this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
10 points (100.0% liked)

Rust

6042 readers
6 users here now

Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.

Wormhole

[email protected]

Credits

  • The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

in sequelize (javascript) it's pretty straightforward to either find a record, or create it if it doesn't exist. I don't see anything similar with sea-orm. There's a 'save' method that seems to insert or update, but I need to know details about the record ahead of time :/

Any ideas?

https://sequelize.org/docs/v6/core-concepts/model-querying-finders/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nerdblood 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I managed to get this working, but there has to be a better way. How else could I write this?

  pub async fn insert_or_return_user(
        db: &DbConn,
        partial_user: Auth0UserPart,
    ) -> Result {
        let user = users::ActiveModel {
            email: Set(partial_user.email.to_owned()),
            email_verified: Set(partial_user.email_verified.to_owned()),
            auth0_sub: Set(partial_user.sub.to_owned()),
            ..Default::default()
        };

        let result = user.clone().insert(db).await;

        match result {
            Ok(u) => {
                println!("{u:#?}");
                Ok(u.try_into_model().unwrap() as UsersModel)
            }
            Err(error) => {
                let user = Users::find()
                    .filter(users::Column::Auth0Sub.eq(&partial_user.sub))
                    .one(db)
                    .await?;

                Ok(user.unwrap() as UsersModel)
            }
        }
    }
[–] snaggen 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I have never used sea-orm, but I wonder if .on_conflict could be used to simplify the code above?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

This is likely what OP will have to do. It actually looks like ANSI SQL now has merge, but you can scroll down a bit and see how each DB handles it slightly differently if you don't use merge.

[–] nerdblood 1 points 1 year ago

I think I had that in a few attempts, I can't remember why I removed it. Thanks for pointing this out.

[–] Lmaydev 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would likely do it in reverse. Try and find the object and if it doesn't exist create it.

[–] snaggen 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That will always be prune to race conditions, where you check if someting exists (then some other thread creates it) and then you try to create it. You should always try to create first, then if it fails due to it already existing, fetch it. That is a good general rule for anything from hashmaps to databases.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's true, but also trying to create first has a race condition too. The above code will panic at the unwrap if the record is deleted after the failed insert, and before the select

[–] snaggen 2 points 1 year ago

So, a loop it is....

[–] nerdblood 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm new to multithreaded programming. How would some other thread create it? Like what's the real-world scenario?

[–] snaggen 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That is all dependent on the program, but the simplest scenario is by an API with two requests at the same time. But it may also be like if you scan for new files, and use inotify, then you may also have a scanning loop as a fallback. Then the scan and inotify may trigger at almost the same time, so if that then results in a db create or insert you can get in to this problem. So, there are multiple ways to get in to trouble, and life always find new ways 😀

[–] nerdblood 1 points 1 year ago

Indeed it does haha, thanks