[5.2] Add random() function to query builder

[hamedmehryar]

This function adds sql statements to query to get a number of random
records.

[GrahamCampbell]

Does this work with all drivers?

[hamedmehryar]

Unfortunately no.
I'm going to implement this in different Grammars.

[hamedmehryar]

Implemented in Grammars.

[GrahamCampbell]

Thanks, but sqlite is still missing.

[hamedmehryar]

I've tested this for sqlite and ... order by RANDOM() LIMIT 1; worked and returned a random row.
Only SqlServer and MySql have different implementations.

[GrahamCampbell]

Ah, ok, Great.

[JayBizzle]

In my opinion, this method should NOT do both order by rand AND also limit.

As it is possible to seed the RAND() MySQL function, i would expect this method to look like this...

public function random($seed = '')
{
    return $this->orderByRaw('RAND('.$seed.')');
}

if this was the case, i would suggest the method be named orderByRand() which would make Eloquent statments more readable i.e. Users::orderByRand()->limit(20)->get();

...or at an absolute push, it could be like this...

public function random($limit = 1, $seed = '')
{
    return $this->orderByRaw('RAND('.$seed.')')->limit($limit);
}

Not sure how this translates to other drivers though

[hamedmehryar]

Thanks @JayBizzle, I will do some further research on it.

[hamedmehryar]

Well, I split this function into two functions:
orderByRand($seed = '')
and
random($value = 1, $seed = '')

This Allows one to use:
$query->orderByRand() only to sort the results randomly.
or to use:
$query->random()->get() to get one or many random records the same as $collection->random()

[taylorotwell]

Why not just use $collection->shuffle()?

[barryvdh]

That's not helpful if you have many items, but only want to load a few (so combined with a limit)

[GrahamCampbell]

Why not just use $collection->shuffle()?

Yeh, that won't be possible if there's millions of rows.

[taylorotwell]

But it’s more feasible to return millions of rows via Eloquent?

On May 24, 2016, at 8:46 AM, Graham Campbell notifications@github.com wrote:

Why not just use $collection->shuffle()?

Yeh, that won't be possible if there's millions of rows.

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #13642 (comment)

[barryvdh]

The use-case is not to get ALL millions rows, but just X random rows from those million. With shuffle(), you would load all rows, but with random SQL, you only get the X rows (although random supposedly isn't very efficient either in MySQL either, but assume better then loading all rows in a collection)

[taylorotwell]

But why would you get all million? Just use a where clause and LIMIT then call shuffle?

$query->where(‘foo’, ‘bar’)->limit(50)->get()->shuffle()?

On May 24, 2016, at 8:58 AM, Barry vd. Heuvel notifications@github.com wrote:

The use-case is not to get ALL millions rows, but just X random rows from those million. With shuffle(), you would load all rows, but with random SQL, you only get the X rows (although random supposedly isn't very efficient either in MySQL either, but assume better then loading all rows in a collection)

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #13642 (comment)

[barryvdh]

Because you would always get the same 50 results, never the next 50.

Simple example; you have a database with jokes (say 1000), and on the frontpage, you want to show a random one. So: $query->orderByRand()->first() will get a random one using SQL. $query->limit(50)->get()->shuffle()->first() would always load 50 same ones, $query->get()->shuffle()->first() would load all?

[taylorotwell]

Gotcha

On May 24, 2016, at 9:06 AM, Barry vd. Heuvel notifications@github.com wrote:

Because you would always get the same 50 results, never the next 50.

Simple example; you have a database with jokes (say 1000), and on the frontpage, you want to show a random one. So: $query->orderByRand()->first() will get a random one using SQL. $query->limit(50)->get()->shuffle()->first() would always load 50 same ones, $query->get()->shuffle()->first() would load all?

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #13642 (comment)

[barryvdh]

But the random() with limit() is a bit much imho, just orderByRand() would probably suffice.

[vlakoff]

Same story… #5223, #5435.

[vlakoff]

You don't have to add two methods. You can do:

->orderByRandom(); // all rows

->orderByRandom()->limit(10); // 10 random rows

Also this emphasizes all the rows are ordered before being truncated. This may be a performance issue on large databases.

[taylorotwell]

Changed this to just a single method: inRandomOrder...

App\User::inRandomOrder()->take(10)->get();

[barryvdh]

Isn't orderByRandom() (or orderRandom()) more clear, that it's actually a ORDER BY statement? (In case there are multiple etc)

[JayBizzle]

Agree with @barryvdh

Also reads better IMO

[taylorotwell]

If someone asked me "how should I sort X?" I would respond with "in random order".

[KennedyTedesco]

To me, orderByRand() (I prefer) or orderByRandom() it's a bit more clear, since we already have a orderBy() method.

[athahersirnaik]

Yes, orderByRandom() is bit clear

[taylorotwell]

I’m not changing it. Sorry. :/

On May 25, 2016, at 8:42 AM, Athaher Sirnaik notifications@github.com wrote:

Yes, orderByRandom() is bit clear

—
You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #13642 (comment)

[neowill2013]

orderByRandom would be better

[taylorotwell]

Sorry locking this because I'm not going to be spammed all day on my inbox.