@alibby: "Greetings,
I'm having some troubles getting single table inheritance 
working.  I'm outside of rails, and I _think_ I understand 
the way this whole thing is supposed to work.  I've got 
tables in a PostgreSQL database, (principal and user, the 
User class extends Principal).
When I run the following code I get an error like so:
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-1.14.4/lib/active_record/base.rb:1789:in 
`method_missing': undefined method `first_name=' for 
#<User:0xb7d815cc @attributes={"type"=>"User"}, 
@new_record=true> (NoMethodError)
When I change the class definition of User to extend 
ActiveRecor888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a4Base the code works and I wind up with rows in 
the users table.
Any ideas what I'm not doing correctly?
The code:
#!/usr/bin/ruby
#CREATE TABLE principals (
#    id integer DEFAULT nextval('id_seq'888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a4text) NOT NULL,
#    "type" text
#);
#
#
#CREATE TABLE users (
#    id integer DEFAULT nextval('id_seq'888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a4text) NOT NULL,
#    username text,
#    "password" text,
#    first_name text,
#    last_name text
#);
require 'rubygems'
require 'active_record'
ActiveRecor888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a4Base.establish_connection(
     :adapter  => "postgresql",
     :host     => "localhost",
     :username => "org",
     :password => "xx",
     :database => "org"
)
class Principal < ActiveRecor888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a4Base
end
class User < Principal
end
u = User.new
u.first_name = 'joejoe'
Andrew Libby
Tangeis, LLC
Innovative IT Management Solutions
<email_address>"
    @dblack: "Hi 
<quote>
If you want to do single table inheritance, you need to use a single
table :-)  You're using two (principals and users).
Try the following:
   1. add a type/text column to users
   2. get rid of principals
   3. in the models, do:
    class User < ActiveRecor888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a4Base
    end
    class Principal < User
    end
I know I've reversed the inheritance flow; it seems to make more sense
this way, but you can of course switch it around.
David
                   David A. Black | <email_address>
Author of "Ruby for Rails"   [1] | Ruby/Rails training & consultancy [3]
DABlog (DAB's Weblog)        [2] | Co-director, Ruby Central, Inc.   [4]
[1] <url> | [3] <url>
[2] <url>    | [4] <url>"
    @alibby: "<quote>
Thanks for your comments.  It seems I completely missed
what single table inheritance is all about. You'd thing by 
calling it single table, I'd have gotten that it was 
_single_table_..  I'm hoping to have other principal types 
in my system (groups, systems, users, etc).  I guess I'll 
need to work something out with
has_a, am I pointing in the right direction?
Thanks.
Andy
Andrew Libby
Tangeis, LLC
Innovative IT Management Solutions
<email_address>"
    @dblack: "Hi 
<quote>
The has_one stuff is separate from the STI stuff.  The basic idea of
STI is that you have one table (principals [switching my example back
to the way yours was]) that has columns for *all* of the attributes
that *any* of the descendants might have.  In other words, the single
table is a flattened, centralized collection.  This is, in a sense,
illogical.  It means that if you have, say, a people table, and then
subclasses of Person like Employee and Customer, technically Customers
will have all of the same characteristics as Employees  including,
perhaps, salary.  The point though is that in exchange for a bit of
weirdness in the database table, you receive a lot of ease at the Ruby
end, where you can accomplish a lot just through inheritance.
In the case you're describing, if principals is the single table, it
would have to include all the future fields for groups, systems, and
users.  That makes me wonder whether STI is actually a good fit for
this case.  You should only use STI when the descendant classes are
pretty similar, and only diverge in a small number of fields.  It
sounds like a system and a user would be very different from each
other.
The associations (has_one/belongs_to, etc.) might make more sense
here.  A User could belong_to a group; Group would have many users;
and so forth.
David
                   David A. Black | <email_address>
Author of "Ruby for Rails"   [1] | Ruby/Rails training & consultancy [3]
DABlog (DAB's Weblog)        [2] | Co-director, Ruby Central, Inc.   [4]
[1] <url> | [3] <url>
[2] <url>    | [4] <url>"
{'source': 'USENET', 'other_information': '{"reply_count": 3, "forum_name": "comp.lang.ruby.20141025.mbox"}', 'file': 'data/output/usenet-comp.lang.parquet'}