feat: extend WhereUnique for non unique filters

[Weakky]

Overview

• Adds a preview feature flag extendedWhereUnique
• Adds non unique fields and boolean operators to WhereUniqueInputs
  • It is still mandatory to specify at least one unique field outside of any boolean operators.
• Adds WhereInputs to nested delete/disconnect/update for to-one relation
• Adds DMMF property to specify which fields constraints are applied on

Schema changes

Considering the following datamodel,

model User {
  id Int @id
  email String @unique
  age Int
  name String

  toOne ToOne?
}

model ToOne {
  id Int @id

  userId Int @unique
  user User? @relation(fields: [userId], references: [id])
}

Here are the additions:

input UserWhereUniqueInput {
  id: Int
  email: Int
  age: Int // ++
  name: String // ++
  AND: [UserWhereInput] // ++
  OR: [UserWhereInput] // ++
  NOT: [UserWhereInput] // ++
}

This new WhereUniqueInput affect all reads and writes that uses it, such as:

• findUnique
• deleteOne
• updateOne
• upsertOne
• and most nested mutations

Furthermore, on one-to-one relation, it adds the ability to add additional filters via a WhereInput (since the record is pinned by the QE). All examples below aren't possible without the extendedWhereUnique feature flag:

await prisma.user.update({ where: {}, data: {
  to_one: {
    disconnect: { /* ToOneWhereInput */ },
    delete: { /* ToOneWhereInput */ },
    update: { where: { /*ToOneWhereInput*/ }, data: {} },
    upsert: { where: { /*ToOneWhereInput*/ }, create: {}, update: {} }
  },
}})

[garrensmith]

Some small feedback. But this is looking really good.
Once the tests are passing I think we good to go.

[garrensmith]

could you rename this test file to extended_where_unique

[Weakky]

The "extended where" is a temporary name that we use to qualify the feature we're building. But those tests are for a where unique. Once we remove the feature flag, we'll refer to this as where unique again. Why do you think we should rename the file?

[garrensmith]

I like the idea of extended where because these sets of tests are around that concept. yes its just normal where but if I came to the code base and looked at a where_unique test I would think its a little strange to be there. But if we have the extended_where_unique it gives me context. There is something related to a new feature that was added later to the where_unique functionality

[Weakky]

but if I came to the code base and looked at a where_unique test I would think its a little strange to be there

I'm sorry but I don't understand why you'd find that strange. This where_unique.rs test file already existed. All I did was add a couple more tests to it. In 2 months, we'll GA and remove this feature flag and extended_where_unique won't make any sense anymore. It won't be easier either from a visibility/searchability perspective because we'll have where unique tests spread in two different files for no obvious reasons because extendedWhereUnique won't be a concept anymore. It does make sense right now but think about onboarding developers 2 years from now without any of this context.