Sometimes It's The Little Things, pt 2

Posted about 7 years back at zerosum dirt(nap) - Home

So my first patch to Rails core was accepted yesterday. It’s a tiny, tiny patch. All it does is add a :method parameter to the auto_complete_field helper so you can do RESTful autocompletion (the filter query should be submitted with a GET, not a POST, if you want to follow the REST conventions).

No big deal really, but it feels good to finally be able to “give back” to the community in a way other than blogging and IRC help. You know, with like, actual code that benefits people other than just me. I’ve contributed to a handful of Java and PHP-based OSS projects over the years, but this is officially my first contribution to a Ruby-based project, and that certainly feels like a step in the right direction.

Ruby-esque JMX

Posted about 7 years back at Revolution On Rails

The topic of JMX on JRuby came up recently and I decided to play around. I found a great starter on Jeff Mesnil's blog, but I decided I hated the syntax.

Ruby has spoiled me. ActiveRecord has spoiled me.

So I cooked up this little (fully working) example:

#Find all the MBeans matching some object name
mbeans = JMX::MBean.find_all_by_name("cacheStatistics:*")

mbeans.each do |bean|
puts "#{bean.name} "

#Either use methods on the bean object
puts " - CacheHits: #{bean.CacheHits}"

#Or access the attributes hash.
puts " - CacheMisses: #{bean.attributes["CacheHits"]}"
end


The code is ~50lines which I'll post at some point.

I never thought working with java objects could be made to "feel" nice.

I was also chatting with "headius" on #jruby, and he mentioned that Rob Harrop, of Spring fame, had a talk at JavaOne about about something similar called MScript. I'd love to get my hands on those slides.

Ruby-esque JMX

Posted about 7 years back at Revolution On Rails

The topic of JMX on JRuby came up recently and I decided to play around. I found a great starter on Jeff Mesnil's blog, but I decided I hated the syntax.

Ruby has spoiled me. ActiveRecord has spoiled me.

So I cooked up this little (fully working) example:

#Find all the MBeans matching some object name
mbeans = JMX::MBean.find_all_by_name("cacheStatistics:*")

mbeans.each do |bean|
puts "#{bean.name} "

#Either use methods on the bean object
puts " - CacheHits: #{bean.CacheHits}"

#Or access the attributes hash.
puts " - CacheMisses: #{bean.attributes["CacheHits"]}"
end


The code is ~50lines which I'll post at some point.

I never thought working with java objects could be made to "feel" nice.

I was also chatting with "headius" on #jruby, and he mentioned that Rob Harrop, of Spring fame, had a talk at JavaOne about about something similar called MScript. I'd love to get my hands on those slides.

Acts As Fast But Very Inaccurate Counter

Posted about 7 years back at Revolution On Rails

Introduction

If you have chosen the InnoDB MySQL engine over MyISAM for its support of transactions, foreign keys and other niceties, you might be aware of its limitations, like much slower count(*). Our DBAs are in a constant lookout for slow queries in production and the ways to keep DBs happy so they recommended that we should try to fix count(). They suggested to check SHOW TABLE STATUS for an approximate count of rows in a table. This morning I wrote acts_as_fast_counter which proved that the speed is indeed improved but the accuracy might be not acceptable. The rest of the post just records details of the exercise.

The approach

I created a model per engine and seeded each with 100K records. Then I run count on each model for a thousand times and measured the results.

The code:

module ActiveRecord; module Acts; end; end 

module ActiveRecord::Acts::ActsAsFastCounter

def self.included(base)
base.extend(ClassMethods)
end

module ClassMethods

def acts_as_fast_counter
self.extend(FastCounterOverrides)
end

module FastCounterOverrides

def count(*args)
if args.empty?
connection.select_one("SHOW TABLE STATUS LIKE '#{ table_name }'")['Rows'].to_i
else
super(*args)
end
end

end

end

end

ActiveRecord::Base.send(:include, ActiveRecord::Acts::ActsAsFastCounter)

# create_table :myisams, :options => 'engine=MyISAM'  do |t|
# t.column :name, :string
# end
# 100_000.times { Myisam.create(:name => Time.now.to_s) }
#
# create_table :innodbs, :options => 'engine=InnoDB' do |t|
# t.column :name, :string
# end
# 100_000.times { Innodb.create(:name => Time.now.to_s) }

class Bench

require 'benchmark'
require 'acts_as_fast_counter'

def self.run
measure
show_count
convert_to_fast_counter
show_count
add_records
show_count
destroy_records
show_count
measure
end

def self.measure
puts "* Benchhmarks:"
n = 1_000
Benchmark.bm(12) do |x|
x.report('MyISAM') { n.times { Myisam.count } }
x.report('InnoDB') { n.times { Innodb.count } }
end
end

def self.convert_to_fast_counter
Innodb.send(:acts_as_fast_counter)
puts "* Converted Innodb to fast counter"
end

def self.add_records
@myisam = Myisam.create(:name => 'One more')
@innodb = Innodb.create(:name => 'One more')
puts "* Added records"
end

def self.destroy_records
@myisam.destroy
@innodb.destroy
puts "* Destroyed records"
end

def self.show_count
puts "* Record count:"
puts " MyISAM: #{ Myisam.count }"
puts " InnoDB: #{ Innodb.count }"
end

end


The results:
* Benchhmarks:
user system total real
MyISAM 0.180000 0.040000 0.220000 ( 0.289983)
InnoDB 0.430000 0.070000 0.500000 ( 35.102496)
* Record count:
MyISAM: 100000
InnoDB: 100000
* Converted Innodb to fast counter
* Record count:
MyISAM: 100000
InnoDB: 100345
* Added records
* Record count:
MyISAM: 100001
InnoDB: 100345
* Destroyed records
* Record count:
MyISAM: 100000
InnoDB: 100345
* Benchhmarks:
user system total real
MyISAM 0.250000 0.030000 0.280000 ( 0.350673)
InnoDB 0.250000 0.040000 0.290000 ( 0.977711)


Final thoughts

The MySQL manual has a clear warning about inaccuracy of the amount of rows in the SHOW TABLE STATUS results:

Rows - The number of rows. Some storage engines, such as MyISAM, store the exact count. For other storage engines, such as InnoDB, this value is an approximation, and may vary from the actual value by as much as 40 to 50%. In such cases, use SELECT COUNT(*) to obtain an accurate count.


The test confirms it by showing 345 more records then expected thus making it not very useful but for some edge cases. If you know a way to improve the speed of count() on InnoDB with some other approach beyond using a counter table, please share.

Acts As Fast But Very Inaccurate Counter

Posted about 7 years back at Revolution On Rails

Introduction

If you have chosen the InnoDB MySQL engine over MyISAM for its support of transactions, foreign keys and other niceties, you might be aware of its limitations, like much slower count(*). Our DBAs are in a constant lookout for slow queries in production and the ways to keep DBs happy so they recommended that we should try to fix count(). They suggested to check SHOW TABLE STATUS for an approximate count of rows in a table. This morning I wrote acts_as_fast_counter which proved that the speed is indeed improved but the accuracy might be not acceptable. The rest of the post just records details of the exercise.

The approach

I created a model per engine and seeded each with 100K records. Then I run count on each model for a thousand times and measured the results.

The code:

module ActiveRecord; module Acts; end; end 

module ActiveRecord::Acts::ActsAsFastCounter

def self.included(base)
base.extend(ClassMethods)
end

module ClassMethods

def acts_as_fast_counter
self.extend(FastCounterOverrides)
end

module FastCounterOverrides

def count(*args)
if args.empty?
connection.select_one("SHOW TABLE STATUS LIKE '#{ table_name }'")['Rows'].to_i
else
super(*args)
end
end

end

end

end

ActiveRecord::Base.send(:include, ActiveRecord::Acts::ActsAsFastCounter)

# create_table :myisams, :options => 'engine=MyISAM'  do |t|
# t.column :name, :string
# end
# 100_000.times { Myisam.create(:name => Time.now.to_s) }
#
# create_table :innodbs, :options => 'engine=InnoDB' do |t|
# t.column :name, :string
# end
# 100_000.times { Innodb.create(:name => Time.now.to_s) }

class Bench

require 'benchmark'
require 'acts_as_fast_counter'

def self.run
measure
show_count
convert_to_fast_counter
show_count
add_records
show_count
destroy_records
show_count
measure
end

def self.measure
puts "* Benchhmarks:"
n = 1_000
Benchmark.bm(12) do |x|
x.report('MyISAM') { n.times { Myisam.count } }
x.report('InnoDB') { n.times { Innodb.count } }
end
end

def self.convert_to_fast_counter
Innodb.send(:acts_as_fast_counter)
puts "* Converted Innodb to fast counter"
end

def self.add_records
@myisam = Myisam.create(:name => 'One more')
@innodb = Innodb.create(:name => 'One more')
puts "* Added records"
end

def self.destroy_records
@myisam.destroy
@innodb.destroy
puts "* Destroyed records"
end

def self.show_count
puts "* Record count:"
puts " MyISAM: #{ Myisam.count }"
puts " InnoDB: #{ Innodb.count }"
end

end


The results:
* Benchhmarks:
user system total real
MyISAM 0.180000 0.040000 0.220000 ( 0.289983)
InnoDB 0.430000 0.070000 0.500000 ( 35.102496)
* Record count:
MyISAM: 100000
InnoDB: 100000
* Converted Innodb to fast counter
* Record count:
MyISAM: 100000
InnoDB: 100345
* Added records
* Record count:
MyISAM: 100001
InnoDB: 100345
* Destroyed records
* Record count:
MyISAM: 100000
InnoDB: 100345
* Benchhmarks:
user system total real
MyISAM 0.250000 0.030000 0.280000 ( 0.350673)
InnoDB 0.250000 0.040000 0.290000 ( 0.977711)


Final thoughts

The MySQL manual has a clear warning about inaccuracy of the amount of rows in the SHOW TABLE STATUS results:

Rows - The number of rows. Some storage engines, such as MyISAM, store the exact count. For other storage engines, such as InnoDB, this value is an approximation, and may vary from the actual value by as much as 40 to 50%. In such cases, use SELECT COUNT(*) to obtain an accurate count.


The test confirms it by showing 345 more records then expected thus making it not very useful but for some edge cases. If you know a way to improve the speed of count() on InnoDB with some other approach beyond using a counter table, please share.

Episode 36: Subversion on Rails

Posted about 7 years back at Railscasts

This episode will walk you through setting up a Rails project on subversion. It covers some helpful tips and gotchas you may experience along the way.

DataGrid - handy hints

Posted about 7 years back at work.rowanhick.com

Okay the orders list. It's a plain vanilla DataGrid component bound to the result from an HTTPService call to get an XML representation of an ActiveRecord orders collection. This all pretty easy to get up and running, but I ran into two immediate snags. Requirement #1 - Multicurrency in the totals column. Our system deals with orders in currencies all over the world, so we have price types and associate each order with a price type. Fair enough. Now we don't store price type symbol with the total (naturally) so how do we get it to appear in the same column in the the datagrid. Option 1 (on the Rails side) would be to add some faux accessor and iterate over the orders populating it before we handed it to the to_xml function sending it to Rails (that's not without it's problems). OR Option 2 (on the Flex side) we manipulate it over here. First off we create a little function that takes our current item (row) and the column we're manipulating, then prepends the symbol and appends the code to the amount. private function formatCurrency(item:Object, column:DataGridColumn):String { var field:String = column.dataField; return item.price_type_dollar_sign+' '+item[field]+' '+item.price_type_symbol; } Then in the mxml code for the datagrid <mx:DataGridColumn headerText="Total Amount" dataField="total_amount_payable" labelFunction="formatCurrency"/> Requirement #2 Sorting a field in an order different to that displayed So we have an order status (Draft, Pending Review, Review, Payment Pending, In Manufacturing, Shipped etc). Great, now you put that straight into your datagrid, hit a column header to sort, and realise it's doing an alpha sort on the status name. As you expect (but not as you wanted). Well again there's two ways to accomplish this - one is to pass in custom sort function to figure out the order. OR The other option, is to pipe down in your xml along with the order status name, a sort order numeric value , so Draft is 1 Shipped is 1000, everything in between gets a number etc. Then just as you do for the currency symbol, change the formatting of the column - so we bind our column to the order status sort_order value, but we display the order status name. When the datagrid sorts, it sorts on the bound value, not on the formatted value. Very nifty and simple. Just like this... private function formatStatus(item:Object, column:DataGridColumn):String { return item.order_status_name; } <mx:DataGridColumn headerText="Status" dataField="order_status_id" labelFunction="formatStatus"/> No nasty sort function, and does the trick. That's it for now... till next time.

Javascript: Event.onElementReady

Posted about 7 years back at Revolution On Rails

We deal with a lot of Javascript at RHG. Rather then create functional one-offs that become hard to maintain and very duplicative, we prefer to have collections of behavior that can be assigned to parts of the document. Our CSS designers especially like this because it makes our markup clean and easy to read. It also means we can have tests that exercise a series of interactions.

However, there is a problem we run into when loading the page over a slow connection: the Javascript is not run until window.onload, meaning our users suffer as they can see part of the page rendered but not use it until it's fully loaded. For those who don't know, window.onload will not execute until all images, CSS, and Javascript files have loaded. Our first solution to this problem was to use onDOMReady. This has worked fairly well and kept our site running reasonably quickly. We've run into problems with onDOMReady in IE6 however, and as a result disabled it in favor of having our pages render all the time. In the IE family of browsers if a script tries to access a part of the DOM before it has been completely processed the browser will raise an exception "operation aborted". After this alert message pops up, the web page becomes unusable and the browser could even crash.

After some careful thinking we decided we would attach our behavior objects in smaller chunks of the DOM. Rather then wait until the window.onload or onDomReady events fire we can use a few inline script tags that call a function that figures out how to attach itself to its most immediate parentNode.

For example, we do this:


<div class="parent">
<div class="bvr-blah">
</div>
<script type="text/javascript">
RHG.Behavior.attach();
</script>
</div>


There could be multiple behaviors in the above block of markup that are all contained within the hypothetical div.parent element.

Now, to allow this to work the div.parent must be ready. Otherwise, IE will cancel the whole page rendering with the "Operation Aborted" alert.

Event.onElementReady checks for features of the DOM element to determine whether or not the element is really ready to be manipulatd. Thankfully, IE doesn't mind if you read from an element before it's ready only if you try and modify it. This method will poll the DOM element until either the nextSibling or the textContent is non null.


Object.extend(Event,{
// check whether or not the DOM element is ready
onElementReady: function(element,callback)
{
if( element && (element.nextSibling || element.textContent) ){
callback();
}
else{
setTimeout( this.onElementReady.bind(this,element,callback), 1 );
}
}
});


Now we can attach our behaviors as the page is rendering and avoid "Operation Aborted" alerts from IE.

Javascript: Event.onElementReady

Posted about 7 years back at Revolution On Rails

We deal with a lot of Javascript at RHG. Rather then create functional one-offs that become hard to maintain and very duplicative, we prefer to have collections of behavior that can be assigned to parts of the document. Our CSS designers especially like this because it makes our markup clean and easy to read. It also means we can have tests that exercise a series of interactions.

However, there is a problem we run into when loading the page over a slow connection: the Javascript is not run until window.onload, meaning our users suffer as they can see part of the page rendered but not use it until it's fully loaded. For those who don't know, window.onload will not execute until all images, CSS, and Javascript files have loaded. Our first solution to this problem was to use onDOMReady. This has worked fairly well and kept our site running reasonably quickly. We've run into problems with onDOMReady in IE6 however, and as a result disabled it in favor of having our pages render all the time. In the IE family of browsers if a script tries to access a part of the DOM before it has been completely processed the browser will raise an exception "operation aborted". After this alert message pops up, the web page becomes unusable and the browser could even crash.

After some careful thinking we decided we would attach our behavior objects in smaller chunks of the DOM. Rather then wait until the window.onload or onDomReady events fire we can use a few inline script tags that call a function that figures out how to attach itself to its most immediate parentNode.

For example, we do this:


<div class="parent">
<div class="bvr-blah">
</div>
<script type="text/javascript">
RHG.Behavior.attach();
</script>
</div>


There could be multiple behaviors in the above block of markup that are all contained within the hypothetical div.parent element.

Now, to allow this to work the div.parent must be ready. Otherwise, IE will cancel the whole page rendering with the "Operation Aborted" alert.

Event.onElementReady checks for features of the DOM element to determine whether or not the element is really ready to be manipulatd. Thankfully, IE doesn't mind if you read from an element before it's ready only if you try and modify it. This method will poll the DOM element until either the nextSibling or the textContent is non null.


Object.extend(Event,{
// check whether or not the DOM element is ready
onElementReady: function(element,callback)
{
if( element && (element.nextSibling || element.textContent) ){
callback();
}
else{
setTimeout( this.onElementReady.bind(this,element,callback), 1 );
}
}
});


Now we can attach our behaviors as the page is rendering and avoid "Operation Aborted" alerts from IE.

Screenshot #1 - Orders list

Posted about 7 years back at work.rowanhick.com

Right here's our first look at the prototype app. Nothing too dramatic but gives you an idea of where we're headed with this. As you can see we've got some fairly standard controls, a datagrid, combo boxes, and buttons. Tomorrow we'll show how this is structured, and how I managed to get some fairly neat stuff with the datagrid working that demonstrates the polish already in Flex.

Episode 35: Custom REST Actions

Posted about 7 years back at Railscasts

REST adds many constraints. It restricts your controllers to seven actions. Normally this is okay, but sometimes you need to add your own custom actions. Learn how in this episode.

DRYing Up Polymorphic Controllers

Posted about 7 years back at Revolution On Rails

Polymorphic routes allow drying up the controller implementation when functionality is identical, regardless of entry point. A good example is comments for articles and blogs. There is a challenge to balance the implementation of the comments controller reflecting the multiple incoming routes. Let's look at the way it could be written.

Routing is straightforward with blogs and article models acting as commentable and both the comment model and comment controllers being polymorphic:

ActionController::Routing::Routes.draw do |map|
map.resources :articles, :has_many => [ :comments ]
map.resources :blogs, :has_many => [ :comments ]
end


This means that a comment can be created via post to either /articles/1/comments/new or /blogs/1/comments/new. The comments controller can be implemented to handle both:

class CommentsController < ApplicationController

def new
@parent = parent_object
@comment = Comment.new
end

def create

@parent = parent_object
@comment = @parent.comments.build(params[:comment])

if @comment.valid? and @comment.save
redirect_to parent_url(@parent)
else
render :action => 'new'
end

end

private

def parent_object
case
when params[:article_id] then Article.find_by_id(params[:article_id])
when params[:news_id] then News.find_by_id(params[:news_id])
end
end

def parent_url(parent)
case
when params[:article_id] then article_url(parent)
when params[:news_id] then news_url(parent)
end
end

end


This method works fine and there is not much drive to start refactoring it right away. This changes, though, if there is a need to add another commentable or allow some other polymorphic route. Instead of adding more 'when' clauses the whole functionality can be extracted and abstracted based on the idea of having fixed naming conventions for resources that allow movement from a controller name to a model. The refactored example has the parent functionality extracted to the application controller to share it as-is with other polymorphic routes:

class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base

protected

class << self

attr_reader :parents

def parent_resources(*parents)
@parents = parents
end

end

def parent_id(parent)
request.path_parameters["#{ parent }_id"]
end

def parent_type
self.class.parents.detect { |parent| parent_id(parent) }
end

def parent_class
parent_type && parent_type.to_s.classify.constantize
end

def parent_object
parent_class && parent_class.find_by_id(parent_id(parent_type))
end

end

class CommentsController < ApplicationController

parent_resources :article, :blogs

def new
@parent = parent_object
@comment = Comment.new
end

def create

@parent = parent_object
@comment = @parent.comments.build(params[:comment])

if @comment.valid? and @comment.save
redirect_to send("#{ parent_type }_url", @parent)
else
render :action => 'new'
end

end

end

The parent_resources call declares resources that are parent for a current controller. An alternative approach is to guess such parent resources from the request URI and routes. Aaron is currently working on a patch on Edge implementing it. We'll update this post later.

If you currently use multiple polymorphic resources and have if clauses in the controller code, you might want to rethink how it could be DRYed up using this approach. In some cases views are very parent type specific. Then it might be better to have different templates and partials rendered via render :template => "/controller/#{ parent_type }_action".

DRYing Up Polymorphic Controllers

Posted about 7 years back at Revolution On Rails

Polymorphic routes allow drying up the controller implementation when functionality is identical, regardless of entry point. A good example is comments for articles and blogs. There is a challenge to balance the implementation of the comments controller reflecting the multiple incoming routes. Let's look at the way it could be written.

Routing is straightforward with blogs and article models acting as commentable and both the comment model and comment controllers being polymorphic:

ActionController::Routing::Routes.draw do |map|
map.resources :articles, :has_many => [ :comments ]
map.resources :blogs, :has_many => [ :comments ]
end


This means that a comment can be created via post to either /articles/1/comments/new or /blogs/1/comments/new. The comments controller can be implemented to handle both:

class CommentsController < ApplicationController

def new
@parent = parent_object
@comment = Comment.new
end

def create

@parent = parent_object
@comment = @parent.comments.build(params[:comment])

if @comment.valid? and @comment.save
redirect_to parent_url(@parent)
else
render :action => 'new'
end

end

private

def parent_object
case
when params[:article_id] then Article.find_by_id(params[:article_id])
when params[:news_id] then News.find_by_id(params[:news_id])
end
end

def parent_url(parent)
case
when params[:article_id] then article_url(parent)
when params[:news_id] then news_url(parent)
end
end

end


This method works fine and there is not much drive to start refactoring it right away. This changes, though, if there is a need to add another commentable or allow some other polymorphic route. Instead of adding more 'when' clauses the whole functionality can be extracted and abstracted based on the idea of having fixed naming conventions for resources that allow movement from a controller name to a model. The refactored example has the parent functionality extracted to the application controller to share it as-is with other polymorphic routes:

class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base

protected

class << self

attr_reader :parents

def parent_resources(*parents)
@parents = parents
end

end

def parent_id(parent)
request.path_parameters["#{ parent }_id"]
end

def parent_type
self.class.parents.detect { |parent| parent_id(parent) }
end

def parent_class
parent_type && parent_type.to_s.classify.constantize
end

def parent_object
parent_class && parent_class.find_by_id(parent_id(parent_type))
end

end

class CommentsController < ApplicationController

parent_resources :article, :blogs

def new
@parent = parent_object
@comment = Comment.new
end

def create

@parent = parent_object
@comment = @parent.comments.build(params[:comment])

if @comment.valid? and @comment.save
redirect_to send("#{ parent_type }_url", @parent)
else
render :action => 'new'
end

end

end

The parent_resources call declares resources that are parent for a current controller. An alternative approach is to guess such parent resources from the request URI and routes. Aaron is currently working on a patch on Edge implementing it. We'll update this post later.

If you currently use multiple polymorphic resources and have if clauses in the controller code, you might want to rethink how it could be DRYed up using this approach. In some cases views are very parent type specific. Then it might be better to have different templates and partials rendered via render :template => "/controller/#{ parent_type }_action".

Possibilities become real.

Posted about 7 years back at work.rowanhick.com

A while back, at a previous company, our clients inundated us with feature requests. At one point at the infancy of this software's life, the codeword for "thank you for your request, we'll try to get it into the software" was called Possibilities. It always left the door open, however I'm sure the rate at things went through the door and never came back (well not until years later!) possibilities became a dreaded word... Now however (my personal belief) is between Rails and Flex turning the seemingly impossible to implement round in no time at all. After a rocky road start to Flex, I'm now having the opportunity to develop a full blown B2B application in it. Replacing a PHP/HTML solution. Both exciting and nerve racking - last night a good 2 hours was spent tracking down how exactly to get something shown in the correct order. I am well impressed, and looking forward to the future of possibilities with Flex 2, Apollo (and what Flex 3 may bring). To share my enthusiasm a good portion of this blog is going to be dedicated to documenting the rebuild of the previously mentioned B2B application. Currently I have client buy in, after ~ 6 hours of knocking up simple interface showing off a very 'windows like' application within a web browser he's sold on it, so it's now the big re-write. Here's the starting point for it: - A rails app with database migrations to take the v1 app's database and migrate it into a rails friendly naming scheme. - Basic objects replicating core functionality within Rails - Two flex front ends, one for general order management, and the other a tailored interface specifically for manufacturing. So far, here's my pro's and con's list Pro + It's going to work once, anywhere. Flash bugs cross browser are fee and far between. (compare that with XHTML/CSS/JS) + More native application functionality (drag/drop, grids etc) + Less network traffic per session + More responsive application Cons - Write, compile, write, compile, write, compile (although Flex Builder/Flex compiler shell reduces the pain) - A lot more code in building the interface - Guess work figureing out how to do complex stuff - Loosing some of Rails niceties (or duplication of things like validations) Next up some screenshots....

RailsConf 2007 - Ruby on Rails Podcast

Posted about 7 years back at Ruby on Rails Podcast

Interviews from RailsConf 2007 in Portland.