graphql-engine/server/src-lib/Hasura/GraphQL/Schema/Build.hs

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

283 lines
13 KiB
Haskell
Raw Normal View History

-- | This module provides building blocks for the GraphQL Schema that the
-- GraphQL Engine presents.
--
-- The functions defined here are used to serve as default implementations for
-- their namesakes in the 'BackendSchema' type class.
--
-- When, for some backend, you want to implement a new feature that manifests
-- itself visibly in the schema (e.g., if you're developing support for update
-- mutations), this module is likely where your efforts should start.
--
-- Using these functions help us present a consistent GraphQL schema across
-- different backends.
--
-- There is a bit of tension however, as sometimes we intentionally do want the
-- GraphQL Schema relating to some backend to be different in some way.
--
-- It could be that a backend only has limited support for some common feature,
-- or, more interestingly, that some backend just does things differently (c.f.
-- MSSQL's @MERGE@ statement with PostgreSQL's @INSERT .. ON CONFLICT@, which
-- are similar enough that we want to use the same overall upsert schema but
-- different enough that we want to use different field names)
--
-- When you want to implement new schema for a backend, there is overall three
-- different ways do deal with this tension:
--
-- 1. You can duplicate existing code and implement the new behavior in the
-- duplicate.
-- 2. You can infuse the new behavior into existing code and switch dynamically
-- at runtime (or via type class instance dispatch, which is the same
-- for our purposes)
-- 3. You can refactor the existing building blocks and compose them differently
-- at use sites to get the desired behavior nuances.
--
-- Of these three, steps 1. and 2. are by far the easiest to execute, while 3.
-- requires some critical thought. However, both 1. and 2. produce legacy code
-- that is difficult to maintain and understand.
--
-- As a guideline, if you find yourself wanting add new behavior to some of
-- these functions it's very likely that you should consider refactoring them
-- instead, thus shifting the responsibility deciding on the correct behavior to
-- use sites.
--
-- It an ongoing effort to adapt and refactor these building blocks such that
-- they have the sizes and shapes that result in the most elegant uses of them
-- that we can manage.
module Hasura.GraphQL.Schema.Build
( buildFunctionMutationFields,
buildFunctionQueryFields,
buildTableDeleteMutationFields,
buildTableInsertMutationFields,
buildTableQueryFields,
buildTableStreamingSubscriptionFields,
buildTableUpdateMutationFields,
)
where
import Data.Text.Extended
import Hasura.GraphQL.Parser hiding (EnumValueInfo, field)
import Hasura.GraphQL.Parser.Constants qualified as G
import Hasura.GraphQL.Schema.Backend (MonadBuildSchema)
import Hasura.GraphQL.Schema.Common
import Hasura.GraphQL.Schema.Mutation
import Hasura.GraphQL.Schema.Select
import Hasura.GraphQL.Schema.SubscriptionStream (selectStreamTable)
import Hasura.GraphQL.Schema.Update (updateTable, updateTableByPk)
import Hasura.Prelude
import Hasura.RQL.IR
import Hasura.RQL.Types.Backend
import Hasura.RQL.Types.Common
import Hasura.RQL.Types.Function
import Hasura.RQL.Types.SchemaCache
import Hasura.RQL.Types.SourceCustomization
import Hasura.RQL.Types.Table
import Language.GraphQL.Draft.Syntax qualified as G
buildTableQueryFields ::
forall b r m n.
MonadBuildSchema b r m n =>
SourceName ->
TableName b ->
TableInfo b ->
G.Name ->
(m [FieldParser n (QueryDB b (RemoteRelationshipField UnpreparedValue) (UnpreparedValue b))])
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
buildTableQueryFields sourceName tableName tableInfo gqlName = do
-- select table
selectName <- mkRootFieldName . fromMaybe gqlName $ _crfName _tcrfSelect
-- select table by pk
selectPKName <- mkRootFieldName . fromMaybe (gqlName <> G.__by_pk) $ _crfName _tcrfSelectByPk
-- select table aggregate
selectAggName <- mkRootFieldName . fromMaybe (gqlName <> G.__aggregate) $ _crfName _tcrfSelectAggregate
catMaybes
<$> sequenceA
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
[ optionalFieldParser QDBMultipleRows $ selectTable sourceName tableInfo selectName selectDesc,
optionalFieldParser QDBSingleRow $ selectTableByPk sourceName tableInfo selectPKName selectPKDesc,
optionalFieldParser QDBAggregation $ selectTableAggregate sourceName tableInfo selectAggName selectAggDesc
]
where
selectDesc = buildFieldDescription defaultSelectDesc $ _crfComment _tcrfSelect
selectPKDesc = buildFieldDescription defaultSelectPKDesc $ _crfComment _tcrfSelectByPk
selectAggDesc = buildFieldDescription defaultSelectAggDesc $ _crfComment _tcrfSelectAggregate
defaultSelectDesc = "fetch data from the table: " <>> tableName
defaultSelectPKDesc = "fetch data from the table: " <> tableName <<> " using primary key columns"
defaultSelectAggDesc = "fetch aggregated fields from the table: " <>> tableName
TableCustomRootFields {..} = _tcCustomRootFields . _tciCustomConfig $ _tiCoreInfo tableInfo
buildTableStreamingSubscriptionFields ::
forall b r m n.
MonadBuildSchema b r m n =>
SourceName ->
TableName b ->
TableInfo b ->
G.Name ->
m [FieldParser n (QueryDB b (RemoteRelationshipField UnpreparedValue) (UnpreparedValue b))]
buildTableStreamingSubscriptionFields sourceName tableName tableInfo gqlName = do
let customRootFields = _tcCustomRootFields $ _tciCustomConfig $ _tiCoreInfo tableInfo
selectDesc = Just $ G.Description $ "fetch data from the table in a streaming manner : " <>> tableName
selectStreamName <-
mkRootFieldName $ fromMaybe gqlName (_crfName $ _tcrfSelect customRootFields) <> G._stream
catMaybes
<$> sequenceA
[ optionalFieldParser QDBStreamMultipleRows $ selectStreamTable sourceName tableInfo selectStreamName selectDesc
]
buildTableInsertMutationFields ::
forall b r m n.
MonadBuildSchema b r m n =>
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
(SourceName -> TableInfo b -> m (InputFieldsParser n (BackendInsert b (UnpreparedValue b)))) ->
Scenario ->
SourceName ->
TableName b ->
TableInfo b ->
G.Name ->
m [FieldParser n (AnnotatedInsert b (RemoteRelationshipField UnpreparedValue) (UnpreparedValue b))]
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
buildTableInsertMutationFields backendInsertAction scenario sourceName tableName tableInfo gqlName = do
insertName <- mkRootFieldName . fromMaybe (G._insert_ <> gqlName) $ _crfName _tcrfInsert
insertOneName <- mkRootFieldName . fromMaybe (G._insert_ <> gqlName <> G.__one) $ _crfName _tcrfInsertOne
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
insert <- insertIntoTable backendInsertAction scenario sourceName tableInfo insertName insertDesc
-- Select permissions are required for insertOne: the selection set is the
-- same as a select on that table, and it therefore can't be populated if the
-- user doesn't have select permissions.
insertOne <- insertOneIntoTable backendInsertAction scenario sourceName tableInfo insertOneName insertOneDesc
pure $ catMaybes [insert, insertOne]
where
insertDesc = buildFieldDescription defaultInsertDesc $ _crfComment _tcrfInsert
insertOneDesc = buildFieldDescription defaultInsertOneDesc $ _crfComment _tcrfInsertOne
defaultInsertDesc = "insert data into the table: " <>> tableName
defaultInsertOneDesc = "insert a single row into the table: " <>> tableName
TableCustomRootFields {..} = _tcCustomRootFields . _tciCustomConfig $ _tiCoreInfo tableInfo
-- | This function is the basic building block for update mutations. It
-- implements the mutation schema in the general shape described in
-- @https://hasura.io/docs/latest/graphql/core/databases/postgres/mutations/update.html@.
--
-- Something that varies between backends is the @update operators@ that they
-- support (i.e. the schema fields @_set@, @_inc@, etc., see
-- <src/Hasura.Backends.Postgres.Instances.Schema.html#updateOperators Hasura.Backends.Postgres.Instances.Schema.updateOperators> for an example
-- implementation). Therefore, this function is parameterised over a monadic
-- action that produces the operators that the backend supports in the context
-- of some table and associated update permissions.
--
-- Apart from this detail, the rest of the arguments are the same as those
-- of @BackendSchema.@'Hasura.GraphQL.Schema.Backend.buildTableUpdateMutationFields'.
--
-- The suggested way to use this is like:
--
-- > instance BackendSchema MyBackend where
-- > ...
-- > buildTableUpdateMutationFields = GSB.buildTableUpdateMutationFields myBackendUpdateOperators
-- > ...
buildTableUpdateMutationFields ::
forall b r m n.
MonadBuildSchema b r m n =>
-- | an action that builds @BackendUpdate@ with the
-- backend-specific data needed to perform an update mutation
( TableInfo b ->
m
(InputFieldsParser n (BackendUpdate b (UnpreparedValue b)))
) ->
-- | The source that the table lives in
SourceName ->
-- | The name of the table being acted on
TableName b ->
-- | table info
TableInfo b ->
-- | field display name
G.Name ->
m [FieldParser n (AnnotatedUpdateG b (RemoteRelationshipField UnpreparedValue) (UnpreparedValue b))]
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
buildTableUpdateMutationFields mkBackendUpdate sourceName tableName tableInfo gqlName = do
let _viewInfo = _tciViewInfo $ _tiCoreInfo tableInfo
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
backendUpdate <- mkBackendUpdate tableInfo
-- update table
updateName <- mkRootFieldName . fromMaybe (G._update_ <> gqlName) $ _crfName _tcrfUpdate
-- update table by pk
updatePKName <- mkRootFieldName . fromMaybe (G._update_ <> gqlName <> G.__by_pk) $ _crfName _tcrfUpdateByPk
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
update <- updateTable backendUpdate sourceName tableInfo updateName updateDesc
-- Primary keys can only be tested in the `where` clause if a primary key
-- exists on the table and if the user has select permissions on all columns
-- that make up the key.
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
updateByPk <- updateTableByPk backendUpdate sourceName tableInfo updatePKName updatePKDesc
pure $ catMaybes [update, updateByPk]
where
updateDesc = buildFieldDescription defaultUpdateDesc $ _crfComment _tcrfUpdate
updatePKDesc = buildFieldDescription defaultUpdatePKDesc $ _crfComment _tcrfUpdateByPk
defaultUpdateDesc = "update data of the table: " <>> tableName
defaultUpdatePKDesc = "update single row of the table: " <>> tableName
TableCustomRootFields {..} = _tcCustomRootFields . _tciCustomConfig $ _tiCoreInfo tableInfo
buildTableDeleteMutationFields ::
forall b r m n.
MonadBuildSchema b r m n =>
SourceName ->
TableName b ->
TableInfo b ->
G.Name ->
m [FieldParser n (AnnDelG b (RemoteRelationshipField UnpreparedValue) (UnpreparedValue b))]
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
buildTableDeleteMutationFields sourceName tableName tableInfo gqlName = do
-- delete from table
deleteName <- mkRootFieldName . fromMaybe (G._delete_ <> gqlName) $ _crfName _tcrfDelete
-- delete from table by pk
deletePKName <- mkRootFieldName . fromMaybe (G._delete_ <> gqlName <> G.__by_pk) $ _crfName _tcrfDeleteByPk
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
delete <- deleteFromTable sourceName tableInfo deleteName deleteDesc
-- Primary keys can only be tested in the `where` clause if the user has
-- select permissions for them, which at the very least requires select
-- permissions.
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
deleteByPk <- deleteFromTableByPk sourceName tableInfo deletePKName deletePKDesc
pure $ catMaybes [delete, deleteByPk]
where
deleteDesc = buildFieldDescription defaultDeleteDesc $ _crfComment _tcrfDelete
deletePKDesc = buildFieldDescription defaultDeletePKDesc $ _crfComment _tcrfDeleteByPk
defaultDeleteDesc = "delete data from the table: " <>> tableName
defaultDeletePKDesc = "delete single row from the table: " <>> tableName
TableCustomRootFields {..} = _tcCustomRootFields . _tciCustomConfig $ _tiCoreInfo tableInfo
buildFunctionQueryFields ::
forall b r m n.
MonadBuildSchema b r m n =>
SourceName ->
FunctionName b ->
FunctionInfo b ->
TableName b ->
m [FieldParser n (QueryDB b (RemoteRelationshipField UnpreparedValue) (UnpreparedValue b))]
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
buildFunctionQueryFields sourceName functionName functionInfo tableName = do
let -- select function
funcDesc =
Just . G.Description $
flip fromMaybe (_fiComment functionInfo) $ "execute function " <> functionName <<> " which returns " <>> tableName
-- select function agg
funcAggDesc = Just $ G.Description $ "execute function " <> functionName <<> " and query aggregates on result of table type " <>> tableName
queryResultType =
case _fiJsonAggSelect functionInfo of
JASMultipleRows -> QDBMultipleRows
JASSingleObject -> QDBSingleRow
catMaybes
<$> sequenceA
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
[ optionalFieldParser (queryResultType) $ selectFunction sourceName functionInfo funcDesc,
optionalFieldParser (QDBAggregation) $ selectFunctionAggregate sourceName functionInfo funcAggDesc
]
buildFunctionMutationFields ::
forall b r m n.
MonadBuildSchema b r m n =>
SourceName ->
FunctionName b ->
FunctionInfo b ->
TableName b ->
m [FieldParser n (MutationDB b (RemoteRelationshipField UnpreparedValue) (UnpreparedValue b))]
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
buildFunctionMutationFields sourceName functionName functionInfo tableName = do
let funcDesc = Just $ G.Description $ "execute VOLATILE function " <> functionName <<> " which returns " <>> tableName
jsonAggSelect = _fiJsonAggSelect functionInfo
catMaybes
<$> sequenceA
Role-invariant schema constructors We build the GraphQL schema by combining building blocks such as `tableSelectionSet` and `columnParser`. These building blocks individually build `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects. Those object specify the valid GraphQL schema. Since the GraphQL schema is role-dependent, at some point we need to know what fragment of the GraphQL schema a specific role is allowed to access, and this is stored in `{Sel,Upd,Ins,Del}PermInfo` objects. We have passed around these permission objects as function arguments to the schema building blocks since we first started dealing with permissions during the PDV refactor - see hasura/graphql-engine@5168b99e463199b1934d8645bd6cd37eddb64ae1 in hasura/graphql-engine#4111. This means that, for instance, `tableSelectionSet` has as its type: ```haskell tableSelectionSet :: forall b r m n. MonadBuildSchema b r m n => SourceName -> TableInfo b -> SelPermInfo b -> m (Parser 'Output n (AnnotatedFields b)) ``` There are three reasons to change this. 1. We often pass a `Maybe (xPermInfo b)` instead of a proper `xPermInfo b`, and it's not clear what the intended semantics of this is. Some potential improvements on the data types involved are discussed in issue hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3125. 2. In most cases we also already pass a `TableInfo b`, and together with the `MonadRole` that is usually also in scope, this means that we could look up the required permissions regardless: so passing the permissions explicitly undermines the "single source of truth" principle. Breaking this principle also makes the code more difficult to read. 3. We are working towards role-based parsers (see hasura/graphql-engine-mono#2711), where the `{InputFields,Field,}Parser` objects are constructed in a role-invariant way, so that we have a single object that can be used for all roles. In particular, this means that the schema building blocks _need_ to be constructed in a role-invariant way. While this PR doesn't accomplish that, it does reduce the amount of role-specific arguments being passed, thus fixing hasura/graphql-engine-mono#3068. Concretely, this PR simply drops the `xPermInfo b` argument from almost all schema building blocks. Instead these objects are looked up from the `TableInfo b` as-needed. The resulting code is considerably simpler and shorter. One way to interpret this change is as follows. Before this PR, we figured out permissions at the top-level in `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, passing down the obtained `xPermInfo` objects as required. After this PR, we have a bottom-up approach where the schema building blocks themselves decide whether they want to be included for a particular role. So this moves some permission logic out of `Hasura.GraphQL.Schema`, which is very complex. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3608 GitOrigin-RevId: 51a744f34ec7d57bc8077667ae7f9cb9c4f6c962
2022-02-17 11:16:20 +03:00
[ optionalFieldParser (MDBFunction jsonAggSelect) $ selectFunction sourceName functionInfo funcDesc
-- TODO: do we want aggregate mutation functions?
]
buildFieldDescription :: Text -> Comment -> Maybe G.Description
buildFieldDescription defaultDescription = \case
Automatic -> Just $ G.Description defaultDescription
Explicit comment -> G.Description . toTxt <$> comment