What do you do when you find a model that can belong to multiple models?
In my case, I'm building the inventory tracking functionality for an MRP. An Inventory Item can be either related to a Product, or a Material - in summary, I need to find a way to relate the two tables on the left, to the table on the right:
What usually comes to mind is using a polymorphic relationship. Let's call this poly_inventory_item:
This way, the item_id field is a foreign key and the item_type will let us know if it is a material or a product. This has some strong points:
- Clean solution with only two fields
- Flexibility to add more relations in the future
However, since there are only two options (either a material or a product), a table with two foreign keys is also a viable option. Let's call this shared_inventory_item:
This case is a bit unusual since it has nullable foreign keys, but it comes with some advantages:
- Clearer relations, as you can see the foreign keys directly
- Faster speeds, due to the indexes on the foreign keys
This second assumption, is what made me question my decision. How much faster can it be?
Testing the speed of both relations
I'm using Rails and SQLite for this test, and tested the speed in some common operations: creating records, getting the item, and querying the table.
Database setup
Standard indexes expected for the shared table and the polymorphic table:
# db/schema.rb
create_table "poly_inventory_items", force: :cascade do |t|
t.string "item_type", null: false
t.integer "item_id", null: false
t.index ["item_type", "item_id"], name: "index_poly_inventory_items_on_item"
end
create_table "shared_inventory_items", force: :cascade do |t|
t.integer "product_id"
t.integer "material_id"
t.index ["material_id"], name: "index_shared_inventory_items_on_material_id"
t.index ["product_id"], name: "index_shared_inventory_items_on_product_id"
end
add_foreign_key "shared_inventory_items", "materials"
add_foreign_key "shared_inventory_items", "products"
Models setup
Very simple definition and validations for the polymorphic table:
class PolyInventoryItem < ApplicationRecord
belongs_to :item, polymorphic: true
validates :item_type, inclusion: {in: %w[Product Material]}
end
The shared table is a bit more complex, as it needs to validate the presence of one of the foreign keys, and the absence of the other:
class SharedInventoryItem < ApplicationRecord
belongs_to :product, optional: true
belongs_to :material, optional: true
validates :product_id, presence: true, unless: :material_id?
validates :material_id, presence: true, unless: :product_id?
validates :product_id, absence: true, if: :material_id?
validates :material_id, absence: true, if: :product_id?
end
On the other side, the Material and Product can be very straightforward:
class Material < ApplicationRecord
has_one :shared_inventory_item
has_one :poly_inventory_item, as: :item
end
class Product < ApplicationRecord
has_one :shared_inventory_item
has_one :poly_inventory_item, as: :item
end
Benchmarking
Since indexes matter more on a large database, I did all tests in a situation with only a thousand records, and again with 100K records. The tests were done using the benchmark-ips gem.
I tested the most important operations for my use case: creating records, reading from the association, and querying the table.
# --- Creating records
Benchmark.ips do |x|
x.report("PolyInventoryItem") do
material = Material.create!(name: "Material")
product = Product.create!(name: "Product", sku: "SKU")
material.create_poly_inventory_item!
product.create_poly_inventory_item!
end
x.report("SharedInventoryItem") do
material = Material.create!(name: "Material")
product = Product.create!(name: "Product", sku: "SKU")
material.create_shared_inventory_item!
product.create_shared_inventory_item!
end
x.compare!
end
# --- Reading from association
Benchmark.ips do |x|
x.report("PolyInventoryItem") do
Product.first.poly_inventory_item
Material.first.poly_inventory_item
end
x.report("SharedInventoryItem") do
Product.first.shared_inventory_item
Material.first.shared_inventory_item
end
x.compare!
end
# --- Querying
product = Product.first
material = Material.first
Benchmark.ips do |x|
x.report("PolyInventoryItem") do
PolyInventoryItem.find_by(item: product)
PolyInventoryItem.find_by(item: material)
end
x.report("SharedInventoryItem") do
SharedInventoryItem.find_by(product: product)
SharedInventoryItem.find_by(material: material)
end
x.compare!
end
Results
Creating records
--- 1K records
SharedInventoryItem: 409.4 i/s
PolyInventoryItem: 394.5 i/s - same-ish: difference falls within error
--- 100K records
SharedInventoryItem: 378.4 i/s
PolyInventoryItem: 377.4 i/s - same-ish: difference falls within error
Reading from association
--- 1K records
SharedInventoryItem: 1982.0 i/s
PolyInventoryItem: 1863.5 i/s - 1.06x slower
--- 100K records
SharedInventoryItem: 1915.8 i/s
PolyInventoryItem: 1761.8 i/s - 1.09x slower
Querying
--- 1K records
SharedInventoryItem: 7471.5 i/s
PolyInventoryItem: 4476.7 i/s - 1.67x slower
--- 100K records
SharedInventoryItem: 6686.9 i/s
PolyInventoryItem: 3862.5 i/s - 1.73x slower
The query with find_by is the one that makes most use of the indexes, and it is the one that has the most significant difference. However, this would only by useful if you are querying the table instead of the association.
Conclusion
I was surprised to see that the speed difference was not as significant as I thought. For the most part, the polymorphic relation is as fast as the shared table, it is also cleaner and easier to maintain. It all comes down to the trade-offs you are willing to make.
I will stick with the polymorphic relation. Hope this helps you make a decision in the future! 🙌
Top comments (0)