Reputation: 4275
I have the following table of counters:
CREATE TABLE cache (
key text PRIMARY KEY,
generation int
);
I would like to increment one of the counters, or set it to zero if the corresponding row doesn't exist yet. Is there a way to do this without concurrency issues in standard SQL? The operation is sometimes part of a transaction, sometimes separate.
The SQL must run unmodified on SQLite, PostgreSQL and MySQL, if possible.
A search yielded several ideas which either suffer from concurrency issues, or are specific to a database:
Try to INSERT
a new row, and UPDATE
if there was an error. Unfortunately, the error on INSERT
aborts the current transaction.
UPDATE
the row, and if no rows were modified, INSERT
a new row.
MySQL has an ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE
clause.
EDIT: Thanks for all the great replies. It looks like Paul is right, and there's not a single, portable way of doing this. That's quite surprising to me, as it sounds like a very basic operation.
Upvotes: 90
Views: 166155
Reputation: 6966
MySQL (and subsequently SQLite) also support the REPLACE INTO syntax:
REPLACE INTO my_table (pk_id, col1) VALUES (5, '123');
This automatically identifies the primary key and finds a matching row to update, inserting a new one if none is found.
Documentation: https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/replace.html
Upvotes: 149
Reputation: 8516
If you're OK with using a library that writes the SQL for you, then you can use Upsert (currently Ruby and Python only):
Pet.upsert({:name => 'Jerry'}, :breed => 'beagle')
Pet.upsert({:name => 'Jerry'}, :color => 'brown')
That works across MySQL, Postgres, and SQLite3.
It writes a stored procedure or user-defined function (UDF) in MySQL and Postgres. It uses INSERT OR REPLACE
in SQLite3.
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 7729
the ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE clause is the best solution because: REPLACE does a DELETE followed by an INSERT so for an ever so slight period the record is removed creating the ever so slight possibility that a query could come back having skipped that if the page was viewed during the REPLACE query.
I prefer INSERT ... ON DUPLICATE UPDATE ... for that reason.
jmoz's solution is the best: though I prefer the SET syntax to the parentheses
INSERT INTO cache
SET key = 'key', generation = 'generation'
ON DUPLICATE KEY
UPDATE key = 'key', generation = (generation + 1)
;
Upvotes: 11
Reputation: 8006
I would do something like the following:
INSERT INTO cache VALUES (key, generation)
ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE (key = key, generation = generation + 1);
Setting the generation value to 0 in code or in the sql but the using the ON DUP... to increment the value. I think that's the syntax anyway.
Upvotes: 30
Reputation:
In PostgreSQL there is no merge command, and actually writing it is not trivial - there are actually strange edge cases that make the task "interesting".
The best (as in: working in the most possible conditions) approach, is to use function - such as one shown in manual (merge_db).
If you don't want to use function, you can usually get away with:
updated = db.execute(UPDATE ... RETURNING 1)
if (!updated)
db.execute(INSERT...)
Just remember that it is not fault proof and it will fail eventually.
Upvotes: 5
Reputation: 753515
Standard SQL provides the MERGE statement for this task. Not all DBMS support the MERGE statement.
Upvotes: 4
Reputation: 39916
I don't know that you are going to find a platform-neutral solution.
This is commonly called an "UPSERT".
See some related discussions:
Upvotes: 8
Reputation: 79093
SQLite supports replacing a row if it already exists:
INSERT OR REPLACE INTO [...blah...]
You can shorten this to
REPLACE INTO [...blah...]
This shortcut was added to be compatible with the MySQL REPLACE INTO
expression.
Upvotes: 33
Reputation: 11243
If you don't have a common way to atomically update or insert (e.g., via a transaction) then you can fallback to another locking scheme. A 0-byte file, system mutex, named pipe, etc...
Upvotes: 0