fireproofsocks
I have an Ecto Schema which needs to restrict certain fields from being updated (for business reasons). What is the best way to do that? I saw this old issue in git: Way to specify field as read-only (do not insert)? · Issue #629 · elixir-ecto/ecto · GitHub but I couldn’t get before_insert or before_update to work anywhere (a full example would have helped). Is this even possible with the current version of Ecto? How are others accomplishing this?
thanks!
Trending in Questions
Hello!
Suppose you are building workflow (order / task / payment) processing system with the following requirements:
Each workflow con...
New
I’m aware of 2 such projects, are there others?
git: GitHub - team-alembic/realworld: A fullstack Phoenix LiveView application with back...
New
Hi everyone.
My team and I have been working on a fairly modest app based around video streaming and chat, but we’ve landed a customer t...
New
I really like the adapter patterns that ecto, nebulex, waffle, etc. use and would love find something similar for a key management servic...
New
Hello folks!
So at work, we are seeing some situations where we have to define some “fixed” strings that are used across the codebase in...
New
How Can I Optimise Compile Time Dependencies
I have been building an elixir application for about 2 years now. Many modules and files ha...
New
Hi,
we run different LLM models across a cluster, with each node loading a configurable subset. Model-specific queues let nodes consume ...
New
Other Trending Topics
I fully migrated to my own harness from Anthropic/Gemini and I think it’s time to share it. Welcome DSH, the DeepSeek Harness, fully writ...
New
Hey. Is there anyone here who creates agents in their apps? Not talking about using agents, but creating them. I’m finding it pretty diff...
New
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
There has been a thread to discuss the Stack Overflow Developer Survey on this forum every year since 2018, so here’s yet another one for...
New
With AI doing more of the implementation work, I’ve been wondering how much coding I should deliberately keep doing myself.
My main conc...
New
I love Elixir. It’s one of 2 programming languages I’ve ever fallen in love with.
But I don’t use it anymore.
Serverless was the promis...
New
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #library
- #deployment
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #elixirconf
- #channels
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #podcasts
- #javascript
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #ai
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #blog-post
- #elixirconf-us
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #elixirconf-eu
- #api
- #forms
- #security
- #hex










Showing Posts 1 to 7- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
NobbZ
The
before_*hooks have been removed in the very early days.But perhaps you can build something around
validate_change/3?fireproofsocks
That’s a good idea. Won’t the validate_change field raise an exception (error?) if a read-only field is submitted? For educational purposes, how could this be accomplished in a way that would let a user submit read-only fields, but the app would quietly omit them from the changeset?
NobbZ
No, it will invalidate the Changesset and append to the error list.
Don’t do this. Tell the user that (s)he is wrong, do not simply alter his/her provided data, (s)he will complain. But it should be possible as well, but you’ll need to do some extra work, as ecto isn’t build for that.
kwando
Just remove the “read only” fields from your
Ecto.Changeset.castorEcto.Changeset.changefunction.fireproofsocks
Hmm… this is a bit trickier than I thought since I need this to occur only on UPDATES. By defining fields using
validate_change()it looks like both inserts and updates get checked. When I inspect thechangesetvariable, it doesn’t seem to know what action is being taken until AFTER the database gets hit.Ankhers
This is a perfect scenario for two changeset functions!
Never feel like you have to pack everything into a single changeset function. You can always create as many as you need for a given module.
fireproofsocks
Ah, that makes sense, thank you! I didn’t think of that. Great, so this works like I need it to now: the data comes in and I store it, but now only certain fields are editable.