Add a basic upsert method

[binarygary]

This is a simplified implementation of #8. There wasn't any discussion in that issue about whether this is a desired feature or not, but I thought I'd give it a try as an excuse play with slic and this library.

In #8 parameter 1 suggests supporting multiple inserts in a nested array. This does not appear to be available in the CRUD trait or in this library.
The second is the columns to match against.
The third param is the columns to update on match. I've opted to omit this and update all columns when a match is found.

Usage:

// Would result in a new row - Oakland to San Diego for 100.
DB::table('table_name')
    ->upsert(
        ['departure' => 'Oakland', 'destination' => 'San Diego', 'price' => '100'] , 
        ['departure','destination']
    );


// Would update existing row - Oakland to San Diego for 99.
DB::table('table_name')
    ->upsert(
        ['departure' => 'Oakland', 'destination' => 'San Diego', 'price' => '99'] , 
        ['departure','destination'] 
    );

Test coverage has been added for:

• Adding a new row to the DB using upsert
• Upserting an existing row with 1 matching column.
• Upserting an existing row with 2 matching columns.

[nikolaystrikhar]

Elegantly implemented! I left a couple of comments about some minor issues :-)

I wonder what @JasonTheAdams and @borkweb think about this approach.

[binarygary]

@nikolaystrikhar Thanks for the quick review!
I've made the requested updates. I did guess on the since tag.

[nikolaystrikhar]

@binarygary Since I'm the only one who checked it, I decided to add more comments about small stuff, but so useful when it comes to many brands :-) And one format fix. Didn't want to bother you :D

And I'm not sure if I can approve tbh, I will ping Matt B about it, so he checks.

Regarding the since tag, I wonder how we are going to do it in libraries, @borkweb maybe we want TBD like we are doing everywhere and then you can update it when you release a new version?

[borkweb]

@binarygary - thank you for the PR! This is a good addition! 👯

[JasonTheAdams]

@binarygary @borkweb In the future we might consider optimizing this a bit more. Namely, when checking to see if the dataset already exists, we can create a modified query that is faster than the final update/insert query. Three things come to mind:

1. Clone the current query so we don't modify the main query, then on the clone...
2. Modify the select to be SELECT 1, since we don't actually need to grab the data to see if the row exists
3. Set a LIMIT 1 since we only need to know if there's at least 1 row