Move the routes for each test inside the test method so that
it's easier to see which routes are applicable to which test.
To ensure that each test wasn't invalidated the changes were
done by first removing all of the routes, ensuring that all
of the tests failed and then adding the routes back to each
test one by one. One test for `assert_recognizes` was
removed as it wasn't actually testing the defined routes and
is now tested more thoroughly in routing_assertions_test.rb.
One downside is that the test suite takes about 1s longer
due to having to using `method_missing` for handling the url
helpers as using `include url_helpers` isn't isolated
for each test.
This add support for sending an explicit opt-out of the "Russian-doll"
cache digest feature on a case-by-case basis. This is useful when cache-
expiration needs to be performed manually and it would be otherwise
difficult to know the exact name of a digested cache key.
More information: https://github.com/rails/cache_digests/pull/16
This yields a small bit of performance improvement when building the
defaults from constraints, specially considering that it's rather common
for constraints to be empty.
Also, there's a bit of duplicated code in here that I have to check
before extracting.
Was surprising found that this example doesn't work:
scope :api do
resources :users
end
and the right form to use it is:
scope 'api' do
resources :users
end
I think this should work similary as `namespace` where both are allowed.
These two are equivalent:
namespace :api do
resources :users
end
namespace 'api' do
resources :user
end
Follow up of the discussion from the original merge commit:
f9cb645dfc (commitcomment-1414561)
We want to avoid people's mistakes with methods like count and sum when
called with a block, that can easily lead to code performing poorly and
that could be way better written with a db query.
Please check the discussion there for more background.
Closes#8268
Since edd94cee9af1688dd036fc58fd405adb30a5e0da, CollectionProxy
delegates all calculation methods - except count - to the scope,
which does basically what this method was doing, but since we're
delegating from the proxy, the association method was never called.
To perform a sum calculation over the array of elements, use to_a.sum(&block).
Please check the discussion in f9cb645dfcb5cc89f59d2f8b58a019486c828c73
for more context.
This reverts commit f9cb645dfcb5cc89f59d2f8b58a019486c828c73.
Conflicts:
activerecord/CHANGELOG.md
Revert "Allow blocks for count with ActiveRecord::Relation. Document and test that sum allows blocks"
This reverts commit 9cc2bf69ce296b7351dc612a8366193390a305f3.
Conflicts:
activerecord/lib/active_record/relation/calculations.rb
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
f1765019ce9b6292f2264b4601dad5daaffe3a89, and then reverted in
d3494903719682abc0948bef290af0d3d7b5a440 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
