Comments on: Rails - Auto Assign Created By and Updated By http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/ Web Development and Design, and Anything That Matters Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:40:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 by: Herryanto Siatono http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-90961 Thu, 07 Aug 2008 05:56:19 +0000 http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-90961 Chris the !user.nil? for created_by has been checked earlier, while created_by.nil? check is not to auto-assign, if it has been manually assign. Chris the !user.nil? for created_by has been checked earlier, while created_by.nil? check is not to auto-assign, if it has been manually assign.

]]> by: Chris http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-90823 Wed, 06 Aug 2008 11:32:52 +0000 http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-90823 I think I may have found the issue. It must be difference between MySQL on Windows and MySQL on my Linux server... My created_by field is set to be not null with a default value of 0. On Windows usermonitor works fine and updates both the created_by and updated_by fields. But, when it is executing on Linux it seems like created_by already has the default value of 0 and it fails the condition "&& created_by.nil?". Shouldn't this condition be " && !user.nil?" just like it is in the update_with_user method? I think I may have found the issue. It must be difference between MySQL on Windows and MySQL on my Linux server… My created_by field is set to be not null with a default value of 0. On Windows usermonitor works fine and updates both the created_by and updated_by fields. But, when it is executing on Linux it seems like created_by already has the default value of 0 and it fails the condition “&& created_by.nil?”. Shouldn’t this condition be ” && !user.nil?” just like it is in the update_with_user method?

]]> by: Herryanto Siatono http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-90772 Wed, 06 Aug 2008 05:12:45 +0000 http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-90772 @Chris, I didn't encounter such problem before, you probably have to track ruby-debug with or println some comments to track what's going on. @Chris, I didn’t encounter such problem before, you probably have to track ruby-debug with or println some comments to track what’s going on.

]]> by: Chris http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-90599 Tue, 05 Aug 2008 02:57:03 +0000 http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-90599 I have installed this and it is working perfectly on my development computer. However, I have pushed it out to my test server and it is only updating "updated_by" and not "created_by". Any ideas on what the problem could be? I have installed this and it is working perfectly on my development computer. However, I have pushed it out to my test server and it is only updating “updated_by” and not “created_by”. Any ideas on what the problem could be?

]]> by: Herryanto Siatono http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-37061 Wed, 15 Aug 2007 01:29:37 +0000 http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-37061 @Daryl, there's no thread safety issue, yep it's okay to use. Yeah I would say no impact. I've been using it since day one, no issue at all. @Daryl, there’s no thread safety issue, yep it’s okay to use. Yeah I would say no impact. I’ve been using it since day one, no issue at all.

]]> by: Daryl http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-37055 Tue, 14 Aug 2007 23:38:54 +0000 http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-37055 Despite your thread safety, is this method still okay to use? Is it overkill or is there no impact over the traditional method? Do you still use this method? =) Despite your thread safety, is this method still okay to use?
Is it overkill or is there no impact over the traditional method?
Do you still use this method? =)

]]> by: Herryanto Siatono http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-24803 Sat, 14 Apr 2007 01:52:34 +0000 http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-24803 @Platte Daddy, yeah I realized that after I delve more into rails, was a newbie back then. Thanks for the update. I've put up a note in my post. @Platte Daddy, yeah I realized that after I delve more into rails, was a newbie back then. Thanks for the update. I’ve put up a note in my post.

]]> by: Platte Daddy http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-24781 Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:41:24 +0000 http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-24781 Did you know that Rails keeps each request isolated? It's built on a CGI model that chucks everything after each request. You don't have to worry about thread safety per request. The only time you would need to worry about thread safety in Rails is if you're working with threaded code of your own. Did you know that Rails keeps each request isolated? It’s built on a CGI model that chucks everything after each request. You don’t have to worry about thread safety per request.

The only time you would need to worry about thread safety in Rails is if you’re working with threaded code of your own.

]]> by: Herryanto Siatono http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-8460 Fri, 22 Dec 2006 18:29:01 +0000 http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-8460 It really depends, Vidal, feel free some people just store id in session[:user] while some store the user object. Feel free to tweak the codes around to meet your needs. :) It really depends, Vidal, feel free some people just store id in session[:user] while some store the user object.

Feel free to tweak the codes around to meet your needs. :)

]]> by: Vidal Graupera http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-7101 Tue, 28 Nov 2006 02:16:27 +0000 http://www.pluitsolutions.com/2006/08/15/rails-auto-assign-created-by-and-updated-by/#comment-7101 This is helpful. Thanks. However, something is not quite right with this code. Typically, session[:user] is an integer ID, so you have current_user.class.find where this is a Fixnum and not User object. This is helpful. Thanks. However, something is not quite right with this code. Typically, session[:user] is an integer ID, so you have current_user.class.find where this is a Fixnum and not User object.

]]>