graphql-engine/server/src-lib/Hasura/RQL/IR/Root.hs

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

111 lines
4.0 KiB
Haskell
Raw Normal View History

{-# LANGUAGE UndecidableInstances #-}
server: support remote relationships on SQL Server and BigQuery (#1497) Remote relationships are now supported on SQL Server and BigQuery. The major change though is the re-architecture of remote join execution logic. Prior to this PR, each backend is responsible for processing the remote relationships that are part of their AST. This is not ideal as there is nothing specific about a remote join's execution that ties it to a backend. The only backend specific part is whether or not the specification of the remote relationship is valid (i.e, we'll need to validate whether the scalars are compatible). The approach now changes to this: 1. Before delegating the AST to the backend, we traverse the AST, collect all the remote joins while modifying the AST to add necessary join fields where needed. 1. Once the remote joins are collected from the AST, the database call is made to fetch the response. The necessary data for the remote join(s) is collected from the database's response and one or more remote schema calls are constructed as necessary. 1. The remote schema calls are then executed and the data from the database and from the remote schemas is joined to produce the final response. ### Known issues 1. Ideally the traversal of the IR to collect remote joins should return an AST which does not include remote join fields. This operation can be type safe but isn't taken up as part of the PR. 1. There is a lot of code duplication between `Transport/HTTP.hs` and `Transport/Websocket.hs` which needs to be fixed ASAP. This too hasn't been taken up by this PR. 1. The type which represents the execution plan is only modified to handle our current remote joins and as such it will have to be changed to accommodate general remote joins. 1. Use of lenses would have reduced the boilerplate code to collect remote joins from the base AST. 1. The current remote join logic assumes that the join columns of a remote relationship appear with their names in the database response. This however is incorrect as they could be aliased. This can be taken up by anyone, I've left a comment in the code. ### Notes to the reviewers I think it is best reviewed commit by commit. 1. The first one is very straight forward. 1. The second one refactors the remote join execution logic but other than moving things around, it doesn't change the user facing functionality. This moves Postgres specific parts to `Backends/Postgres` module from `Execute`. Some IR related code to `Hasura.RQL.IR` module. Simplifies various type class function signatures as a backend doesn't have to handle remote joins anymore 1. The third one fixes partial case matches that for some weird reason weren't shown as warnings before this refactor 1. The fourth one generalizes the validation logic of remote relationships and implements `scalarTypeGraphQLName` function on SQL Server and BigQuery which is used by the validation logic. This enables remote relationships on BigQuery and SQL Server. https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/1497 GitOrigin-RevId: 77dd8eed326602b16e9a8496f52f46d22b795598
2021-06-11 06:26:50 +03:00
module Hasura.RQL.IR.Root
( SourceConfigWith (..),
RootField (..),
MutationDB (..),
ActionQuery (..),
ActionMutation (..),
QueryRootField,
MutationRootField,
SubscriptionRootField,
QueryDBRoot (..),
MutationDBRoot (..),
RemoteRelationshipField (..),
)
where
import Data.Aeson.Ordered qualified as JO
import Data.Kind (Type)
import Hasura.Prelude
import Hasura.RQL.IR.Action
import Hasura.RQL.IR.Delete
import Hasura.RQL.IR.Insert
import Hasura.RQL.IR.RemoteSchema
import Hasura.RQL.IR.Select
import Hasura.RQL.IR.Update
import Hasura.RQL.Types.Backend qualified as RQL
import Hasura.RQL.Types.Common qualified as RQL
import Hasura.RQL.Types.QueryTags qualified as RQL
import Hasura.RQL.Types.RemoteSchema qualified as RQL
import Hasura.SQL.AnyBackend qualified as AB
import Hasura.SQL.Backend
data SourceConfigWith (db :: BackendType -> Type) (b :: BackendType)
= SourceConfigWith (RQL.SourceConfig b) (Maybe RQL.QueryTagsConfig) (db b)
server: support remote relationships on SQL Server and BigQuery (#1497) Remote relationships are now supported on SQL Server and BigQuery. The major change though is the re-architecture of remote join execution logic. Prior to this PR, each backend is responsible for processing the remote relationships that are part of their AST. This is not ideal as there is nothing specific about a remote join's execution that ties it to a backend. The only backend specific part is whether or not the specification of the remote relationship is valid (i.e, we'll need to validate whether the scalars are compatible). The approach now changes to this: 1. Before delegating the AST to the backend, we traverse the AST, collect all the remote joins while modifying the AST to add necessary join fields where needed. 1. Once the remote joins are collected from the AST, the database call is made to fetch the response. The necessary data for the remote join(s) is collected from the database's response and one or more remote schema calls are constructed as necessary. 1. The remote schema calls are then executed and the data from the database and from the remote schemas is joined to produce the final response. ### Known issues 1. Ideally the traversal of the IR to collect remote joins should return an AST which does not include remote join fields. This operation can be type safe but isn't taken up as part of the PR. 1. There is a lot of code duplication between `Transport/HTTP.hs` and `Transport/Websocket.hs` which needs to be fixed ASAP. This too hasn't been taken up by this PR. 1. The type which represents the execution plan is only modified to handle our current remote joins and as such it will have to be changed to accommodate general remote joins. 1. Use of lenses would have reduced the boilerplate code to collect remote joins from the base AST. 1. The current remote join logic assumes that the join columns of a remote relationship appear with their names in the database response. This however is incorrect as they could be aliased. This can be taken up by anyone, I've left a comment in the code. ### Notes to the reviewers I think it is best reviewed commit by commit. 1. The first one is very straight forward. 1. The second one refactors the remote join execution logic but other than moving things around, it doesn't change the user facing functionality. This moves Postgres specific parts to `Backends/Postgres` module from `Execute`. Some IR related code to `Hasura.RQL.IR` module. Simplifies various type class function signatures as a backend doesn't have to handle remote joins anymore 1. The third one fixes partial case matches that for some weird reason weren't shown as warnings before this refactor 1. The fourth one generalizes the validation logic of remote relationships and implements `scalarTypeGraphQLName` function on SQL Server and BigQuery which is used by the validation logic. This enables remote relationships on BigQuery and SQL Server. https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/1497 GitOrigin-RevId: 77dd8eed326602b16e9a8496f52f46d22b795598
2021-06-11 06:26:50 +03:00
data RootField (db :: BackendType -> Type) remote action raw where
RFDB ::
RQL.SourceName ->
AB.AnyBackend (SourceConfigWith db) ->
RootField db remote action raw
server: support remote relationships on SQL Server and BigQuery (#1497) Remote relationships are now supported on SQL Server and BigQuery. The major change though is the re-architecture of remote join execution logic. Prior to this PR, each backend is responsible for processing the remote relationships that are part of their AST. This is not ideal as there is nothing specific about a remote join's execution that ties it to a backend. The only backend specific part is whether or not the specification of the remote relationship is valid (i.e, we'll need to validate whether the scalars are compatible). The approach now changes to this: 1. Before delegating the AST to the backend, we traverse the AST, collect all the remote joins while modifying the AST to add necessary join fields where needed. 1. Once the remote joins are collected from the AST, the database call is made to fetch the response. The necessary data for the remote join(s) is collected from the database's response and one or more remote schema calls are constructed as necessary. 1. The remote schema calls are then executed and the data from the database and from the remote schemas is joined to produce the final response. ### Known issues 1. Ideally the traversal of the IR to collect remote joins should return an AST which does not include remote join fields. This operation can be type safe but isn't taken up as part of the PR. 1. There is a lot of code duplication between `Transport/HTTP.hs` and `Transport/Websocket.hs` which needs to be fixed ASAP. This too hasn't been taken up by this PR. 1. The type which represents the execution plan is only modified to handle our current remote joins and as such it will have to be changed to accommodate general remote joins. 1. Use of lenses would have reduced the boilerplate code to collect remote joins from the base AST. 1. The current remote join logic assumes that the join columns of a remote relationship appear with their names in the database response. This however is incorrect as they could be aliased. This can be taken up by anyone, I've left a comment in the code. ### Notes to the reviewers I think it is best reviewed commit by commit. 1. The first one is very straight forward. 1. The second one refactors the remote join execution logic but other than moving things around, it doesn't change the user facing functionality. This moves Postgres specific parts to `Backends/Postgres` module from `Execute`. Some IR related code to `Hasura.RQL.IR` module. Simplifies various type class function signatures as a backend doesn't have to handle remote joins anymore 1. The third one fixes partial case matches that for some weird reason weren't shown as warnings before this refactor 1. The fourth one generalizes the validation logic of remote relationships and implements `scalarTypeGraphQLName` function on SQL Server and BigQuery which is used by the validation logic. This enables remote relationships on BigQuery and SQL Server. https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/1497 GitOrigin-RevId: 77dd8eed326602b16e9a8496f52f46d22b795598
2021-06-11 06:26:50 +03:00
RFRemote :: remote -> RootField db remote action raw
RFAction :: action -> RootField db remote action raw
RFRaw :: raw -> RootField db remote action raw
RFMulti :: [RootField db remote action raw] -> RootField db remote action raw
server: support remote relationships on SQL Server and BigQuery (#1497) Remote relationships are now supported on SQL Server and BigQuery. The major change though is the re-architecture of remote join execution logic. Prior to this PR, each backend is responsible for processing the remote relationships that are part of their AST. This is not ideal as there is nothing specific about a remote join's execution that ties it to a backend. The only backend specific part is whether or not the specification of the remote relationship is valid (i.e, we'll need to validate whether the scalars are compatible). The approach now changes to this: 1. Before delegating the AST to the backend, we traverse the AST, collect all the remote joins while modifying the AST to add necessary join fields where needed. 1. Once the remote joins are collected from the AST, the database call is made to fetch the response. The necessary data for the remote join(s) is collected from the database's response and one or more remote schema calls are constructed as necessary. 1. The remote schema calls are then executed and the data from the database and from the remote schemas is joined to produce the final response. ### Known issues 1. Ideally the traversal of the IR to collect remote joins should return an AST which does not include remote join fields. This operation can be type safe but isn't taken up as part of the PR. 1. There is a lot of code duplication between `Transport/HTTP.hs` and `Transport/Websocket.hs` which needs to be fixed ASAP. This too hasn't been taken up by this PR. 1. The type which represents the execution plan is only modified to handle our current remote joins and as such it will have to be changed to accommodate general remote joins. 1. Use of lenses would have reduced the boilerplate code to collect remote joins from the base AST. 1. The current remote join logic assumes that the join columns of a remote relationship appear with their names in the database response. This however is incorrect as they could be aliased. This can be taken up by anyone, I've left a comment in the code. ### Notes to the reviewers I think it is best reviewed commit by commit. 1. The first one is very straight forward. 1. The second one refactors the remote join execution logic but other than moving things around, it doesn't change the user facing functionality. This moves Postgres specific parts to `Backends/Postgres` module from `Execute`. Some IR related code to `Hasura.RQL.IR` module. Simplifies various type class function signatures as a backend doesn't have to handle remote joins anymore 1. The third one fixes partial case matches that for some weird reason weren't shown as warnings before this refactor 1. The fourth one generalizes the validation logic of remote relationships and implements `scalarTypeGraphQLName` function on SQL Server and BigQuery which is used by the validation logic. This enables remote relationships on BigQuery and SQL Server. https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/1497 GitOrigin-RevId: 77dd8eed326602b16e9a8496f52f46d22b795598
2021-06-11 06:26:50 +03:00
data MutationDB (b :: BackendType) (r :: Type) v
= MDBInsert (AnnotatedInsert b r v)
| MDBUpdate (AnnotatedUpdateG b r v)
| MDBDelete (AnnDelG b r v)
| -- | This represents a VOLATILE function, and is AnnSimpleSelG for easy
-- re-use of non-VOLATILE function tracking code.
MDBFunction RQL.JsonAggSelect (AnnSimpleSelectG b r v)
deriving stock (Generic, Functor, Foldable, Traversable)
server: support remote relationships on SQL Server and BigQuery (#1497) Remote relationships are now supported on SQL Server and BigQuery. The major change though is the re-architecture of remote join execution logic. Prior to this PR, each backend is responsible for processing the remote relationships that are part of their AST. This is not ideal as there is nothing specific about a remote join's execution that ties it to a backend. The only backend specific part is whether or not the specification of the remote relationship is valid (i.e, we'll need to validate whether the scalars are compatible). The approach now changes to this: 1. Before delegating the AST to the backend, we traverse the AST, collect all the remote joins while modifying the AST to add necessary join fields where needed. 1. Once the remote joins are collected from the AST, the database call is made to fetch the response. The necessary data for the remote join(s) is collected from the database's response and one or more remote schema calls are constructed as necessary. 1. The remote schema calls are then executed and the data from the database and from the remote schemas is joined to produce the final response. ### Known issues 1. Ideally the traversal of the IR to collect remote joins should return an AST which does not include remote join fields. This operation can be type safe but isn't taken up as part of the PR. 1. There is a lot of code duplication between `Transport/HTTP.hs` and `Transport/Websocket.hs` which needs to be fixed ASAP. This too hasn't been taken up by this PR. 1. The type which represents the execution plan is only modified to handle our current remote joins and as such it will have to be changed to accommodate general remote joins. 1. Use of lenses would have reduced the boilerplate code to collect remote joins from the base AST. 1. The current remote join logic assumes that the join columns of a remote relationship appear with their names in the database response. This however is incorrect as they could be aliased. This can be taken up by anyone, I've left a comment in the code. ### Notes to the reviewers I think it is best reviewed commit by commit. 1. The first one is very straight forward. 1. The second one refactors the remote join execution logic but other than moving things around, it doesn't change the user facing functionality. This moves Postgres specific parts to `Backends/Postgres` module from `Execute`. Some IR related code to `Hasura.RQL.IR` module. Simplifies various type class function signatures as a backend doesn't have to handle remote joins anymore 1. The third one fixes partial case matches that for some weird reason weren't shown as warnings before this refactor 1. The fourth one generalizes the validation logic of remote relationships and implements `scalarTypeGraphQLName` function on SQL Server and BigQuery which is used by the validation logic. This enables remote relationships on BigQuery and SQL Server. https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/1497 GitOrigin-RevId: 77dd8eed326602b16e9a8496f52f46d22b795598
2021-06-11 06:26:50 +03:00
data ActionQuery (r :: Type)
= AQQuery (AnnActionExecution r)
| AQAsync (AnnActionAsyncQuery ('Postgres 'Vanilla) r)
deriving stock (Functor, Foldable, Traversable)
server: support remote relationships on SQL Server and BigQuery (#1497) Remote relationships are now supported on SQL Server and BigQuery. The major change though is the re-architecture of remote join execution logic. Prior to this PR, each backend is responsible for processing the remote relationships that are part of their AST. This is not ideal as there is nothing specific about a remote join's execution that ties it to a backend. The only backend specific part is whether or not the specification of the remote relationship is valid (i.e, we'll need to validate whether the scalars are compatible). The approach now changes to this: 1. Before delegating the AST to the backend, we traverse the AST, collect all the remote joins while modifying the AST to add necessary join fields where needed. 1. Once the remote joins are collected from the AST, the database call is made to fetch the response. The necessary data for the remote join(s) is collected from the database's response and one or more remote schema calls are constructed as necessary. 1. The remote schema calls are then executed and the data from the database and from the remote schemas is joined to produce the final response. ### Known issues 1. Ideally the traversal of the IR to collect remote joins should return an AST which does not include remote join fields. This operation can be type safe but isn't taken up as part of the PR. 1. There is a lot of code duplication between `Transport/HTTP.hs` and `Transport/Websocket.hs` which needs to be fixed ASAP. This too hasn't been taken up by this PR. 1. The type which represents the execution plan is only modified to handle our current remote joins and as such it will have to be changed to accommodate general remote joins. 1. Use of lenses would have reduced the boilerplate code to collect remote joins from the base AST. 1. The current remote join logic assumes that the join columns of a remote relationship appear with their names in the database response. This however is incorrect as they could be aliased. This can be taken up by anyone, I've left a comment in the code. ### Notes to the reviewers I think it is best reviewed commit by commit. 1. The first one is very straight forward. 1. The second one refactors the remote join execution logic but other than moving things around, it doesn't change the user facing functionality. This moves Postgres specific parts to `Backends/Postgres` module from `Execute`. Some IR related code to `Hasura.RQL.IR` module. Simplifies various type class function signatures as a backend doesn't have to handle remote joins anymore 1. The third one fixes partial case matches that for some weird reason weren't shown as warnings before this refactor 1. The fourth one generalizes the validation logic of remote relationships and implements `scalarTypeGraphQLName` function on SQL Server and BigQuery which is used by the validation logic. This enables remote relationships on BigQuery and SQL Server. https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/1497 GitOrigin-RevId: 77dd8eed326602b16e9a8496f52f46d22b795598
2021-06-11 06:26:50 +03:00
data ActionMutation (r :: Type)
= AMSync (AnnActionExecution r)
| AMAsync AnnActionMutationAsync
server: support remote relationships on SQL Server and BigQuery (#1497) Remote relationships are now supported on SQL Server and BigQuery. The major change though is the re-architecture of remote join execution logic. Prior to this PR, each backend is responsible for processing the remote relationships that are part of their AST. This is not ideal as there is nothing specific about a remote join's execution that ties it to a backend. The only backend specific part is whether or not the specification of the remote relationship is valid (i.e, we'll need to validate whether the scalars are compatible). The approach now changes to this: 1. Before delegating the AST to the backend, we traverse the AST, collect all the remote joins while modifying the AST to add necessary join fields where needed. 1. Once the remote joins are collected from the AST, the database call is made to fetch the response. The necessary data for the remote join(s) is collected from the database's response and one or more remote schema calls are constructed as necessary. 1. The remote schema calls are then executed and the data from the database and from the remote schemas is joined to produce the final response. ### Known issues 1. Ideally the traversal of the IR to collect remote joins should return an AST which does not include remote join fields. This operation can be type safe but isn't taken up as part of the PR. 1. There is a lot of code duplication between `Transport/HTTP.hs` and `Transport/Websocket.hs` which needs to be fixed ASAP. This too hasn't been taken up by this PR. 1. The type which represents the execution plan is only modified to handle our current remote joins and as such it will have to be changed to accommodate general remote joins. 1. Use of lenses would have reduced the boilerplate code to collect remote joins from the base AST. 1. The current remote join logic assumes that the join columns of a remote relationship appear with their names in the database response. This however is incorrect as they could be aliased. This can be taken up by anyone, I've left a comment in the code. ### Notes to the reviewers I think it is best reviewed commit by commit. 1. The first one is very straight forward. 1. The second one refactors the remote join execution logic but other than moving things around, it doesn't change the user facing functionality. This moves Postgres specific parts to `Backends/Postgres` module from `Execute`. Some IR related code to `Hasura.RQL.IR` module. Simplifies various type class function signatures as a backend doesn't have to handle remote joins anymore 1. The third one fixes partial case matches that for some weird reason weren't shown as warnings before this refactor 1. The fourth one generalizes the validation logic of remote relationships and implements `scalarTypeGraphQLName` function on SQL Server and BigQuery which is used by the validation logic. This enables remote relationships on BigQuery and SQL Server. https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/1497 GitOrigin-RevId: 77dd8eed326602b16e9a8496f52f46d22b795598
2021-06-11 06:26:50 +03:00
-- The `db` type argument of @RootField@ expects only one type argument, the backend `b`, as not all
-- types stored in a RootField will have a second parameter like @QueryDB@ does: they all only have
-- in common the fact that they're parametric over the backend. To define @QueryRootField@ in terms
-- of @QueryDB@ (and likewise for mutations), we need a type-level function `b -> QueryDB b (v
-- b)`. Sadly, neither type synonyms nor type families may be partially applied. Hence the need for
-- @QueryDBRoot@ and @MutationDBRoot@.
newtype QueryDBRoot r v b = QDBR (QueryDB b r (v b))
newtype MutationDBRoot r v b = MDBR (MutationDB b r (v b))
server: support remote relationships on SQL Server and BigQuery (#1497) Remote relationships are now supported on SQL Server and BigQuery. The major change though is the re-architecture of remote join execution logic. Prior to this PR, each backend is responsible for processing the remote relationships that are part of their AST. This is not ideal as there is nothing specific about a remote join's execution that ties it to a backend. The only backend specific part is whether or not the specification of the remote relationship is valid (i.e, we'll need to validate whether the scalars are compatible). The approach now changes to this: 1. Before delegating the AST to the backend, we traverse the AST, collect all the remote joins while modifying the AST to add necessary join fields where needed. 1. Once the remote joins are collected from the AST, the database call is made to fetch the response. The necessary data for the remote join(s) is collected from the database's response and one or more remote schema calls are constructed as necessary. 1. The remote schema calls are then executed and the data from the database and from the remote schemas is joined to produce the final response. ### Known issues 1. Ideally the traversal of the IR to collect remote joins should return an AST which does not include remote join fields. This operation can be type safe but isn't taken up as part of the PR. 1. There is a lot of code duplication between `Transport/HTTP.hs` and `Transport/Websocket.hs` which needs to be fixed ASAP. This too hasn't been taken up by this PR. 1. The type which represents the execution plan is only modified to handle our current remote joins and as such it will have to be changed to accommodate general remote joins. 1. Use of lenses would have reduced the boilerplate code to collect remote joins from the base AST. 1. The current remote join logic assumes that the join columns of a remote relationship appear with their names in the database response. This however is incorrect as they could be aliased. This can be taken up by anyone, I've left a comment in the code. ### Notes to the reviewers I think it is best reviewed commit by commit. 1. The first one is very straight forward. 1. The second one refactors the remote join execution logic but other than moving things around, it doesn't change the user facing functionality. This moves Postgres specific parts to `Backends/Postgres` module from `Execute`. Some IR related code to `Hasura.RQL.IR` module. Simplifies various type class function signatures as a backend doesn't have to handle remote joins anymore 1. The third one fixes partial case matches that for some weird reason weren't shown as warnings before this refactor 1. The fourth one generalizes the validation logic of remote relationships and implements `scalarTypeGraphQLName` function on SQL Server and BigQuery which is used by the validation logic. This enables remote relationships on BigQuery and SQL Server. https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/1497 GitOrigin-RevId: 77dd8eed326602b16e9a8496f52f46d22b795598
2021-06-11 06:26:50 +03:00
-- | IR of a remote relationship. A remote relationship currently can be to
-- either a remote schema or a database's table. See RemoteSourceSelect for
-- explanation on 'vf'.
data RemoteRelationshipField vf
Enable remote joins from remote schemas in the execution engine. ### Description This PR adds the ability to perform remote joins from remote schemas in the engine. To do so, we alter the definition of an `ExecutionStep` targeting a remote schema: the `ExecStepRemote` constructor now expects a `Maybe RemoteJoins`. This new argument is used when processing the execution step, in the transport layer (either `Transport.HTTP` or `Transport.WebSocket`). For this `Maybe RemoteJoins` to be extracted from a parsed query, this PR also extends the `Execute.RemoteJoin.Collect` module, to implement "collection" from a selection set. Not only do those new functions extract the remote joins, but they also apply all necessary transformations to the selection sets (such as inserting the necessary "phantom" fields used as join keys). Finally in `Execute.RemoteJoin.Join`, we make two changes. First, we now always look for nested remote joins, regardless of whether the join we just performed went to a source or a remote schema; and second we adapt our join tree logic according to the special cases that were added to deal with remote server edge cases. Additionally, this PR refactors / cleans / documents `Execute.RemoteJoin.RemoteServer`. This is not required as part of this change and could be moved to a separate PR if needed (a similar cleanup of `Join` is done independently in #3894). It also introduces a draft of a new documentation page for this project, that will be refined in the release PR that ships the feature (either #3069 or a copy of it). While this PR extends the engine, it doesn't plug such relationships in the schema, meaning that, as of this PR, the new code paths in `Join` are technically unreachable. Adding the corresponding schema code and, ultimately, enabling the metadata API will be done in subsequent PRs. ### Keeping track of concrete type names The main change this PR makes to the existing `Join` code is to handle a new reserved field we sometimes use when targeting remote servers: the `__hasura_internal_typename` field. In short, a GraphQL selection set can sometimes "branch" based on the concrete "runtime type" of the object on which the selection happens: ```graphql query { author(id: 53478) { ... on Writer { name articles { title } } ... on Artist { name articles { title } } } } ``` If both of those `articles` are remote joins, we need to be able, when we get the answer, to differentiate between the two different cases. We do this by asking for `__typename`, to be able to decide if we're in the `Writer` or the `Artist` branch of the query. To avoid further processing / customization of results, we only insert this `__hasura_internal_typename: __typename` field in the query in the case of unions of interfaces AND if we have the guarantee that we will processing the request as part of the remote joins "folding": that is, if there's any remote join in this branch in the tree. Otherwise, we don't insert the field, and we leave that part of the response untouched. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3810 GitOrigin-RevId: 89aaf16274d68e26ad3730b80c2d2fdc2896b96c
2022-03-09 06:17:28 +03:00
= RemoteSchemaField (RemoteSchemaSelect (RemoteRelationshipField vf))
| -- | AnyBackend is used here to capture a relationship to an arbitrary target
RemoteSourceField (AB.AnyBackend (RemoteSourceSelect (RemoteRelationshipField vf) vf))
-- | Represents a query root field to an action
type QueryActionRoot v =
ActionQuery (RemoteRelationshipField v)
server: support remote relationships on SQL Server and BigQuery (#1497) Remote relationships are now supported on SQL Server and BigQuery. The major change though is the re-architecture of remote join execution logic. Prior to this PR, each backend is responsible for processing the remote relationships that are part of their AST. This is not ideal as there is nothing specific about a remote join's execution that ties it to a backend. The only backend specific part is whether or not the specification of the remote relationship is valid (i.e, we'll need to validate whether the scalars are compatible). The approach now changes to this: 1. Before delegating the AST to the backend, we traverse the AST, collect all the remote joins while modifying the AST to add necessary join fields where needed. 1. Once the remote joins are collected from the AST, the database call is made to fetch the response. The necessary data for the remote join(s) is collected from the database's response and one or more remote schema calls are constructed as necessary. 1. The remote schema calls are then executed and the data from the database and from the remote schemas is joined to produce the final response. ### Known issues 1. Ideally the traversal of the IR to collect remote joins should return an AST which does not include remote join fields. This operation can be type safe but isn't taken up as part of the PR. 1. There is a lot of code duplication between `Transport/HTTP.hs` and `Transport/Websocket.hs` which needs to be fixed ASAP. This too hasn't been taken up by this PR. 1. The type which represents the execution plan is only modified to handle our current remote joins and as such it will have to be changed to accommodate general remote joins. 1. Use of lenses would have reduced the boilerplate code to collect remote joins from the base AST. 1. The current remote join logic assumes that the join columns of a remote relationship appear with their names in the database response. This however is incorrect as they could be aliased. This can be taken up by anyone, I've left a comment in the code. ### Notes to the reviewers I think it is best reviewed commit by commit. 1. The first one is very straight forward. 1. The second one refactors the remote join execution logic but other than moving things around, it doesn't change the user facing functionality. This moves Postgres specific parts to `Backends/Postgres` module from `Execute`. Some IR related code to `Hasura.RQL.IR` module. Simplifies various type class function signatures as a backend doesn't have to handle remote joins anymore 1. The third one fixes partial case matches that for some weird reason weren't shown as warnings before this refactor 1. The fourth one generalizes the validation logic of remote relationships and implements `scalarTypeGraphQLName` function on SQL Server and BigQuery which is used by the validation logic. This enables remote relationships on BigQuery and SQL Server. https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/1497 GitOrigin-RevId: 77dd8eed326602b16e9a8496f52f46d22b795598
2021-06-11 06:26:50 +03:00
-- | Represents a mutation root field to an action
type MutationActionRoot v =
ActionMutation (RemoteRelationshipField v)
type QueryRootField v =
RootField
(QueryDBRoot (RemoteRelationshipField v) v)
Enable remote joins from remote schemas in the execution engine. ### Description This PR adds the ability to perform remote joins from remote schemas in the engine. To do so, we alter the definition of an `ExecutionStep` targeting a remote schema: the `ExecStepRemote` constructor now expects a `Maybe RemoteJoins`. This new argument is used when processing the execution step, in the transport layer (either `Transport.HTTP` or `Transport.WebSocket`). For this `Maybe RemoteJoins` to be extracted from a parsed query, this PR also extends the `Execute.RemoteJoin.Collect` module, to implement "collection" from a selection set. Not only do those new functions extract the remote joins, but they also apply all necessary transformations to the selection sets (such as inserting the necessary "phantom" fields used as join keys). Finally in `Execute.RemoteJoin.Join`, we make two changes. First, we now always look for nested remote joins, regardless of whether the join we just performed went to a source or a remote schema; and second we adapt our join tree logic according to the special cases that were added to deal with remote server edge cases. Additionally, this PR refactors / cleans / documents `Execute.RemoteJoin.RemoteServer`. This is not required as part of this change and could be moved to a separate PR if needed (a similar cleanup of `Join` is done independently in #3894). It also introduces a draft of a new documentation page for this project, that will be refined in the release PR that ships the feature (either #3069 or a copy of it). While this PR extends the engine, it doesn't plug such relationships in the schema, meaning that, as of this PR, the new code paths in `Join` are technically unreachable. Adding the corresponding schema code and, ultimately, enabling the metadata API will be done in subsequent PRs. ### Keeping track of concrete type names The main change this PR makes to the existing `Join` code is to handle a new reserved field we sometimes use when targeting remote servers: the `__hasura_internal_typename` field. In short, a GraphQL selection set can sometimes "branch" based on the concrete "runtime type" of the object on which the selection happens: ```graphql query { author(id: 53478) { ... on Writer { name articles { title } } ... on Artist { name articles { title } } } } ``` If both of those `articles` are remote joins, we need to be able, when we get the answer, to differentiate between the two different cases. We do this by asking for `__typename`, to be able to decide if we're in the `Writer` or the `Artist` branch of the query. To avoid further processing / customization of results, we only insert this `__hasura_internal_typename: __typename` field in the query in the case of unions of interfaces AND if we have the guarantee that we will processing the request as part of the remote joins "folding": that is, if there's any remote join in this branch in the tree. Otherwise, we don't insert the field, and we leave that part of the response untouched. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3810 GitOrigin-RevId: 89aaf16274d68e26ad3730b80c2d2fdc2896b96c
2022-03-09 06:17:28 +03:00
(RemoteSchemaRootField (RemoteRelationshipField v) RQL.RemoteSchemaVariable)
(QueryActionRoot v)
JO.Value
type MutationRootField v =
RootField
(MutationDBRoot (RemoteRelationshipField v) v)
Enable remote joins from remote schemas in the execution engine. ### Description This PR adds the ability to perform remote joins from remote schemas in the engine. To do so, we alter the definition of an `ExecutionStep` targeting a remote schema: the `ExecStepRemote` constructor now expects a `Maybe RemoteJoins`. This new argument is used when processing the execution step, in the transport layer (either `Transport.HTTP` or `Transport.WebSocket`). For this `Maybe RemoteJoins` to be extracted from a parsed query, this PR also extends the `Execute.RemoteJoin.Collect` module, to implement "collection" from a selection set. Not only do those new functions extract the remote joins, but they also apply all necessary transformations to the selection sets (such as inserting the necessary "phantom" fields used as join keys). Finally in `Execute.RemoteJoin.Join`, we make two changes. First, we now always look for nested remote joins, regardless of whether the join we just performed went to a source or a remote schema; and second we adapt our join tree logic according to the special cases that were added to deal with remote server edge cases. Additionally, this PR refactors / cleans / documents `Execute.RemoteJoin.RemoteServer`. This is not required as part of this change and could be moved to a separate PR if needed (a similar cleanup of `Join` is done independently in #3894). It also introduces a draft of a new documentation page for this project, that will be refined in the release PR that ships the feature (either #3069 or a copy of it). While this PR extends the engine, it doesn't plug such relationships in the schema, meaning that, as of this PR, the new code paths in `Join` are technically unreachable. Adding the corresponding schema code and, ultimately, enabling the metadata API will be done in subsequent PRs. ### Keeping track of concrete type names The main change this PR makes to the existing `Join` code is to handle a new reserved field we sometimes use when targeting remote servers: the `__hasura_internal_typename` field. In short, a GraphQL selection set can sometimes "branch" based on the concrete "runtime type" of the object on which the selection happens: ```graphql query { author(id: 53478) { ... on Writer { name articles { title } } ... on Artist { name articles { title } } } } ``` If both of those `articles` are remote joins, we need to be able, when we get the answer, to differentiate between the two different cases. We do this by asking for `__typename`, to be able to decide if we're in the `Writer` or the `Artist` branch of the query. To avoid further processing / customization of results, we only insert this `__hasura_internal_typename: __typename` field in the query in the case of unions of interfaces AND if we have the guarantee that we will processing the request as part of the remote joins "folding": that is, if there's any remote join in this branch in the tree. Otherwise, we don't insert the field, and we leave that part of the response untouched. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3810 GitOrigin-RevId: 89aaf16274d68e26ad3730b80c2d2fdc2896b96c
2022-03-09 06:17:28 +03:00
(RemoteSchemaRootField (RemoteRelationshipField v) RQL.RemoteSchemaVariable)
(MutationActionRoot v)
JO.Value
type SubscriptionRootField v =
RootField
(QueryDBRoot (RemoteRelationshipField v) v)
(RemoteSchemaRootField (RemoteRelationshipField v) RQL.RemoteSchemaVariable)
(QueryActionRoot v)
JO.Value