RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded on update and delete for small number of rows (10s)

I have the following two calls that return the same RangeError:

 await db
    .update(schema.cards)
    .set({ redeemable: true })
    .where(eq(schema.cards.contractAddress, vaultAddress))
    .returning({ address: vaultAddress })
    .catch((error) => {
      console.error(error);
      error(500);
    });

await db
    .delete(schema.cards)
    .where(
      and(
        eq(schema.accounts.address, address),
        eq(schema.cards.contractAddress, vaultAddress),
      ),
    )
    .returning({ address })
    .catch((error) => {
      console.error(error);
      error(500);
    });

 await db
    .update(schema.cards)
    .set({ redeemable: true })
    .where(eq(schema.cards.contractAddress, vaultAddress))
    .returning({ address: vaultAddress })
    .catch((error) => {
      console.error(error);
      error(500);
    });

await db
    .delete(schema.cards)
    .where(
      and(
        eq(schema.accounts.address, address),
        eq(schema.cards.contractAddress, vaultAddress),
      ),
    )
    .returning({ address })
    .catch((error) => {
      console.error(error);
      error(500);
    });

 await db
    .update(schema.cards)
    .set({ redeemable: true })
    .where(eq(schema.cards.contractAddress, vaultAddress))
    .returning({ address: vaultAddress })
    .catch((error) => {
      console.error(error);
      error(500);
    });

await db
    .delete(schema.cards)
    .where(
      and(
        eq(schema.accounts.address, address),
        eq(schema.cards.contractAddress, vaultAddress),
      ),
    )
    .returning({ address })
    .catch((error) => {
      console.error(error);
      error(500);
    });

 await db
    .update(schema.cards)
    .set({ redeemable: true })
    .where(eq(schema.cards.contractAddress, vaultAddress))
    .returning({ address: vaultAddress })
    .catch((error) => {
      console.error(error);
      error(500);
    });

await db
    .delete(schema.cards)
    .where(
      and(
        eq(schema.accounts.address, address),
        eq(schema.cards.contractAddress, vaultAddress),
      ),
    )
    .returning({ address })
    .catch((error) => {
      console.error(error);
      error(500);
    });

The number of rows in question is around 10. I am successfully using .where with update in another query.

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:10 PM

Is it exactly how your delete is written?
.returning({ address }) .returning({ address }) is invalid, you need to .returning({ address: schema.accounts.address }) .returning({ address: schema.accounts.address }) or an other column

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:10 PM

you are assigning addressaddress to .returning.returning

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:11 PM

looks the same for updateupdate

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:12 PM

maybe it is not clear but returnin is {aName: theTableColumn}{aName: theTableColumn}

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:12 PM

thank you! that solved the first and led to another issue for the latter (deletion).

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:14 PM

so I get the following:
PostgresError: missing FROM-clause entry for table "accounts"PostgresError: missing FROM-clause entry for table "accounts" Which I suppose makes sense; there is a one-to-many relation from accounts -> cards, I would like to delete all cards that belong to the specific account based on an address of that account, but the reference in cards is to the accounts id

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:17 PM

oh you want a subquery in your where

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:17 PM

accounts.address is unique, would one way of addressing this being making the relation reference the address in the card relation?

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:18 PM

Oh I like that option much more. I will have a look at the docs for that

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:18 PM

Relations are only for

select

select

.
https://orm.drizzle.team/docs/operators#exists

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:19 PM

I am thinking about existsexists but it depends on the query you need

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:21 PM

I would like to delete all cards that belong to the specific account based on an address of that account

if there is a way to match a card and account it could be possible

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:22 PM

you can try to reproduce a light version of your schema and share it with https://drizzle.run

Drizzle Run

Rrphlmr ⚡you can try to reproduce a light version of your schema and share it with https:...

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:24 PM

yessir https://drizzle.run/ylvbdkuyfnwkkaube1ux4itc

Drizzle Run

New starter 01 playground - Drizzle Run

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:24 PM

woops, forgot a field, changes pushed

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:25 PM

the playground is

btw

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:30 PM

and maybe to be a bit clearer with the query I am after:

Delete all cards

that match a given contractAddresscontractAddress and
that reference the account given by the account.addressaccount.address.

So cards that match the contractAddress but reference another account are not deleted

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:32 PM

Ok, I'm forking it and come back in few minutes. If you try on your own we could compare :p

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:32 PM

I will try

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:38 PM

can a cardscards have no accountIdaccountId ?

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:41 PM

strictly, yes, because there is no notNullnotNull. This isn't the case in my application however

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:42 PM

ok because we could add a reference from accountIdaccountId to accounts.idaccounts.id but I was just asking :p

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:42 PM

for this POC I am making for tomorrow I won't include the notNullnotNull but it should be there I suppose as all cards should be related to an account

Rrphlmr ⚡ok because we could add a reference from `accountId` to `accounts.id` but I was ...

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:43 PM

wait, isn't that what there is already?

Sshot wait, isn't that what there is already?

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:43 PM

Relations are "runtime" link between tables but not "real" link like references (foreign key)

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:44 PM

ah so you're saying I could add a database-level relation with foreign keys?

Sshot ah so you're saying I could add a database-level relation with foreign keys?

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:44 PM

yes, only if you need to prevent errors

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:44 PM

If that is my only option I will have to but I'm trying to avoid changes to the schema if possible atm

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:45 PM

With a ref, you have the guarantee that it will be an existing accountId

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:45 PM

Right, I see

Sshot If that is my only option I will have to but I'm trying to avoid changes to the ...

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:45 PM

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:50 PM

hmm, with the following I delete all cards but for every user. Will keep trying.

const query = db.select().from(accounts).where(eq(accounts.address, "0xdeadbeef"))

const result = await db
    .delete(cards)
    .where(
        and(
            exists(query),
            eq(cards.contractAddress, "0xsomething"),
        ),
    )

const query = db.select().from(accounts).where(eq(accounts.address, "0xdeadbeef"))

const result = await db
    .delete(cards)
    .where(
        and(
            exists(query),
            eq(cards.contractAddress, "0xsomething"),
        ),
    )

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:51 PM

Which I guess makes sense, as exists(query)exists(query) I expect to always be true with how I have defined it.

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:53 PM

I did the same query

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:54 PM

https://drizzle.run/r8be0g6tp5knhfui3ajmmbd3

Drizzle Run

Delete with where on sub query - Drizzle Run

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 2:55 PM

It seems to delete the expected cards

shotOP•7/17/24, 2:57 PM

If you add the card value, in your playground:

    {
    id: 4,
    accountId: 2,
    contractAddress: "contract-aa",
  },

    {
    id: 4,
    accountId: 2,
    contractAddress: "contract-aa",
  },

This will also get deleted though no?

shotOP•7/17/24, 3:01 PM

i.e. it is deleting cards that match the contractAddress but for every user.

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 3:06 PM

ah yes

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 3:08 PM

I have updated

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 3:08 PM

const checkQuery = db
  .select()
  .from(accounts)
  .where(and(eq(accounts.address, address), eq(cards.accountId, accounts.id)));

const checkQuery = db
  .select()
  .from(accounts)
  .where(and(eq(accounts.address, address), eq(cards.accountId, accounts.id)));

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 3:09 PM

now the check is also checking the accountId

shotOP•7/17/24, 3:09 PM

ahhh this makes good sense. Thanks for all the help! its greatly appreciated

shotOP•7/17/24, 3:10 PM

Curious, how big is the team working on drizzle?

Sshot Curious, how big is the team working on drizzle?

rphlmr ⚡•7/17/24, 3:11 PM

I think they are 4 developers (I am not a core member, just an early adopter contributing lol)

shotOP•7/17/24, 3:11 PM

awesome, well, thanks again

RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded on update and delete for small number of rows (10s)

Similar Threads

Similar Threads

Similar Threads