-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 186
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Is it possible to have a default update method so what I don't have to spell out every column in modify statement? #608
Comments
Hi @git4sun you can have a prepared update statement and that will automatically bind a record if you bind all its components, and this is just using simple applications of case class Record(email: String, name: String)
val query = update.where(_.id eqs id).modify(_.email setTo ?).and(_.name setTo ?) .prepare()
query.bind(Record("test@yahoo.com", "test")).future() The problem you have is that no part of the primary key can be updated, if your record also includes primary keys, how would you deal with that for instance? The bind wouldn't be deterministic so it's not really that easy to implement one at framework level generically, we are working on improvements here with the macro API. In the mail Regards, |
for example: |
HI @git4sun, We are working on generating more macro assisted methods, starting with a store and a prepared store method, to allow an automated insertion of columns, but it's still in progress as there are a few edges cases we don't yet cover properly. The schema inference and typesafe checking mechanism will support what you are after, it will take 1 or 2 more sprints to get there, but I will keep you posted. Regards, |
@alexflav23 great news! BTW, thanks for the great software. |
Hi @git4sun, We have reached the point where implementing this is very feasible, as we now have implicit machinery that's capable of generating extractor types from a table and typechecking them in advanced scenarios. But before going further here, there are a few interesting scenarios to account for:
What I'm thinking is to use Scala symbols, but you would have to manually match the names against the column names. We could do something to auto-match if tables only have a single column of a given type, but that's not likely to be a very realistic scenario. For So here's what I'm thinking: db.table.update(`colName -> 5, `colName2 -> "some new text") Then you could get compile time errors if:
And so on, I'm sure there are things I couldn't cover off the top of my head. Please feel free to pitch in if you had anything different in mind. Regards. |
In most cases, I just need to set all the column data to the given object. Because that way I can separate all the data manipulation logic and the database operation. Is it possible to have an update method like
update.where(_.id eqs id).modify(Record(...))
? It can also prevent the mistakes like forgetting updating a couple columns when there are too many.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: