carlgleisner
Is it supported to have eager_check?: true run on identities when the identity consists of more than one attribute?
I have a compound identity that indeed returns errors on submission with Postgres as data layer. On another resource using an identity with a single attribute I do get eager checking on validation however, as one would expect of course.
identities do
identity :imaginative_party_name, [:host_id, :party_name] do
eager_check? true
message "success not possible if you insist on reusing party names all the time"
end
end
Looking at the documentation I cannot tell that this would not be supported. If so, then maybe this could be pointed out?
Where Next?
Trending in Questions
Other Trending Topics
Latest Ash Threads
Latest on Elixir Forum
Sponsor Spotlight
Supporting innovation across the BEAM ecosystem.
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
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #ai
- #elixirconf-us
- #blog-post
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #api
- #forms
- #hex
- #security
- #metaprogramming
Our Sponsors
Build Elixir applications with speed and confidence.
Supporting innovation across the BEAM ecosystem.
We build reliable cloud platforms for business-critical systems.
Error tracking, logs, uptime, and Just Enough APM. Built for developers.
Elixir, Erlang & BEAM conferences from Code Sync - join us in 2026!
Master modern tools, write cleaner code, and tackle real-world challenges.
Bringing learning, work and compliance together since 1987.
**Building the future of software with AI, trust, and human connection.**
The team behind Membrane, Popcorn, LiveDebugger. Available for hire.
Courses that'll move you from confusion to "Aha, now I get it!"
Showing Posts 1 to 5- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
zachdaniel
Are you saying that eager checking is not working for your compound identity?
carlgleisner
Yes I’m sorry for failing to make that explicit.
I’ll revert with a reproduction (have a few of those outstanding at the moment).
zachdaniel
Interesting. It should work
If not then its a bug.
carlgleisner
It works
The thing was that I was using
argumentfor the input of the key of the related record together with achangewithmanage_relationship. As I understand it now this is intended behaviour.I dug up a few of your messages in the Discord which I think explain it:
You put examples in there as well, very helpful. Maybe I could copy these here as well if appropriate?
Humbly, maybe a note in the documentation could be of use for others? I’d be happy to provide a PR as a starting point if desirable.
Sidenote
I’m yet to try out the solutions you suggested since for now it’s just fine for me to not use
argument+change. But I did wonder whether that also solves not getting errors after submission when passing in input that does not relate to theidof an existing record.Reference codebase
I used this little reproduction for testing for future reference.
But I guess it’s technically not a “reproduction” when there is no actual issue
https://github.com/carlgleisner/ash_phoenix_reproduction
EDIT: I should edit the title of this post for posterity
zachdaniel
You would have my utmost gratitude
This one would probably be a separate issue? Likely has something to do with input names not matching? But curious to see if its still an issue after your change