Schemaless Changesets vs Embedded Schemas for Phoenix Forms

tomkonidas

While reading Programming Phoenix LiveView, I came across a section (Model Change with Schemaless Changesets - Chapter 5) which goes through setting up schemaless changesets for forms that you do not have a database table for.

I am very familiar with this method (I do it all the time), however instead of creating a Schemaless Changeset, I usually opt to just make an Embedded Schema. To me it seems simpler/cleaner to be able to define the struct and the type at the same time instead of maintaining two things (defstruct and types).

Schemaless

defmodule MyApp.Accounts.User do
  defstruct [:first_name, :email]
  @types %{first_name: :string, email: :string}
end

Embedded

defmodule MyApp.Accounts.User do
  @primary_key false  
  embedded_schema do
    field :first_name, :string
    field :email, :string
  end
end

Question:

Are there any reasons to choose schemaless changesets over embedded schemas?

8 comments

/phoenix #ecto #liveview #book-programming-phoenix-liveview

9 4443 8

2024-03-19 14:59:49 UTC

Showing Posts 1 to 8

Show Best Posts
Show All (oldest first)
Show All (newest first)

LostKobrakai

Schemaless changesets can be defined at runtime/by code. So it‘s useful when you don‘t have a fixed schema.

Post #1

cjbottaro

I’ve always used “embedded” schemas. I don’t think I’ve ever seen the official docs endorse “schemaless”, where as they do the former.

Schemaless feels like it’s dipping into some private API’s with that @types module var…

Post #2

LostKobrakai

There‘s no need for it to be a module attribute though. The data can come from wherever:

{%{field: nil}, %{field: :integer}}
|> Ecto.Changeset.cast(params, [:field])
…

Post #3

linusdm

I also found the distinction between using a schemaless changeset and an embedded schema confusing at times.

Part of that confusion stems from the name of “embedded schema”, I think. Using them stand-alone does not require them to be embedded in any way. But I see where the name comes from (using them in combination with a database).

Post #4

tfwright

You can use schemaless changesets without a struct. İ do that when I want to implement lightweight validation for user input that doesn’t pertain directly to an existing schema.

Post #5

kingdomcoder

Schemaless changeset does not support inputs_for (GitHub Issue).

Please, use embedded schemas. This cost me 3 weeks of work.

Post #6

voughtdq

For Phoenix Forms, no. I always opt for the embedded schema. I have experimented with a kind of Django-like form module where I define, for example, WebWeb.Forms.OnboardingForm and use an embedded schema. Then the save function can run a Multi or just regular stuff from the application modules inside a transaction. It’s kind of nice, but I haven’t decided if it’s the best solution. The idea is that the form is really a web-side concept that just needs to call a few backend functions.

For me, schemaless changesets work well for bulk imports where you want to run data validation and massaging before an insert_all/3. This is mostly for internal use, but I can imagine using it for an API and telling the user which record failed to validate for a better user experience.

Here’s an example, right inside my schema module:

  def schemaless_changeset(attrs) do
    types = Enum.into(__MODULE__.__schema__(:fields), %{}, fn field ->
      {field, __MODULE__.__schema__(:type, field)}
    end)

    {%{}, types}
    |> cast(attrs, Map.keys(types))
  end

Now of course you can just use the actual schema, but it feels “dirty” because you can’t use insert_all/3 on a schema or changeset. So, rather than having apply_changes/1 (or apply_action/2) turn the changeset into a schema then back into a map or keyword list (and forgetting to remove the additional struct fields in the schema ;), I like this approach. As with anything, your mileage may vary.

Post #7