i get errors with the following error message when...

# exposed

[John Pena]

i get errors with the following error message when i try to query using an enum value:

Transaction attempt #0 failed: org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: operator does not exist: "MyEnumColumn" = character varying\n  Hint: No operator matches the given name and argument types. You might need to add explicit type casts

[Emil Kantis]

Would be helpful to share the generated query and perhaps the DSL used to generate the query 🙂

[John Pena]

@Emil Kantis done

[Emil Kantis]

taking a look, I'm also using it in postgres with similar query etc

[Emil Kantis]

it could be helpful to others to keep things in a thread btw 🙂

[John Pena]

cool, thanks for your help!

[Emil Kantis]

did you create your schema using exposed?

[Emil Kantis]

If you check the table definition, is it something like this ?

create table my_things
(
	my_field varchar(32) character varying not null,
);

[John Pena]

looking

[John Pena]

i did not create the schema with exposed

[John Pena]

CREATE TYPE "public"."MyField" AS ENUM ('X', 'Y', 'Z');

[John Pena]

-- Table Definition
CREATE TABLE "public"."MyTable" (
    "myField" "public"."MyField" NOT NULL
)

[Emil Kantis]

if you try changing the table to the following, it would probably™ be fine

CREATE TABLE "public"."MyTable" (
    "myField" varchar(32) NOT NULL
)

[John Pena]

yeah if i can’t figure this out then that’ll be my solution, just use a varchar or an int

[John Pena]

but it “seems” like it should work, given that it’s issuing the proper query

[Emil Kantis]

maybe when you run the query manually your client infers that it's the enum value 'x' you refer to, whereas the query sent from postgres is executed as-is, thus comparing the enum to a varchar which is not valid

[Emil Kantis]

which would sort of make sense.. not sure if there's any way around it though..

[Emil Kantis]

This guy seems to have managed to do something similar.. 🙂 https://github.com/JetBrains/Exposed/issues/609

[John Pena]

“Workaround update: avoiding the DAO DSL with all the same existing classes works :)”

[John Pena]

might also be an option

[John Pena]

@Emil Kantis thanks for your help, looks like i have a few options