Add ReturnValuesOnConditionCheckFailure member to Update & Put Enhanced Request

[masakiasanuma]

Describe the feature

Currently, only UpdateItemRequest and PutItemRequest using the non-enhanced Dynamo DB client allows you to set the ReturnValuesOnConditionCheckFailure member to make the ConditionalCheckFailedException to return the failed item. I want this member to be added to the UpdateItemEnhancedRequest and PutItemEnhancedRequest so that this feature can be used with the enhanced Dynamo DB client.

Use Case

My service currently uses multiple conditions when creating & updating items, and there's no way to differentiate which condition failed without retrieving & checking the item that failed in the ConditionalCheckFailedException object. With the ReturnValuesOnConditionCheckFailure feature, my service will be able to throw specific exceptions based on which condition failed, allowing the service clients to handle exceptions more clearly.

Proposed Solution

Add an optional returnValuesOnConditionCheckFailure member to UpdateItemEnhancedRequest.builder and PutItemEnhancedRequest.builder that takes in the ReturnValuesOnConditionCheckFailure Enum. When this member is set to ALL_OLD, it will append the failed/old item as a Map<String, AttributeValue> in the ConditionalCheckFailedException object.

Other Information

I believe this was a recent feature added based on the announcement date, which might be the reason this was not added to the Enhanced requests yet.

Somewhat similar to this issue, but I specifically need the value to be returned on ConditionalCheckFailedException. The ReturnValues attribute does not return the item in the exception object, it only returns when the operation succeeds.

Acknowledgements

• I may be able to implement this feature request
• This feature might incur a breaking change

AWS Java SDK version used

2

JDK version used

17

Operating System and version

AL2

[debora-ito]

@masakiasanuma thank you for reaching out. Request acknowledged.

Community note: add a 👍 reaction to the original description to help us prioritize this request.

[masakiasanuma]

Hi @debora-ito, thank you for picking this up! Just curious, is there an average ETA for the completion of these kind of requests? I want to determine if it's worth implementing a workaround for now or if I should just wait until this feature request is completed. Thanks!

[breader124]

Hi, I'd like to start working on it if possible

[masakiasanuma]

Hi @breader124, it seems like they have not started working on this yet as they might not have enough bandwidth to prioritize this request over others. If you have the time, I would very much appreciate it if you could implement this feature!

[debora-ito]

This is now supported, via #4708.

Available in version 2.21.37. Thank you @breader124 for your contribution!

[github-actions]

⚠️COMMENT VISIBILITY WARNING⚠️

Comments on closed issues are hard for our team to see.
If you need more assistance, please open a new issue that references this one.
If you wish to keep having a conversation with other community members under this issue feel free to do so.

[masakiasanuma]

Thank you @debora-ito and @breader124!