Phoenix Todos - The User Model

This post is written as a set of Literate Commits. The goal of this style is to show you how this program came together from beginning to end.

Each commit in the project is represented by a section of the article. Click each section's header to see the commit on Github, or check out the repository and follow along.

Written by Pete Corey on Sep 7, 2016.

Create Users Table

Let’s focus on adding users and authorization to our Todos application. The first thing we’ll need is to create a database table to hold our users and a corresponding users schema.

Thankfully, Phoenix comes with many generators that ease the process of creating things like migrations and models.

To generate our users migration, we’ll run the following mix command:


mix phoenix.gen.model User users email:string encrypted_password:string

We’ll modify the migration file the generator created for us and add NOT NULL restrictions on both the email and encrypted_password fields:


add :email, :string, null: false
add :encrypted_password, :string, null: false

We’ll also add an index on the email field for faster queries:


create unique_index(:users, [:email])

Great! Now we can run that migration with the mix ecto.migrate command.

priv/repo/migrations/20160901141548_create_user.exs

+defmodule PhoenixTodos.Repo.Migrations.CreateUser do + use Ecto.Migration + + def change do + create table(:users) do + add :email, :string, null: false + add :encrypted_password, :string, null: false + + timestamps + end + + create unique_index(:users, [:email]) + end +end

Creating the Users Model

Now that we’re created our users table, we need to create a corresponding User model. Phoenix actually did most of the heavy lifting for us when we ran the mix phoenix.gen.model command.

If we look in /web/models, we’ll find a user.ex file that holds our new User model. While the defaults generated for us are very good, we’ll need to make a few tweaks.

In addition to the :email and :encrypted_password fields, we’ll also need a virtual :password field.


field :password, :string, virtual: true

:password is virtual because it will be required by our changeset function, but will not be stored in the database.

Speaking of required fields, we’ll need to update our @required_fields and @optional_fields attributes to reflect the changes we’ve made:


@required_fields ~w(email password)
@optional_fields ~w(encrypted_password)

These changes to @required_fields break our auto-generated tests against the User model. We’ll need to update the @valid_attrs attribute in test/models/user_test.ex and replace :encrypted_password with :password:


@valid_attrs %{email: "user@example.com", password: "password"}

And with that, our tests flip back to green!

test/models/user_test.exs

+defmodule PhoenixTodos.UserTest do + use PhoenixTodos.ModelCase + + alias PhoenixTodos.User + + @valid_attrs %{email: "user@example.com", password: "password"} + @invalid_attrs %{} + + test "changeset with valid attributes" do + changeset = User.changeset(%User{}, @valid_attrs) + assert changeset.valid? + end + + test "changeset with invalid attributes" do + changeset = User.changeset(%User{}, @invalid_attrs) + refute changeset.valid? + end +end

web/models/user.ex

+defmodule PhoenixTodos.User do + use PhoenixTodos.Web, :model + + schema "users" do + field :email, :string + field :password, :string, virtual: true + field :encrypted_password, :string + + timestamps + end + + @required_fields ~w(email password) + @optional_fields ~w(encrypted_password) + + @doc """ + Creates a changeset based on the `model` and `params`. + + If no params are provided, an invalid changeset is returned + with no validation performed. + """ + def changeset(model, params \\ :empty) do + model + |> cast(params, @required_fields, @optional_fields) + end +end

Additional Validation

While the default required/optional field validation is a good start, we know that we’ll need additional validations on our User models.

For example, we don’t want to accept email addresses without the "@" symbol. We can write a test for this in our UserTest module:


test "changeset with invalid email" do
  changeset = User.changeset(%User{}, %{
    email: "no_at_symbol",
    password: "password"
  })
  refute changeset.valid?
end

Initially this test fails, but we can quickly make it pass by adding basic regex validation to the :email field in our User.changeset function:


|> validate_format(:email, ~r/@/)

We can repeat this process for all of the additional validation we need, like checking password length, and asserting email uniqueness.

test/models/user_test.exs

... - alias PhoenixTodos.User + alias PhoenixTodos.{User, Repo} ... end + + test "changeset with invalid email" do + changeset = User.changeset(%User{}, %{ + email: "no_at_symbol", + password: "password" + }) + refute changeset.valid? + end + + test "changeset with short password" do + changeset = User.changeset(%User{}, %{ + email: "email@example.com", + password: "pass" + }) + refute changeset.valid? + end + + test "changeset with non-unique email" do + User.changeset(%User{}, %{ + email: "email@example.com", + password: "password", + encrypted_password: "encrypted" + }) + |> Repo.insert! + + assert {:error, _} = User.changeset(%User{}, %{ + email: "email@example.com", + password: "password", + encrypted_password: "encrypted" + }) + |> Repo.insert + end end

web/models/user.ex

... |> cast(params, @required_fields, @optional_fields) + |> validate_format(:email, ~r/@/) + |> validate_length(:password, min: 5) + |> unique_constraint(:email, message: "Email taken") end

Hashing Our Password

You might have noticed that we had to manually set values for the encrypted_password field for our "changeset with non-unique email" test to run. This was to prevent the database from complaining about a non-null constraint violation.

Let’s remove those lines from our test and generate the password hash ourselves!

:encrypted_password was an unfortunate variable name choice. Our password is not being encrypted and stored in the database; that would be insecure. Instead we're storing the hash of the password.

We’ll use the comeonin package to hash our passwords, so we’ll add it as a dependency and an application in mix.exs:


def application do
  [...
   applications: [..., :comeonin]]
end

defp deps do
  [...
   {:comeonin, "~> 2.0"}]
end

Now we can write a private method that will update the our :encrypted_password field on our User model if its given a valid changeset that’s updating the value of :password:


defp put_encrypted_password(changeset = %Ecto.Changeset{
  valid?: true,
  changes: %{password: password}
}) do
  changeset
  |> put_change(:encrypted_password, Comeonin.Bcrypt.hashpwsalt(password))
end

We’ll use pattern matching to handle the cases where a changeset is either invalid, or not updating the :password field:


defp put_encrypted_password(changeset), do: changeset

Isn’t that pretty? And with that, our tests are passing once again.

mix.exs

... applications: [:phoenix, :phoenix_html, :cowboy, :logger, :gettext, - :phoenix_ecto, :postgrex]] + :phoenix_ecto, :postgrex, :comeonin]] end ... {:cowboy, "~> 1.0"}, - {:mix_test_watch, "~> 0.2", only: :dev}] + {:mix_test_watch, "~> 0.2", only: :dev}, + {:comeonin, "~> 2.0"}] end

mix.lock

-%{"connection": {:hex, :connection, "1.0.4"}, +%{"comeonin": {:hex, :comeonin, "2.5.2"}, + "connection": {:hex, :connection, "1.0.4"}, "cowboy": {:hex, :cowboy, "1.0.4"},

test/models/user_test.exs

... email: "email@example.com", - password: "password", - encrypted_password: "encrypted" + password: "password" }) ... email: "email@example.com", - password: "password", - encrypted_password: "encrypted" + password: "password" })

web/models/user.ex

... |> unique_constraint(:email, message: "Email taken") + |> put_encrypted_password end + + defp put_encrypted_password(changeset = %Ecto.Changeset{ + valid?: true, + changes: %{password: password} + }) do + changeset + |> put_change(:encrypted_password, Comeonin.Bcrypt.hashpwsalt(password)) + end + defp put_encrypted_password(changeset), do: changeset end

Final Thoughts

Things are starting to look very different from our original Meteor application. While Meteor tends to hide complexity from application developers by withholding code in the framework itself, Phoenix expects developers to write much of this boilerplate code themselves.

While Meteor’s methodology lets developers get off the ground quickly, Phoenix’s philosophy of hiding nothing ensures that there’s no magic in the air. Everything works just as you would expect; it’s all right in front of you!

Additionally, Phoenix generators ease most of the burden of creating this boilerplate code.

Now that our User model is in place, we’re in prime position to wire up our front-end authorization components. Check back next week to see those updates!