }
> > >
> > > has_many :lists
> > >
> > > attr_accessible :user_id, :role_id, :relationship_id, :role, :user,
> :created_at, :updated_at, :type, :begin_date, :end_date, :active
> > >
> > > validates_uniqueness_of :relationship_id, scope: [ :type, :role_id,
> :user_id ]
> > >
> > > scope :page_with_cached_total_count, lambda { |page_number,
> total_count_value |
> > > page(page_number).extending {
> > > define_method(:total_count) { total_count_value }
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > define_index do
> > > indexes user.first_name, as: :first_name, sortable: true
> > > indexes user.middle_name, as: :middle_name, sortable: true
> > > indexes user.last_name, as: :last_name, sortable: true
> > > indexes user.email, as: :email, sortable: true
> > > indexes group(:name), as: :group, sortable: true
> > >
> > > set_property field_weights: {
> > > first_name: 15,
> > > last_name: 15,
> > > middle_name: 2,
> > > email: 7,
> > > groups: 10
> > > }
> > >
> > > has organization(:id), as: :organization_id
> > > has created_at, updated_at
> > > has role(:name), as: :role_name, crc: true
> > > has :type, crc: true
> > > end
> > >
> > > # Override ActiveRecord's inheritance column method since we use a
> `type` column
> > > def self.inheritance_column
> > > nil
> > > end
> > > end
> > >
> > > I need those conditions on the User, Organization and other models so
> that they will respect the conditions when I call something like
> Organization.find(1).members, which would do a join on the relationships
> table and search by type 'organization' and the and ensure that the
> relationship is in fact active (active=1).
> > >
> > > For example, my Organization model's relationship definition looks
> like this:
> > >
> > > has_many :relationships, foreign_key: 'relationship_id', conditions: {
> relationships: { type: 'Organization', active: true } }
> > > has_many :members, through: :relationships, source: :user
> > >
> > > If I remove the conditions from the Organization model, and simply
> leave it on the Relationships model, then it doesn't respect the condition
> when I call something like Organization.find(1).members. There are some
> other errors, weirdness I experience as well, but that is the major reason.
> > >
> > > If you have any help, or insight as to how I could better structure
> this and retain the needed index performance with TS, I would be forever
> grateful! I hope I made this clear enough.
> > >
> > > Thank you.
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, January 1, 2013 9:30:49 PM UTC-6, Pat Allan wrote:
> > > Why do the conditions need to be in the other models? Can you run me
> through the associations in all models related to this issue?
> > > On 02/01/2013, at 11:34 AM, John Barker wrote:
> > >
> > > > So I thought this problem was fixed, after moving the needed
> conditions to the relationship table, but come to find out, I can't have
> the conditions there; they have to be in my other models. Consider me
> stumped.
> > > >
> > > > On Friday, December 28, 2012 11:11:07 PM UTC-6, Pat Allan wrote:
> > > > No worries - it helps that I had someone else dealing with the same
> issue on Flying Sphinx recently :)
> > > > On 29/12/2012, at 4:06 PM, John Barker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Pat,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for such a prompt response! So moving the conditions from
> the User model to the Relationship model and changing the attributes to
> relationships.model(:column) seems to work exactly as I need it to. I tried
> a similar thing earlier, but must have overlooked something.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for such a great library (and a great service, Flying
> Sphinx)!
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > >
> > > > > On Friday, December 28, 2012 10:51:16 PM UTC-6, Pat Allan wrote:
> > > > > Hi John
> > > > > I would avoid using has_many :through shortcuts in your index
> definition - so, you're doing the right thing with fields, but not with
> attributes. Thinking Sphinx uses ActiveRecord to generate the SQL, and it
> appears ActiveRecord isn't as smart as it could be with joins for those
> associations.
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course, then you have the catch that you're applying conditions
> to the has_many :through versions of the associations… I would probably
> define those as additional associations on Relationship instead if
> necessary?
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Pat
> > > > >
> > > > > On 29/12/2012, at 1:15 PM, John Barker wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I have an index in my User model that is creating redundant
> joins for attributes I have defined. My model looks as follows:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > class User < ActiveRecord::Base
> > > > > > has_many :relationships
> > > > > > has_many :groups, through: :relationships, conditions:
> Proc.new { ['relationships.type = ?', 'Group'] }
> > > > > > has_many :organizations, through: :relationships,
> conditions: Proc.new { ['relationships.type = ?', 'Organization'] }
> > > > > > has_many :roles, through: :relationships
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > define_index do
> > > > > > # fields
> > > > > > indexes first_name, sortable: true
> > > > > > indexes last_name, sortable: true
> > > > > > indexes email, sortable: true
> > > > > > indexes relationships.group(:name), as: :groups,
> sortable: true
> > > > > > indexes relationships.role(:name), as: :roles
> > > > > >
> > > > > > set_property field_weights: {
> > > > > > first_name: 15,
> > > > > > last_name: 15,
> > > > > > email: 7,
> > > > > > groups: 10
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > has relationships(:type), as: :relationship_type, crc:
> true
> > > > > > has groups(:id), as: :group_id
> > > > > > has organizations(:id), as: :organization_id
> > > > > > has roles(:name), as: :role_name, crc: true
> > > > > > has created_at, updated_at
> > > > > > end
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This produces the following query in the sphinx configuration:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > SELECT
> > > > > > SQL_NO_CACHE `users`.`id` * CAST(5 AS SIGNED) + 4 AS `id` ,
> > > > > > `users`.`first_name` AS `first_name`
> > > > > > `users`.`last_name` AS `last_name`,
> > > > > > `users`.`email` AS `email`,
> > > > > > GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT IFNULL(`groups`.`name`, '0') SEPARATOR
> ' ') AS `groups`,
> > > > > > GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT IFNULL(`roles`.`name`, '0') SEPARATOR
> ' ') AS `roles`,
> > > > > > `users`.`id` AS `sphinx_internal_id`, 0 AS `sphinx_deleted`,
> > > > > > 765557111 AS `class_crc`, IFNULL('User', '') AS
> `sphinx_internal_class`,
> > > > > > IFNULL(`users`.`first_name`, '') AS `first_name_sort`,
> > > > > > IFNULL(`users`.`last_name`, '') AS `last_name_sort`,
> > > > > > IFNULL(`users`.`email`, '') AS `email_sort`,
> > > > > > GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT IFNULL(IFNULL(`groups`.`name`, ''),
> '0') SEPARATOR ' ') AS `groups_sort`,
> > > > > > GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT IFNULL(CRC32(`relationships`.`type`),
> '0') SEPARATOR ',') AS `relationship_type`,
> > > > > > GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT IFNULL(`groups_users`.`id`, '0')
> SEPARATOR ',') AS `group_id`,
> > > > > > GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT IFNULL(`organizations`.`id`, '0')
> SEPARATOR ',') AS `organization_id`,
> > > > > > GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT IFNULL(CRC32(`roles_users`.`name`),
> '0') SEPARATOR ',') AS `role_name`,
> > > > > > UNIX_TIMESTAMP(`users`.`created_at`) AS `created_at`,
> > > > > > UNIX_TIMESTAMP(`users`.`updated_at`) AS `updated_at`
> > > > > > FROM `users`
> > > > > > LEFT OUTER JOIN `relationships` ON `relationships`.`user_id`
> = `users`.`id`
> > > > > > LEFT OUTER JOIN `groups` ON `groups`.`id` =
> `relationships`.`relationship_id`
> > > > > > LEFT OUTER JOIN `roles` ON `roles`.`id` =
> `relationships`.`role_id`
> > > > > > LEFT OUTER JOIN `relationships` `relationships_users_join`
> ON `relationships_users_join`.`user_id` = `users`.`id`
> > > > > > LEFT OUTER JOIN `groups` `groups_users` ON
> `groups_users`.`id` = `relationships_users_join`.`relationship_id` AND
> relationships.type = 'Group'
> > > > > > LEFT OUTER JOIN `relationships` `relationships_users_join_2`
> ON `relationships_users_join_2`.`user_id` = `users`.`id`
> > > > > > LEFT OUTER JOIN `organizations` ON `organizations`.`id` =
> `relationships_users_join_2`.`relationship_id` AND relationships.type =
> 'Organization'
> > > > > > LEFT OUTER JOIN `relationships` `relationships_users_join_3`
> ON `relationships_users_join_3`.`user_id` = `users`.`id`
> > > > > > LEFT OUTER JOIN `roles` `roles_users` ON `roles_users`.`id`
> = `relationships_users_join_3`.`role_id`
> > > > > > WHERE (`users`.`id` >= $start AND `users`.`id` <= $end)
> > > > > > GROUP BY `users`.`id` ORDER BY NULL
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Everything is great up until the joins; it creates three extra
> unnecessary joins (relationships_users_join_n) for the Group, Organization,
> and Roles attributes. I have tried changing the attribute syntax from
> groups(:id) to relationships.group(:id) but it fails to acknowledge the
> conditions that is applied to the join that is defined by the has_many in
> the model. Other than failing to acknowledge the condition, it solves my
> redundant join issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any help is greatly appreciated!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> Google Groups "Thinking Sphinx" group.
> > > > > > To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/thinking-sphinx/-/JvcwXKlb4MgJ.
> > > > > > 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/thinking-sphinx?hl=en.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Thinking Sphinx" group.
> > > > > To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/thinking-sphinx/-/IJE3e6jUKT8J.
> > > > > 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/thinking-sphinx?hl=en.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Thinking Sphinx" group.
> > > > To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/thinking-sphinx/-/c1sORwQ8_ssJ.
> > > > 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/thinking-sphinx?hl=en.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Thinking Sphinx" group.
> > > To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/thinking-sphinx/-/BgBwJl6miUwJ.
> > > 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/thinking-sphinx?hl=en.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Thinking Sphinx" group.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/thinking-sphinx/-/VhUvzzEzfwEJ.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > [email protected]<javascript:>
> .
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected] <javascript:>.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/thinking-sphinx?hl=en.
>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thinking Sphinx" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/thinking-sphinx/-/cTUlW78tBYcJ.
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/thinking-sphinx?hl=en.
