fix(upsert): do not overwrite an explcit created_at during upsert #13593
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
We found that when doing an upsert with model data that already included a `createdAt` timestampe, our explcit `createdAt` was being overwritten with the current time any time we also utilized the `fields` option.
e.g.
```
const instance = await MyModel.upsert({ id: 1, myfield: 'blah', createdAt: new Date('2010-01-01T12:00:00.000Z') }, { fields: [ 'myfield' ], returning: true });
console.log(instance.createdAt); // expected 2010-01-01T12:00:00.000Z, but got a now()-ish timestamp.
```
Issue appears to be that the check for a provided `createdAt` was being checked against the `updateValues` instead of the `insertValues`. Most of the time, this is inconsequential because the `insertValues` and `updateValues` both contain the same fields. But, when using the `fields` feature, the `createdAt` field is stripped away from the `updateValues`, so sequelize happily overwrites the `insertValues.createAt` value.
sdepold
approved these changes
Nov 1, 2021
|
Thx :) |
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 6.9.0 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
aliatsis
pushed a commit
to creditiq/sequelize
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 2, 2022
…quelize#13593) We found that when doing an upsert with model data that already included a `createdAt` timestampe, our explcit `createdAt` was being overwritten with the current time any time we also utilized the `fields` option. e.g. ``` const instance = await MyModel.upsert({ id: 1, myfield: 'blah', createdAt: new Date('2010-01-01T12:00:00.000Z') }, { fields: [ 'myfield' ], returning: true }); console.log(instance.createdAt); // expected 2010-01-01T12:00:00.000Z, but got a now()-ish timestamp. ``` Issue appears to be that the check for a provided `createdAt` was being checked against the `updateValues` instead of the `insertValues`. Most of the time, this is inconsequential because the `insertValues` and `updateValues` both contain the same fields. But, when using the `fields` feature, the `createdAt` field is stripped away from the `updateValues`, so sequelize happily overwrites the `insertValues.createAt` value. Co-authored-by: Sascha Depold <sdepold@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We found that when doing an upsert with model data that already included a
createdAttimestampe, our explcitcreatedAtwas being overwritten with the current time any time we also utilized thefieldsoption.e.g.
Issue appears to be that the check for a provided
createdAtwas being checked against theupdateValuesinstead of theinsertValues. Most of the time, this is inconsequential because theinsertValuesandupdateValuesboth contain the same fields. But, when using thefieldsfeature, thecreatedAtfield is stripped away from theupdateValues, so sequelize happily overwrites theinsertValues.createAtvalue.