- 16 4月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Caleb Thompson 提交于
Previously, freezing a cloned ActiveRecord object froze the original too. By cloning `@attributes` before freezing, we prevent cloned objects (which in Ruby share state of ivars) from being effected by `#freeze`. Resolves issue #4936, which has further information on this issue, as well as steps to reproduce. * Add a test case for `#freeze` not causing `cloned.frozen?` to be true. * Clone @attributes before freezing in `ActiveRecord::Core`, then reassign the cloned, frozen hash to the frozen model's `@attributes` ivar. /cc @steveklabnik
-
- 13 4月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Xavier Noria 提交于
Registries have class-level accessors to write clean code, let's use them. This makes style uniform also with existing usage in ScopeRegistry and InstrumentationRegistry. If performance of the method_missing callback was ever considered to be a concern, then we should stop using it altogether and probably remove the callback. But while we have the feature we should use it.
-
- 10 4月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 wangjohn 提交于
-
- 06 4月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael Mendonça França 提交于
-
- 28 3月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Alexander Balashov 提交于
-
- 27 3月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Sam Saffron 提交于
-
- 21 3月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ian Young 提交于
-
- 19 3月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Aaron Pfeifer 提交于
When partial inserts are enabled, overridden db defaults are ignored. This results in locking columns having a nil value for new records if the db default is null. This happens because the list of changed attributes for new records is always assumed to be empty. Solution: When a new record's default attributes are set, also initialize the list of changed attributes by comparing current values against what's stored as the column defaults in the database.
-
- 15 3月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Yves Senn 提交于
Closes #9712.
-
- 10 3月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ben Moss 提交于
This allows end-users to have a `connection` method on their models without clashing with ActiveRecord internals.
-
- 25 2月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Hiroshige Umino 提交于
-
- 20 2月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 wangjohn 提交于
Reduced memory leak problem in transactions by lazily updating AR objects with new transaction state. If AR object has a callback, the callback will be performed immediately (non-lazily) so the transaction still has to keep records with callbacks.
-
- 22 1月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael Mendonça França 提交于
[ci skip]
-
- 21 1月, 2013 2 次提交
- 22 11月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Jon Leighton 提交于
This improves memory and performance without having to use symbols which present DoS problems. Thanks @headius and @tenderlove for the suggestion. This was originally committed in f1765019, and then reverted in d3494903 due to it causing problems in a real application. This second attempt should solve that. Benchmark --------- require 'active_record' require 'benchmark/ips' ActiveRecord::Base.establish_connection(adapter: 'sqlite3', database: ':memory:') class Post < ActiveRecord::Base connection.create_table :posts, force: true do |t| t.string :name end end post = Post.create name: 'omg' Benchmark.ips do |r| r.report('Post.new') { Post.new name: 'omg' } r.report('post.name') { post.name } r.report('post.name=') { post.name = 'omg' } r.report('Post.find(1).name') { Post.find(1).name } end Before ------ Calculating ------------------------------------- Post.new 1419 i/100ms post.name 7538 i/100ms post.name= 3024 i/100ms Post.find(1).name 243 i/100ms ------------------------------------------------- Post.new 20637.6 (±12.7%) i/s - 102168 in 5.039578s post.name 1167897.7 (±18.2%) i/s - 5186144 in 4.983077s post.name= 64305.6 (±9.6%) i/s - 317520 in 4.998720s Post.find(1).name 2678.8 (±10.8%) i/s - 13365 in 5.051265s After ----- Calculating ------------------------------------- Post.new 1431 i/100ms post.name 7790 i/100ms post.name= 3181 i/100ms Post.find(1).name 245 i/100ms ------------------------------------------------- Post.new 21308.8 (±12.2%) i/s - 105894 in 5.053879s post.name 1534103.8 (±2.1%) i/s - 7634200 in 4.979405s post.name= 67441.0 (±7.5%) i/s - 337186 in 5.037871s Post.find(1).name 2681.9 (±10.6%) i/s - 13475 in 5.084511s
-
- 09 11月, 2012 2 次提交
-
-
由 Carlos Antonio da Silva 提交于
These were removed with ActiveRecord::Model in https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/9e4c41c903e8e58721f2c41776a8c60ddba7a0a9#L15L156
-
由 AvnerCohen 提交于
-
- 26 10月, 2012 2 次提交
-
-
由 Jon Leighton 提交于
-
由 Jon Leighton 提交于
In the end I think the pain of implementing this seamlessly was not worth the gain provided. The intention was that it would allow plain ruby objects that might not live in your main application to be subclassed and have persistence mixed in. But I've decided that the benefit of doing that is not worth the amount of complexity that the implementation introduced.
-
- 21 10月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Jeremy Kemper 提交于
This reverts commit 83846838.
-
- 20 10月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Jon Leighton 提交于
I think it's going to be too much pain to try to transition the :active_record load hook from executing against Base to executing against Model. For example, after Model is included in Base, and modules included in Model will no longer get added to the ancestors of Base. So plugins which wish to be compatible with both Model and Base should use the :active_record_model load hook which executes *before* Base gets loaded. In general, ActiveRecord::Model is an advanced feature at the moment and probably most people will continue to inherit from ActiveRecord::Base for the time being.
-
- 23 9月, 2012 2 次提交
-
-
由 Francesco Rodriguez 提交于
-
由 Francesco Rodriguez 提交于
-
- 19 9月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Guillermo Iguaran 提交于
-
- 17 9月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Guillermo Iguaran 提交于
-
- 15 9月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Jon Leighton 提交于
This reverts commit c24c8852. Here's the explanation I just sent to @tenderlove: Hey, I've been thinking about about the transaction memory leak thing that we were discussing. Example code: post = nil Post.transaction do N.times { post = Post.create } end Post.transaction is going to create a real transaction and there will also be a (savepoint) transaction inside each Post.create. In an idea world, we'd like all but the last Post instance to be GC'd, and for the last Post instance to receive its after_commit callback when Post.transaction returns. I can't see how this can work using your solution where the Post itself holds a reference to the transaction it is in; when Post.transaction returns, control does not switch to any of Post's instance methods, so it can't trigger the callbacks itself. What we really want is for the transaction itself to hold weak references to the objects within the transaction. So those objects can be GC'd, but if they are not GC'd then the transaction can iterate them and execute their callbacks. I've looked into WeakRef implementations that are available. On 1.9.3, the stdlib weakref library is broken and we shouldn't use it. There is a better implementation here: https://github.com/bdurand/ref/blob/master/lib/ref/weak_reference/pure_ruby.rb We could use that, either by pulling in the gem or just copying the code in, but it still suffers from the limitation that it uses ObjectSpace finalizers. In my testing, this finalizers make GC quite expensive: https://gist.github.com/3722432 Ruby 2.0 will have a native WeakRef implementation (via ObjectSpace::WeakMap), hence won't be reliant on finalizers: http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4168 So the ultimate solution will be for everyone to use Ruby 2.0, and for us to just use ObjectSpace::WeakMap. In the meantime, we have basically 3 options: The first is to leave it as it is. The second is to use a finalizer-based weakref implementation and take the GC perf hit. The final option is to store object ids rather than the actual objects. Then use ObjectSpace._id2ref to deference the objects at the end of the transaction, if they exist. This won't stop memory use growing within the transaction, but it'll grow more slowly. I benchmarked the performance of _id2ref this if the object does or does not exist: https://gist.github.com/3722550 If it does exist it seems decent, but it's hugely more expensive if it doesn't, probably because we have to do the rescue nil. Probably most of the time the objects will exist. However the point of doing this optimisation is to allow people to create a large number of objects inside a transaction and have them be GC'd. So for that use case, we'd be replacing one problem with another. I'm not sure which of the two problems is worse. My feeling is that we should just leave this for now and come back to it when Ruby 2.0 is out. I'm going to revert your commit because I can't see how it solves this. Hope you don't mind... if I've misunderstood then let me know! Jon
-
- 08 9月, 2012 2 次提交
-
-
由 Carlos Antonio da Silva 提交于
* There is no need to delete the primary key from cloned attributes, since it sets the same pk to nil afterwards. * Check for empty? instead of any? to run initialize callbacks.
-
由 Aaron Patterson 提交于
transaction.
-
- 21 8月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Aaron Patterson 提交于
-
- 18 8月, 2012 2 次提交
-
-
由 Jon Leighton 提交于
any? will check that each item in the array is truthy, as opposed to !empty? which will simply check that the array has length. For an empty array, !empty? still seems to be faster than any?
-
由 Jon Leighton 提交于
deep_dup is slow. we only need to dup the values, so just do that directly.
-
- 11 8月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Jon Leighton 提交于
It's not really a good idea to have this as a global config option. We should allow people to specify the behaviour per association. There will now be two new values: * :dependent => :restrict_with_exception implements the current behaviour of :restrict. :restrict itself is deprecated in favour of :restrict_with_exception. * :dependent => :restrict_with_error implements the new behaviour - it adds an error to the owner if there are dependent records present See #4727 for the original discussion of this.
-
- 03 8月, 2012 2 次提交
-
-
由 Xavier Noria 提交于
-
由 Xavier Noria 提交于
-
- 28 7月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael Mendonça França 提交于
This reverts commit 14fc8b34. Reason: we need to discuss a better path from this removal. Conflicts: activerecord/lib/active_record/reflection.rb activerecord/test/cases/base_test.rb activerecord/test/models/developer.rb
-
- 16 7月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Kang Wen 提交于
-
- 19 6月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Steve Klabnik 提交于
This feature adds a lot of complication to ActiveRecord for dubious value. Let's talk about what it does currently: class Customer < ActiveRecord::Base composed_of :balance, :class_name => "Money", :mapping => %w(balance amount) end Instead, you can do something like this: def balance @balance ||= Money.new(value, currency) end def balance=(balance) self[:value] = balance.value self[:currency] = balance.currency @balance = balance end Since that's fairly easy code to write, and doesn't need anything extra from the framework, if you use composed_of today, you'll have to add accessors/mutators like that. Closes #1436 Closes #2084 Closes #3807
-
- 16 6月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Jon Leighton 提交于
Get rid of ActiveModel::Configuration, make better use of ActiveSupport::Concern + class_attribute, etc.
-
- 10 6月, 2012 1 次提交
-
-
由 Andrew White 提交于
There are two possible scenarios where the @mass_assignment_options instance variable can become corrupted: 1. If the assign_attributes doesn't complete correctly, then subsequent calls to a nested attribute assignment method will use whatever options were passed to the previous assign_attributes call. 2. With nested assign_attributes calls, the inner call will overwrite the current options. This will only affect nested attributes as the attribute hash is sanitized before any methods are called. To fix this we save the current options in a local variable and then restore these options in an ensure block.
-