Re:You Might Not Need GraphQL
by ricardobeat on Wednesday April 12, 2017 @07:42PM
(#14102782)
Your argument is basically fear, uncertainty and doubt. Any concrete points?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:You Might Not Need GraphQL
by vertex-four on Thursday April 13, 2017 @08:19AM
(#14106145)
> Last time I've looked (just a few months ago), the libraries weren't exactly mature-looking, e.g. prone to n+1 queries issue.
This point seems perfectly concrete.
Re:You Might Not Need GraphQL
by ruslan_talpa on Thursday April 13, 2017 @08:30AM
(#14106212)
the n+1 comes from the execution module of the reference implementation if you use the "default/simple" logic.
But this is just a reference/general purpose implementation.
No one said you can not create smarter resolvers that inspect the AST or even create your own execution module. It's possible :) and it works.
Re:You Might Not Need GraphQL
by vertex-four on Thursday April 13, 2017 @10:01AM
(#14106944)
Indeed - but there's very little in the way of good examples on how to do that effectively and in a resilient manner, last time I checked.
Re:You Might Not Need GraphQL
by andrewingram on Friday April 14, 2017 @12:52PM
(#14115514)
I find this strange, because this has been a solved problem with graphql-js for about 18 months now, and provided as a core feature in other implementations such as Sangria in Scala. I've written about this particular problem, calling out solutions that exist in different languages:
https://dev-blog.apollodata.com/optimizing-your-graphql-requ...