issues: 1425029242
This data as json
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1425029242 | I_kwDOBm6k_c5U8Dh6 | 1863 | Update a single record in an existing table | 9599 | closed | 0 | 8658075 | 16 | 2022-10-27T04:53:17Z | 2022-11-29T18:08:53Z | 2022-11-29T18:06:37Z | OWNER | API design: ``` POST /db/table/row-pks/-/update { "field": "updated_value" } ``` Only the fields that you pass will be updated. Maybe this is the wrong design though? The design for insert currently looks like this: - https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1851#issuecomment-1294224185 ``` POST /db/table/-/insert Authorization: Bearer xxx Content-Type: application/json { "row": { "id": 1, "name": "New name" } } ``` I could use the same format for `/-/update`, but in this case the API doesn't require you to pass every field so `"row"` doesn't seem like the right key. I think I'll go with this: ``` POST /db/table/1/-/update Authorization: Bearer xxx Content-Type: application/json { "update": { "name": "New name" } } ``` The benefit of having an `"update"` key is that it allows me to use other keys in the future. Maybe a `"alter": true` key to indicate that new columns should be added if they are missing. | 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1863/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | completed |