In Rails 4.1, how to find records by enum symbol?

ruby-on-rails ruby ruby-on-rails-4 rails-activerecord ruby-on-rails-4.1

27,253

Solution 1

ActiveRecord::Enum provides scopes based on its values.

Just try:

Conversation.active

Conversation.archived

Of course, you can create your own scopes as Kyle Decot mentioned.

Solution 2

This works great:

Conversation.where("conversation.status = ?", Conversation.statuses[:active])

For some reason this does NOT work:

Conversation.where(status: :active) #searches for NULL
Conversation.where(status: 'active') #searches for status=0 no matter what the enum

Update

All the above statements work with Rails 5. Happy coding!

Solution 3

ActiveRecord::Enum provides built-in scopes based on the values so you can simply do:

Conversation.active
Conversation.archived

Solution 4

Conversation.where(status: Conversation.statuses[:active])

Solution 5

Did you try Conversation.where(status: [:active, :archived]) ? As listed here.

View more solutions

27,253

Abdulaziz

Updated on March 01, 2020

Comments

Abdulaziz about 4 years
Assume I have this model:
```
class Conversation < ActiveRecord::Base
  enum status: [ :active, :archived ]
end
```
How can I find all active conversations without using the numeric value of the enum or without having to iterate over each conversation?

I tried doing Conversation.where(status: :active), but it didn't yield any results.

The only solution comes to mind is to iterate over all conversations and select the active ones, but it doesn't look like a good solution.
```
Conversation.all.select {|conversation| conversation.active? }  
```
Is there anything I can do about this?
- Waiting for Dev... almost 9 years
  
  It will work in Rails 5 github.com/rails/rails/issues/19964
joshua.paling over 9 years

No need to create a new instance - Conversation.statuses[:active] should work
Avael Kross about 9 years

ASAP, enum creates scopes like this by default, so if you have enum status: %i[active archived], you already have .active and .archived scopes.
pragma almost 9 years

Kensuke Naito's solution below is much better
Logar about 8 years

This one never worked for me. Everytime i have to match every record with the same state as my object I have to do Conversation.where(status: Conversation.statuses[my_conversation.status]). Any idea why it doesn't work ?
Shifa Khan about 8 years

@Logar Maybe isn't supposed to.. Check github.com/rails/rails/issues/19964
Logar about 8 years

Hehe, I got lured by documentation. At least now I know !
MegaTux about 8 years

Conversation.where(status: [Conversation.statuses[:active], Conversation.statuses[:archived]])
MegaTux about 8 years

Nice!, this way I can do "or" expressions: Conversation.where(status: [Conversation.statuses[:active], Conversation.statuses[:archived]])
Mirror318 almost 8 years

Note that Rails 5 will allow all these statements to work. Woo!
Chris Nicola almost 8 years

Not really a solution if you are passing that type value as a string say via an API request or query string value.
rubyprince about 7 years

The answer can be rewritten as Conversation.where(status: Conversation.statuses[:active]). No need for strings.
Greg Blass almost 7 years

Just switched back to work on a Rails 4 project and thought I was going nuts. Thank you for noting that these are Rails 5 conventions.
rmcsharry over 6 years

Also, if you wanted the opposite (ie. all records where status is anything other than active): Conversation.where.not(status: Conversation.statuses[:active])
Abe Voelker over 6 years

Unfortunately Rails 5 doesn't fix querying through a parent (e.g. Person.joins(:conversations).where(conversations: {status: :active}) errors out). Have to use the first method for that yet (Person.joins(:conversations).where(conversations: {status: Conversation.statuses[:active]})).