### 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
In hasura/graphql-engine#5144, we noticed that having remote relationships in the schema is problematic for Relay. In particular, we don't support remote schemas in Relay at all, and because of this, remote relationships were also broken.
The fix was easy: when we're building the schema for Relay, whenever we encounter a remote relationship in our configuration, we simply skip building that field. The implementation was easy: (see hasura/graphql-engine#5145)
```diff
- SFRemoteRelationship info -> pure $ mkRemoteRelationshipFld info
+ SFRemoteRelationship info ->
+ -- https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine/issues/5144
+ if isRelay then [] else pure $ mkRemoteRelationshipFld info
```
A test case was added in that PR to prevent us from accidentally re-including remote relationships in the Relay schema. (However, it now looks like that test case does not function correctly.)
The above code was later refactored in #3037, making use of the `MaybeT` effect. However, this effect was not used correctly, so that the result of the check was ignored.
This fixes the code to use the `MaybeT` effect correctly.
CC @0x777 @rakeshkky
PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3868
GitOrigin-RevId: e528303e01eacf60173cba1eec1898986cf12359
### Description
This PR is one further step towards remote joins from remote schemas. It introduces a custom partial AST to represent queries to remote schemas in the IR: we now need to augment what used to be a straightforward GraphQL AST with additional information for remote join fields.
This PR does the minimal amount of work to adjust the rest of the code accordingly, using `Void` in all places that expect a type representing remote relationships.
PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3794
GitOrigin-RevId: 33fc317731aace71f82ad158a1951ea93350d6cc
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@5168b99e46 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
This PR pretty much does the same thing to remote relationship types in schemacache as what #2979 did to remote relationship types in the IR. On main remote relationships are represented by types of form `T from to`. This PR changes it to `T from` which makes it a lot more reusable.
PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/3037
GitOrigin-RevId: 90a5c9e2346c8dc2da6ec5b8c970d6c863d2afb8
