Bug description
When an entity uses a composite identifier via @Id on a property whose type is itself an entity/record (the pattern used for composite ID support, see https://spring.io/blog/2025/07/22/spring-data-jdbc-composite-id/ and #574), the columns belonging to that composite id are incorrectly included in the SET clause of the generated UPDATE statement, in addition to the WHERE clause.
For a simple (non-composite) @Id, the id column is correctly excluded from SET — only the composite/complex-identifier case is affected.
Root cause (traced in source)
org.springframework.data.jdbc.core.convert.SqlGenerator.Columns:
populateColumnNameCache() detects a complex identifier via Association.isComplexIdentifier() and recurses into the referenced identifier entity:
populateColumnNameCache(association.getRequiredTargetIdentifierEntity(),
prefix + property.getEmbeddedPrefix());
- Inside that recursive call, each property of the identifier entity goes through
initSimpleColumnName(property, prefix), which classifies the column via:
if (!property.getOwner().isIdProperty(property)) {
nonIdColumnNames.add(columnName);
} else {
idColumnNames.add(columnName);
}
Here property.getOwner() is the identifier entity itself (e.g. a plain record MyCompositeId), whose own fields are not individually annotated @Id — the @Id annotation lives on the root entity's property that references this identifier type. So property.getOwner().isIdProperty(property) returns false for every field of the composite id, and all of them end up in nonIdColumnNames instead of idColumnNames.
- Later,
updatable.removeAll(idColumnNames) therefore does not remove the composite id's columns, so they remain in updatableColumns and get emitted in the generated UPDATE ... SET ... statement.
Steps to reproduce
class Entity {
@Id
CompositeId id;
String someField;
}
record CompositeId(String partA, String partB) {}
interface Repo extends CrudRepository<Entity, CompositeId> {}
- Save a new
Entity (insert) — works fine.
- Load it and call
repo.save(entity) again (update path, since id is non-null).
- Inspect the generated SQL.
Expected behavior
UPDATE entity SET some_field = ? WHERE part_a = ? AND part_b = ?
Composite id columns should be excluded from SET, consistent with how a simple @Id is handled.
Actual behavior
UPDATE entity SET part_a = ?, part_b = ?, some_field = ? WHERE part_a = ? AND part_b = ?
The composite id's columns are redundantly included in SET.
Why this matters beyond redundancy
Most relational databases silently accept SET pk_col = <same value> as a no-op, so this goes unnoticed there. On a database that rejects any assignment to a primary-key column inside UPDATE ... SET at statement-validation time — regardless of whether the value actually changes — this makes save() unusable for entities with a composite @Id, forcing a bypass of the standard repository save() path entirely.
Environment
Observed with the composite-id feature introduced in 4.0.0-M4 (https://spring.io/blog/2025/07/22/spring-data-jdbc-composite-id/); please let me know if this is already fixed in a more recent build.
Bug description
When an entity uses a composite identifier via
@Idon a property whose type is itself an entity/record (the pattern used for composite ID support, see https://spring.io/blog/2025/07/22/spring-data-jdbc-composite-id/ and #574), the columns belonging to that composite id are incorrectly included in theSETclause of the generatedUPDATEstatement, in addition to theWHEREclause.For a simple (non-composite)
@Id, the id column is correctly excluded fromSET— only the composite/complex-identifier case is affected.Root cause (traced in source)
org.springframework.data.jdbc.core.convert.SqlGenerator.Columns:populateColumnNameCache()detects a complex identifier viaAssociation.isComplexIdentifier()and recurses into the referenced identifier entity:initSimpleColumnName(property, prefix), which classifies the column via:property.getOwner()is the identifier entity itself (e.g. a plain recordMyCompositeId), whose own fields are not individually annotated@Id— the@Idannotation lives on the root entity's property that references this identifier type. Soproperty.getOwner().isIdProperty(property)returnsfalsefor every field of the composite id, and all of them end up innonIdColumnNamesinstead ofidColumnNames.updatable.removeAll(idColumnNames)therefore does not remove the composite id's columns, so they remain inupdatableColumnsand get emitted in the generatedUPDATE ... SET ...statement.Steps to reproduce
Entity(insert) — works fine.repo.save(entity)again (update path, since id is non-null).Expected behavior
Composite id columns should be excluded from
SET, consistent with how a simple@Idis handled.Actual behavior
The composite id's columns are redundantly included in
SET.Why this matters beyond redundancy
Most relational databases silently accept
SET pk_col = <same value>as a no-op, so this goes unnoticed there. On a database that rejects any assignment to a primary-key column insideUPDATE ... SETat statement-validation time — regardless of whether the value actually changes — this makessave()unusable for entities with a composite@Id, forcing a bypass of the standard repositorysave()path entirely.Environment
Observed with the composite-id feature introduced in
4.0.0-M4(https://spring.io/blog/2025/07/22/spring-data-jdbc-composite-id/); please let me know if this is already fixed in a more recent build.