brettbeatty
Central to my app is the Account. I have a lot of schemas that belongs_to Account. I like including corresponding has_one/has_many on Account for query/build_assoc conveniences, but I don’t want to clutter the Account struct with an increasing number of non-core associations that will always be #Ecto.Association.NotLoaded<...>. Is there a way to define an association without adding it to the schema struct?
Off the top of my head the features I would most want but so far have worked around would be these:
join: m in assoc(a, :my_assoc)Ecto.assoc(account, :my_assoc)Ecto.build_assoc(account, :my_assoc)
Trending in Questions
I having some trouble figuring out if I have set myself too strict of standards for my production server. Currently I can handle 75% of r...
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
Hello,
I’m trying to build a basic Phoenix web-app, and I’d like to use Tailwind.
However, when I launch mix phx.server, I get an error...
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
Other Trending Topics
A little off-topic, but I feel like people here have a good head on their shoulders.
I used to be quite good at making software. Was luc...
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
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
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
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
- #metaprogramming











Showing Posts 1 to 3- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
krasenyp
I don’t think there’s a way to do that. But your problem could be a symptom of non-optimal design.
Most probably, the problem is the
Accountschema being central to your app. One solution is to embrace a domain-driven design approach and think of how to separate it in multiple schemas in different bounded contexts. For this you’d have to have deep knowledge of the business domain.Another approach is to stop relying on Ecto schemas everywhere in your app. They’re a database and/or validation concern. You could use well defined maps coupled with specs. Then you’d care more about the shape of your data and non-core fields won’t bother you that much.
I’m sure you’ll find a satisfactory solution.
fuelen
You can hide fields you’re not interested in by defining
InspectprotocolThe code above will hide default
#Ecto.Association.NotLoaded<...>values for:my_assoc1and:my_assoc2fields and will show them only if something else is set.brettbeatty
I appreciated your feedback and ended up going another way, but just to see if what I wanted was technically possible, I made it work in dev by overriding
Account.__schema__/2to support associations that don’t show up in the struct.I have no plans to use this in production, but it does seem to work with
Ecto.assoc(account, :my_assoc),Ecto.build_assoc(account, :my_assoc), andjoin: m in assoc(a, :my_assoc).