Except there are some pretty curious choices they made in order to "optimise" updates, notably if you have a JSONB field and you don't update anything at the first level, it considers that there has been no update, and silently ignores any updates that were made. But only to that field, so any other updates to other fields WILL be sent to the server. So, yeah, like HORRIBLE!
Thank you so much for bringing this up :D
You're absolutely right about SQLAlchemy's quirky behavior with JSONB fields. I've updated the article to include a new section specifically addressing this issue, as it's definitely something developers should be aware of.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Except there are some pretty curious choices they made in order to "optimise" updates, notably if you have a
JSONBfield and you don't update anything at the first level, it considers that there has been no update, and silently ignores any updates that were made. But only to that field, so any other updates to other fields WILL be sent to the server. So, yeah, like HORRIBLE!Thank you so much for bringing this up :D
You're absolutely right about SQLAlchemy's quirky behavior with JSONB fields. I've updated the article to include a new section specifically addressing this issue, as it's definitely something developers should be aware of.