id,node_id,number,title,user,state,locked,assignee,milestone,comments,created_at,updated_at,closed_at,author_association,pull_request,body,repo,type,active_lock_reason,performed_via_github_app,reactions,draft,state_reason
521868864,MDU6SXNzdWU1MjE4Njg4NjQ=,66,"The "".upsert()"" method is misnamed",9599,closed,0,,,15,2019-11-12T23:48:28Z,2019-12-31T01:30:21Z,2019-12-31T01:30:20Z,OWNER,,"This thread here is illuminating: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3634984/insert-if-not-exists-else-update

The term `UPSERT` in SQLite has a specific meaning as-of 3.24.0 (2018-06-04): https://www.sqlite.org/lang_UPSERT.html

It means ""behave as an UPDATE or a no-op if the INSERT would violate a uniqueness constraint"". The syntax in 3.24.0+ looks like this (confusingly it does not use the term ""upsert""):
```sql
INSERT INTO phonebook(name,phonenumber) VALUES('Alice','704-555-1212')
  ON CONFLICT(name) DO UPDATE SET phonenumber=excluded.phonenumber
```
Here's the problem: the `sqlite-utils` `.upsert()` and `.upsert_all()` methods don't do this. They use the following SQL:

```sql
INSERT OR REPLACE INTO [{table}] ({columns}) VALUES {rows};
```

If the record already exists, it will be entirely replaced by a new record - as opposed to updating any specified fields but leaving existing fields as they are (the behaviour of ""upsert"" in SQLite itself).",140912432,issue,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/66/reactions"", ""total_count"": 1, ""+1"": 1, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,completed
529376481,MDExOlB1bGxSZXF1ZXN0MzQ2MjY0OTI2,67,Run tests against 3.5 too,9599,closed,0,,,2,2019-11-27T14:20:35Z,2019-12-31T01:29:44Z,2019-12-31T01:29:43Z,OWNER,simonw/sqlite-utils/pulls/67,,140912432,pull,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/67/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",0,