Store User Roles as Bitmask, Not Relation #272
Conversation
|
Barring objections from anyone who's worked with the Role code (@mehulkar ?) I'm going to run this against my test database in dev, make sure it doesn't horrificially break anything, then deploy this weekend. |
|
Interesting. The point of this to cache a users roles in the users table? |
|
And simplify adding roles. They'll be defined in code, rather than the DB. We're not at the level where having dynamic role creation is terribly useful. |
|
Speeds up queries too I guess. Does this completely remove the need for the roles table? |
|
Yup. and makes them easier to write. No more joining on four different tables to figure out who should show up on a page! I may have made this change primarily because I was too |
|
Yeah I've had that problem before. This is cool. Wish I had found this gem 6 months ago :) |
|
The sad part is I wrote the code to do exactly what the gem does, then found out it existed and already had tests and was properly modularised 👎… I was so excited to finally use my knowledge of bitwise operators |
Model user roles as a bitmask on the User record, not a relation. Incldues migration rake task that converts between the old and new formats.
Model user roles as a bitmask on the User record, not a relation. Incldues migration rake task that converts between the old and new formats.
Model user roles as a bitmask on the User record, not a relation. Incldues migration rake task that converts between the old and new formats.
No description provided.