fireproofsocks
Forgive me if this is obvious, but how does one delete a database record WITHOUT selecting it first? Ecto.Repo — Ecto v3.14.0 has examples, but they are all doing 2 operations: a select, then a delete.
In the interest of optimization, is it possible with Ecto to delete a record with a single operation? Something like the SQL query DELETE FROM my_table WHERE id=123 ?
Is it considered bad form to delete without selecting first?
Thanks for pointers, as always.
Trending in Questions
I having some trouble figuring out if I have set myself too strict of standards for my production server. Currently I can handle 75% of r...
New
Documentation
While reading the Scoped Routes section, I noticed that the documentation currently refers to a problem without explainin...
New
Hello,
I’m trying to build a basic Phoenix web-app, and I’d like to use Tailwind.
However, when I launch mix phx.server, I get an error...
New
Hi everyone,
I am toying with the idea of building a “match maker” for giving personal help to people that wants to start coding.
I sta...
New
I recently noticed that Elixir’s Logger defaults its primary log level to :debug when no :logger, :level application configuration is pre...
New
I’m working on a small exercise involving update_in/3, and I came up with this solution:
data = %{
name: "Periodic Table",
category:...
New
I’ve got trouble wrapping my head around the order in which functions are called in this snippet (from Phoenix’s authentication):
toke...
New
Other Trending Topics
Edit: 2026 May 15 - This post is archived.
Mob is alive!!
Main docs: mob v0.7.11 — Documentation
A bit of explanation for the slightly c...
New
Hey, I’m Jesse and I’m the main contributor behind Dexter, a full-featured, lightning-fast Elixir LSP optimized for large codebases. It s...
New
I am happy to introduce the very α version of the new programming language compiled to BEAM.
Welcome Cure.
It has literally three kille...
New
Hobbes is a low-level distributed database for the Elixir programming language.
Hobbes provides a simple, safe, and scalable storage lay...
New
Hi everyone!
The first release candidate for the Expert language server project is now available!
We’ve published a press release detai...
New
A little off-topic, but I feel like people here have a good head on their shoulders.
I used to be quite good at making software. Was luc...
New
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #library
- #deployment
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #elixirconf
- #channels
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #podcasts
- #javascript
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ai
- #ecto-query
- #elixirconf-us
- #blog-post
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #elixirconf-eu
- #api
- #forms
- #metaprogramming
- #hex










Showing Posts 1 to 8- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
Adzz
Ypu can do something like this:
That is just build a struct with the id in it then delete
OvermindDL1
Can also look at
repo.delete_all/2, it accepts a query for doing just that.xlphs
from(x in DataModel, where: x.id == ^id) |> Repo.delete_allfireproofsocks
I tried that, but that generates an error:
** (Ecto.StaleEntryError) attempted to delete a stale structAdzz
I think that will only do that if the id you gave it doesn’t exist in the db… maybe it was already deleted?
OvermindDL1
From the docs:
So yep, looks like you are right.
fireproofsocks
Thank you! Just to show a more thorough example:
You might get zero as the number of rows deleted.
Huolong
I think you have to do a query to pass existing rows to delete or delete_all,
because they require the Ecto metadata element of the struct to contain the ‘loaded’ flag.
The only alternative would be to completely fake the whole struct,
including all the internal fields and flags.
But I agree with you that there should be a version of delete,
which just takes a primary key value, by analogy with the ‘get’ function.