I will update the article with what you said here.
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 7:21:45 PM UTC+1, Michael Koziarski wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, 4 January 2013 at 2:16 AM, Hongli Lai wrote:
>
> This article explains how the vulnerability works, how it is triggered and
> what the
This article explains how the vulnerability works, how it is triggered and
what the facts
are:
http://blog.phusion.nl/2013/01/03/rails-sql-injection-vulnerability-hold-your-horses-here-are-the-facts/
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 10:28:36 PM UTC+1, Aaron Patterson wrote:
>
> Rails versions 3.2.
On 4 apr, 17:01, John Leach wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 05:35 -0700, Hongli Lai wrote:
> > On Apr 4, 2:21 pm, John Leach wrote:
> > > You don't need to buffer your own writes to protect against
> > > inter-message interleaving. Opening the log file in O_APPEN
On Apr 4, 2:21 pm, John Leach wrote:
> You don't need to buffer your own writes to protect against
> inter-message interleaving. Opening the log file in O_APPEND mode
> should get you that (assuming each message is made with one write call)
That only works if the data you're writing is smaller t
On Apr 4, 7:58 am, Adam Wróbel wrote:
> I'd guess it helps with handling concurrency on production systems. If you
> have a couple workers writing to one log file at the same time you will get
> messages from different requests interleaved.
Actually BufferedLogger does not protect you against i
This is a different kind of buffering. It's for thread-safety, not for
improving performance like OS-level buffering. Each thread is assigned
its own buffer so that log data from different threads don't
interleave each other.
On Apr 2, 4:14 pm, John Leach wrote:
> Hi,
>
> BufferedLogger appears t
On Nov 2, 1:50 pm, Xavier Noria wrote:
> The patch mentioned in the thread will be taken into account for sure.
> I think it would be great that we have this robustness and at the same
> time be able to deal with it as if it was an ordinary validation
> error. Assuming it is doable in a robust and
I think there's too much misinformation and too many misunderstandings
going in this thread.
First, "Rails validations" aren't thread-unsafe or concurrency-unsafe,
only validates_uniqueness_of potentially is. The problem has been
known for years. In fact, a few years back I've explicitly documente
What I'd really like to see is a generic multipart parser written in C/
C++ that can be used in Ruby. mod_porter does the parsing for you in
the web server but unfortunately their parser depends on all kinds of
Apache stuff and can't be easily split off.
--
You received this message because you a
On Jun 17, 4:43 pm, Prem Sichanugrist wrote:
> +1 on benchmarking result. would love to see from
>
> - Apache + Passenger
> - Nginx + Passenger
> - Mongrel
> - Thin
> - Webrick
>
> What should be the method of benchmark?
The web server has got nothing to do with it, it only forwards the
multipart
On Jun 17, 9:29 am, Joost Baaij wrote:
> Yes there are: multipart forms send more data since every field has its own
> MIME header. From RFC2388:
>
> "The multipart/form-data encoding has a high overhead and performance impact
> if there are many fields with short values. However, in practice, f
Looks like Rails 3 currently depends on RDoc 2.2.0 exactly, even
though the latest version is 2.5.x. Why this specific version?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-c...@googlegr
According to http://guides.rails.info/getting_started.html Rails 3
requires either Ruby 1.8.7 < p248 or Ruby 1.9.2dev because everything
in between has bugs. That's quite unfortunate seeing that the MRI core
developers haven't released any fixes for the bugs yet, yet Linux
distributions are eager t
I believe this is something that needs fixing in RubyGems. I filed a
bug:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=27867&group_id=126&atid=575
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send emai
On Feb 22, 12:08 pm, Hongli Lai wrote:
> As for Rack breakage, wouldn't that be easily solved with some version
> numbering discipline? If Rack decides to break an interface then it
> should bump its major version to 2.
Now that I think about it, this wouldn't solve the web-se
On Feb 22, 11:25 am, Yehuda Katz wrote:
> Hongli,
>
> This is a classic problem of the sort Bundler was created to solve. The only
> possible solutions are to either ensure that these versions of the gems do
> not coexist in a system gems repo or to use a tool like bundler to
> pre-resolve the lis
Hi guys, can I call attention for this ticket? I think it's pretty
severe.
https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/4031-having-rails-23pre-or-rack-11-installed-breaks-rails-2x
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails:
On Nov 29, 9:45 pm, Xavier Noria wrote:
> Hey just a brief mail to let you know I've done some systematic work
> on Rails Contributors in the past weeks: Tried to resolve every email
> address, and checked all handlers that exist as github usernames.
>
> At this moment there are 337 email addresse
On Nov 8, 10:38 pm, Ryan Bigg wrote:
> The site is down:http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/rubyonrails.org
Looks up to me.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this
Hi guys. Just wanted to notify you, before releasing 2.3.4, that there
are two failing AR-MySQL unit tests on 2-3-stable:
1) Failure:
test_validate_uniqueness(ValidationsTest)
[./test/cases/validations_test.rb:355:in
`test_validate_uniqueness'
./test/cases/../../../activesupport/lib/ac
On Aug 17, 2:06 am, Jeremy Evans wrote:
> Unfortunately, this is a pointless endeavor. It's easier to prevent
> duplicate entries using a unique index. In both the unique index and
> your method, the error is raised by the database when the insert is
> attempted.
>
> The only reason to use a va
On Aug 6, 12:39 pm, Eloy Duran wrote:
> I was actually talking about this in my last email.
I'm experiencing this as well.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this
On Jul 24, 10:16 am, Hongli Lai wrote:
> You are right, it doesn't work at this time. But I can make it work.
With this I mean that Phusion Passenger vendors Rack as well in order
to work around broken applications. With a few tricks I can remove
this vendoring while still r
On Jul 22, 8:42 pm, Matt Jones wrote:
> I don't think that vendoring Rack will even *work* on Passenger - I
> haven't tried it, but a casual reading of the FrameworkSpawner code
> shows that it loads the Rails gem (in preload_rails). With 2.3.3, this
> will blow up unless Rack is installed
On Jul 22, 4:26 am, Matt Jones wrote:
> The situation for Rack is a little weird. Here's what I observed:
>
> - when running Rails from installed gems, the call to load_rails_gem
> will blow up unless Rack is installed. The code to set things up for
> vendor/gems isn't even loaded for this pa
On May 28, 11:13 am, Mislav Marohnić
wrote:
> I bumped Rails 2.3-stable branch in our app today and deployed, thinking I'm
> being a good developer by getting all the bugfixes this way.
> What I actually did is broke many aspects of our app because all `to_json`
> calls now return "{}" (hardcoded
On May 27, 2:57 am, cainlevy wrote:
> After playing with a reimagined version of attr_accessible/
> attr_protected in my plugin, I'm much happier with the model-side
> filtering approach. I think it allows for more interesting and useful
> defaults.
>
> Since this API is to live only as a plugin
On May 24, 8:25 am, Michael Koziarski wrote:
> cainlevy wrote:
> > Which points to an interesting question -- should the model or the
> > controller be responsible for filtering the attributes? That is,
> > should the burden be on the model to only assign allowed parameters,
> > or the controller
On Apr 26, 11:13 pm, Sven Fuchs wrote:
> Hi Hongli,
>
> cool, that's a great writeup! Thanks for turning this discussion
> towards more practical points :)
>
> Perhaps it helps when I also add some disclaimer about myself. I'm not
> biased towards or against Gettext in any way, too. I've used
(Note: I'm biased towards the Gettext approach, after having used it
to translate desktop applications)
After reading all the replies I think the issue boils down to "default
translations as key" vs "symbols as keys".
"default transactions as key":
1. Pro: lots of existing, mature Gettext tools
On Apr 11, 11:59 pm, Michael Koziarski wrote:
> The difference here depends on the database and how its optimiser
> works. I believe the last time we looked at it there was no
> difference on mysql, slightly negative impact on postgres (the
> optimiser didn't know the types of the variables so c
On Apr 11, 10:00 pm, rogerdpack wrote:
> I wonder if tying it in with "real" prepared statements would help.
> Did they?
Yes I was using real prepared statements. It didn't boost performance.
I concluded that real prepared statements are only of limited use and
cannot be applied generally, but r
On Apr 11, 9:02 am, rogerdpack wrote:
> Here are a few thoughts I had a year or so backy for some potential
> low hanging fruit for speeding rails up [if anybody ever wants to
> implement them :)
>
> Forgive the naivety of these, they're mostly just suggestions from
> someone not all that famili
weblog.rubyonrails.org is not wide enough. On Linux this causes the
navigation bar to wrap:
http://izumi.plan99.net/weblog-ror-wrap.png
Changing the width of the #container CSS rule from 650px to 680px
solves the problem.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this mes
On Nov 18, 10:58 pm, "Michael Koziarski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Just use your own code rather than Rails.cache. For one of myprojects I have
>
> QUEUE = MemCache.new("localhost:22122")
>
> And use that from code. No need to do anything with Rails.cache at all.
Actually you might be interes
On Nov 18, 8:27 pm, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Thanks Koz for a brief and Hongli for more detailed explanation, but I don't
> think you got my question right.
>
> You guys are talking about (hidden) textual form controls that map to
> booleans. That's fine. I'm talking about HT
On Nov 13, 11:55 pm, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I'm puzzled by this latest commit:
> "Tag helper should output an attribute with the value 'false' instead of
> omitting the attribute, if the associated option is false but not
> nil."http://github.com/rails/rails/commit/4e9abdd
On Nov 1, 12:20 pm, "Michael Koziarski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Could you open a ticket for this in lighthouse?
>
> The behaviour of the relative_url_root setting changed slightly in
> 2.2, and we probably broke something that mongrel or passenger is
> expecting to be there.
The change in re
On Sep 30, 12:23 pm, Thomas Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/11...
>
> Based on the prototype plugin, form_collections.git:
>
> http://www.vector-seven.com/git/rails/plugins/form_collections.git/
>
> Copying the description from th
On Sep 10, 1:14 pm, Frederick Cheung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Yeah, I chatted to Koz about it. I'm planning to play around with
> identity maps and stuff like that in conjunction with that (not that I
> have very definite plans - more of a lets toss all these things in the
> air and see
On Sep 11, 8:19 am, August Lilleaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Personally, I can't recall ever having needed a stand-alone DB adapter
> library, so I can't be of much help there.
In places where performance is critical, or when dealing with legacy
databases, it might be necessary to drop to raw
On Sep 10, 7:28 pm, 7rans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is kind of interesting to me b/c way back I suggested to DHH that
> the underlying DB adapter code would also be a good thing to extract
> into a separate project (I dubbed it ActiveDBA, I think DHH suggested
> calling it ActionAdapter).
On Sep 10, 12:57 pm, Hongli Lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 9, 7:53 pm, Frederick Cheung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Just to follow up on this (not that I've had time to touch this since
> > last week), what do people think we could d
On Sep 9, 7:53 pm, Frederick Cheung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Just to follow up on this (not that I've had time to touch this since
> last week), what do people think we could do with this that would be
> useful ?
>
> Fred
It might be useful for lazy loading from the database inside cached
On Aug 21, 4:23 pm, Adam Šindelář <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Our company is currently working on a large government contract to
> develop an elearning system using Ruby on Rails. To support our needs,
> we have added numerous useful features to ActiveRecord over the past
> year or so; th
The ONLamp tutorials on rubyonrails.org are really outdated. Rails 2.1
has been out for quite some time now, but the tutorials are still for
1.x. This seriously confuses a lot of newcomers.
I've been searching for good Rails 2.x tutorials for some time now.
Unfortunately, all the tutorials that I
On Jul 19, 6:34 am, RobbPdx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <=== Volunteer.
>
> The OP was about the technical issues.
>
> I've also been trying to contribute to the rails wiki, but have been
> frustrated by (1) the site being down often, and (2) not being able to
> do anything about spammers on it.
On Apr 23, 11:25 am, "Michael Koziarski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> 1) Have a giant 'doing dependencies lock
>
> By wrapping a big lock around load_missing_constant and friends so
> only one thread goes about creating classes at any given time. All
> the other threads would have to wait for tha
Hi.
There has been a lot of fuss about Rails deployment lately. I've
written some ideas on my blog (http://izumi.plan99.net/blog/index.php/
2008/01/27/rails-deployment-wouldnt-it-be-great-if-it-worked-like-
this/) about how Rails deployment can be made dead-easy, i.e. PHP-
style upload-and-forget
On Dec 7, 11:01 am, Manfred Stienstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's the only problem I have with the patch, it seem a bit strange
> to include a solution specifically for one editor on one platform.
> Maybe it's better left as a plugin?
I'm for including this patch by default, and against t
On Dec 7, 3:01 am, chuyeow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I like the merb-style exception pages where there're links to open the
> files listed in the stack trace in TextMate and the source around each
> line a lot so I stole the idea (and the code!) and made a patch for
> Rails:http://dev.rubyonrai
On Dec 4, 2:12 am, chuyeow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm could be due to this reported bug:http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10348
>
> Try doing these steps first like the reporter suggests:
> rake mysql:build_databases
> rake test_mysql TEST=aaa_create_tables_test.rb
>
> Cheers,
> Chu Yeow
Ye
On Dec 2, 7:30 am, chuyeow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm Frederick is right, that's all I've had to do. If you read the
> latest RUNNING_UNIT_TESTS (http://dev.rubyonrails.org/browser/trunk/
> activerecord/RUNNING_UNIT_TESTS) and the connection settings for
> running tests on MySQL (http://dev.
I've created a patch for generating more a secure default secret key
for CookieStore: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10286
I'm looking for +1s, please review/comment on my patch.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Go
On Nov 25, 11:50 pm, DHH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just learned about the high humor of me pointing you to your own
> blog :). That's priceless.
Indeed. :) However, I have changed my opinion. A comment as well as a
website turned a tide. Please read
http://izumi.plan99.net/blog/index.php/200
On Nov 26, 11:45 am, Frederick Cheung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Unless this has changed recently I never had to do that. I just
> created the activerecord_unittest and activerecord_unittest2 databases
> and gave the rails user access to them and I was good to go
>
> Fred
That didn't work for m
I'm trying to write a patch for Rails. The ActiveRecord
RUNNING_UNIT_TESTS file says that I have to load the MySQL .sql file
from test/fixtures/db_defintions, but there is no mysql.sql. There is
a connection.rb, but no mention of it in the Rakefile or in the
RUNNING_UNIT_TESTS file. How do I load
I think there's still a lot of fear and misinformation floating
around. I have written a summary of the whole situation, as well as my
own view, at:
http://izumi.plan99.net/blog/index.php/2007/11/25/rails-20-cookie-session-store-and-security/
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Y
On Nov 21, 4:11 pm, DHH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Just to be absolutely clear, you can feel comfortable using session
> > cookies if you only store a user_id and a flash message in the
> > session, right? (Sorry, I'm just getting a bit confused.)
>
> Yes.
Did I miss something obvious?
- Many
There are more issues though. I've documented them here:
http://izumi.plan99.net/blog/index.php/2007/04/07/ruby-on-railss-handling-of-uploaded-files/
To summarize:
1. Some libraries, such as RMagick, also have bugs. RMagick.read (or
something) checks whether its parameter is an IO object, and if n
On Nov 10, 11:41 am, "Jeremy Kemper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey Ara, a one-two punch of validates_uniqueness_of plus a unique
> index on those fields gives you nice error messages in the common case
> and a rare database exception otherwise. This should definitely be in
> the docs.
>
> Now,
On Nov 6, 3:52 pm, revans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How about keeping the structure I suggested, but adding comments
> explaining the structure for clarification? To me it makes sense
> because it DRY's up your code, something Rails advocates, but doesn't
> follow in this area.
Yes but Rails a
On Nov 5, 2:35 pm, "Chad Woolley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/5/07, Hongli Lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree. Perhaps it could just be a link in the comments of
> database.yml which points to more info on the rails rdoc/trac?
On Nov 4, 9:40 pm, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2007 8:32 PM, Robert Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > So, I've written a patch for mysql and postgres generators to follow the
> > above, instead of what we are used to. Links below, looking for some
> > +1's :
At the moment ActionController verification returns "200 OK" if
verfication has failed, unless the developer specified redirect_to.
This status code doesn't seem appropriate, the request failed after
all. I think "412 Precondition Failed" would be more appropriate,
because one essentially specifie
On Oct 28, 6:59 pm, Rick Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that's reasonable...
>
> Also, perhaps redirect_to with an activerecord model could assume a
> 303?
>
> redirect_to foo_path # 301
> redirect_to @foo # 303
>
> The fact that browsers don't redo the post when reloading sounds like
On Oct 28, 11:02 am, "Michael Koziarski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> As was mentioned by others, you should really be sending 201, so I'm
> not even sure this is an issue that merits changing the documentation.
> I realise browsers don't support 201 but that's why we have
> respond_to
Seeing t
On Oct 27, 7:26 am, "Michael Koziarski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I dunno, there's a fine line between 'rest friendly' and 'worrying
> about impractical academic differences'. I'm not necessarily hugely
> opposed to adding a method, but the fact that it's only the two of us
> in this thread se
Since yesterday, manuals.rubyonrails.com gives this error:
Service Temporarily Unavailable
The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to
maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this
On Aug 19, 3:28 am, pedz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> According to "Ruby On Rails", the layout call is suppose to be
> inherited: (page 508)
>
> "Subclasses of a controller will use the parent's layout unless they
> override it using the layout directive"
>
> I have a case where this is not worki
On Aug 17, 6:21 pm, Deepak Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Very interesting to see you working on this project. I work a lot for
> Enterprises and it makes a lot of difference when it comes to Oracle
> with prepared statements and data binding. In case of loops etc. we
> had find the performanc
On May 19, 12:14 am, "S. Robert James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I use sanitize_sql all the time. But that's not what I meant. Let me
> illustrate:
>
> Product.get_sql_of {Product.find(:conditions => 'cost < 3')}
> # => 'SELECT * FROM products WHERE cost < 3'
>
> It's easy for that case, but
On May 17, 9:55 pm, Luca Mearelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> aahh I won't be at the conf... any way to meet in a virtual space?
> perhaps the #railsconf irc channel?
Yes, I'd be delighted to. :) I hope we can solve this together.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You recei
On May 18, 12:58 am, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> It would be good to know what is this treshold.
For some reason I'm unable to reproduce that problem now. Perhaps I
was mistaken.
> It is possible that there is a performance boost on raw queries, but that
> it's not visible be
On May 18, 10:04 pm, "S. Robert James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A lot of plugins would be easier if there was a way, instead of
> executing a find, to get the SQL it would use as a String (or perhaps
> an array of a string and bind variables).
>
> This would make it easier to do a lot of power
On May 16, 1:04 pm, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> The former refers to your intention to drop prepared statements after each
> query. The latter is what would happen if you didn't cleanup these prepared
> statements - you'd suddenly have hundreds of them in the database. I think
>
On May 16, 5:42 am, Sam Smoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I guess my question is: Is flushing the statements really necessary
> or are you just working under an assumption the database (Postgres/
> MySQL) will blindly allow it to grow to unreasonable levels?
I'm sorry, I do not understand wha
On May 16, 5:49 am, "Michael A. Schoen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd have to disagree with you there. Rails actually performs very well
> with Oracle. A change made a while back to default to "similar"
> cursor_sharing resulted in much of the benefit of bind variables.
> "performs badly" is de
On May 16, 1:11 am, "Jeremy Kemper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I like the gist of your idea and approach. Thanks for working on it.
>
> I'd start with using bound variables first, though. They're always
> beneficial and are a natural stepping stone to prepared statements
> which can be added lat
On May 15, 11:55 pm, Courtenay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/14/07, Hongli Lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know this is tangential, but is there any good reason for storing
> images in the database?
>
> I can think of a few, but they're not very good;
On May 15, 11:17 am, Hongli Lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's an update. I noticed that using prepared statements will indeed
> make MySQL queries a bit slower. The unit tests in an unmodified Rails
> edge source tree took 18 seconds. After adding prepared statements,
&g
Here's an update. I noticed that using prepared statements will indeed
make MySQL queries a bit slower. The unit tests in an unmodified Rails
edge source tree took 18 seconds. After adding prepared statements,
they took 28 seconds. I've been working on optimizing this since
yesterday evening, and
On May 15, 12:20 am, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Yes. But I have made sure the test user has create role privileges. It
> doesn't help.
You need to give it *all* privileges, including superuser.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message b
On May 15, 12:13 am, "Alexey Verkhovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 5/14/07, Hongli Lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All the bitching about string escaping is at the warning level,
> corresponding tests actually pass.
>
> Errors all stem from this:
>
On May 14, 10:23 pm, "Alexey Verkhovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 5/14/07, Hongli Lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rails continuous build
> athttp://cruisecontrolrb.thoughtworks.com/builds/RubyOnRailsruns
> ActiveRecord unit tests with Postgres 8.2.3, am
On May 14, 10:35 pm, "Alexey Verkhovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 5/14/07, Mislav Marohnić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 5/14/07, Alexey Verkhovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd dare to say that Oracle isn't exactly very popular in Rails world.
>
> It is in my corner of the woods
On May 14, 9:07 pm, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Doesn't that negate the whole idea of having prepared statements in the
> database in the first place? I don't think Rails core team would accept the
> patch that slows down ActiveRecord just for the sake of using a database
> feat
On May 14, 8:25 pm, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> So, every query ever issued will become a prepared statement. Isn't this
> going to lead to unnecessary overhead? I mean, there are *a lot* of various
> SELECT statements generated by even a simple Rails application. Does it
> real
On May 14, 7:15 pm, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Nicely done! But am I to understand StatementBuilder code is going to
> replace (cleanup) all the string hacks currently involved in building SQL
> queries? Will the usage of prepared statements in MySQL/PostgreSQL become
> implici
I'm working on long-awaited support for prepared statements in
ActiveRecord. Before I finish my work, I would like to know whether
the Ruby on Rails core team accepts my design, and whether they will
review my patch (once it is finished) seriously. I have documented the
design at: http://izumi.pla
Right now I'm working on implementing prepared statements in Ruby on
Rails, but the PostgreSQL unit tests fail, even before I've written
any code, because the PostgreSQL adapter has many problems. Can
someone please review the patch at http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/8049
? This fixes a lot of P
91 matches
Mail list logo
