Is it possible run a mutation on another graphqlType from within a mutation? I'm not sure if this is a good idea or not. Ideally it would be nice to have create mutations for each one of graphql data types and then call into each of those functions when needed. Hopefully this keeps things more DRY.
For example I have 2 graphql types "projects" and "rooms". For every project a room needs to be created and the ID placed in the project for reference later.
I see 3 ways of doing this:
- From front end, run 2 different graphql queries (for a new project and a new room) and a final one updating the project with the new room id.
- On the backend/graphql server. Just handle all the db calls inside of one resolve function for simplicity, returning the project and the room that were created.
- Running mutations inside a mutation. Call into the room create function from the project create function, and returning both data sets.
Still learning the ropes with graphql so any insight on whats good practice would be awesome.
Is it possible run a mutation on another graphqlType from within a mutation? I'm not sure if this is a good idea or not. Ideally it would be nice to have create mutations for each one of graphql data types and then call into each of those functions when needed. Hopefully this keeps things more DRY.
For example I have 2 graphql types "projects" and "rooms". For every project a room needs to be created and the ID placed in the project for reference later.
I see 3 ways of doing this:
- From front end, run 2 different graphql queries (for a new project and a new room) and a final one updating the project with the new room id.
- On the backend/graphql server. Just handle all the db calls inside of one resolve function for simplicity, returning the project and the room that were created.
- Running mutations inside a mutation. Call into the room create function from the project create function, and returning both data sets.
Still learning the ropes with graphql so any insight on whats good practice would be awesome.
Share Improve this question edited Nov 22, 2017 at 17:29 Justin asked Sep 13, 2016 at 13:18 JustinJustin 3,0393 gold badges27 silver badges47 bronze badges2 Answers
Reset to default 7I'm sure you figured out a solution to your problem long ago, but why not just make a mutation that captures the entire process, like createProjectAndRoom? I think it's a mistake to think of GraphQL resolvers as mapping very rigidly to single actions on single models.
The most mon way to do this is on an afterInsert (or similarly-named) hook. So in this case, after the "room" has been created, create the "project" during the after insert hook.