Use take instead of first in ActiveRecord::Relation#first_or_create

[guigs]

This change was suggested in discussion of #24847.

first adds an order by clause to query that may make it slower.

[rails-bot]

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rails team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @eileencodes (or someone else) soon.

If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

[guigs]

r? @rafaelfranca

[matthewd]

@rafaelfranca @sgrif given they're private, shouldn't we rename them to match the new implementation?

If we want to backport to 5-0-stable as a bug fix, I agree we should keep the existing name there.

[sgrif]

They're private, but we know they have pretty wide usage. I think renaming them would be too much unnecessary breakage.

[guigs]

How about add take_or_create and deprecate first_or_create in 5.0 and remove first_or_create in 5.1?

[sgrif]

I don't think we should be removing first_or_create

On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 9:42 AM Guilherme Goettems Schneider <
notifications@github.com> wrote:

How about add take_or_create and deprecate first_or_create in 5.0 and
remove first_or_create in 5.1?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#25173 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABdWKxU21sTu-eW5GcjkRSvG5buqCMGQks5qGEY3gaJpZM4Io89h
.

[jeremywadsack]

Any further thoughts on this change? Just ran into it and discovered the ORDER BY defeated our index on the fields in the where clause preceding first_or_create in the chain.

[matthewd]

@sgrif I'm not sure which change you were suggesting above.

If we're not prepared to rename first_or_create etc, even though they're not documented, because we think people are using them anyway.. it surely follows that we oughtn't change their behaviour either?

[jeremywadsack]

Just to note, these methods were documented in Rails 3.2. So many code bases still depend on them (not to mention developers).

What about adding new take_or_create methods? Then developers can move to the new one?

[rails-bot]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.
Thank you for your contributions.

[simi]

@rafaelfranca @matthewd I still think this is relevant. I think going with new methods take_or_* will make sense. There's PR for that opened - #24847.

It makes sense for me to keep first_or_* being ordered and take_or_* not. Same works for first and take. Making first_or_ methods being not ordered will make this inconsistent in my eyes.

Order is usually unnecessary from my experience on first_or_ calls. But I can imagine some apps rely on that. Ordering can be really expensive in database and it is IMHO best practice to avoid it when not necessary.