### Description This PR does several things: - it cleans up some structural issues with the engineering documentation: - it harmonizes the table of contents structure across different files - adds a link to the bigquery documentation - moves some files to a new `deep-dives` subfolder - puts a title at the top of each page to avoid github assuming their title is "table of contents" - it pre-fills the glossary with a long list of words that could use an entry (all empty for now) - it adds the only remaining relevant server file from [hasura-internal's wiki](https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-internal/wiki): the old "multiple backends architecture" file ### Discussion A few things worth discussing in the scope of this PR: - is it worth migrating old documentation such as the multiple backends architecture, that document a decision process rather instead of being up-to-date reflections of the code? are we planning to delete hasura-internal? - should we focus instead on _new_ documentation, aimed to be kept up to date? - are there other old documents we want to move in here, or is that it? - is this glossary structure ok, or would a purely alphabetical structure make sense? - does it make sense to have the glossary only in the engineering section? more generally, _what's our broader plan for documentation_? PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/4537 GitOrigin-RevId: c2b674657b19af7a75f66a2a304c80c30f5b0afb
13 KiB
Building the schema
We use the same piece of code to generate the GraphQL schema and parse it, to ensure those two parts of the code are always consistent. In practice, we do this by building introspectable parsers, in the style of parser combinators, which turn an incoming GraphQL AST into our internal representation (IR).
Table of contents
Terminology
The schema building code takes as input our metadata: what sources do we have, what tables are tracked, what columns do they have... and builds the corresponding GraphQL schema. More precisely, its output is a series of parsers. That term is controversial, as it is ambiguous.
To clarify: an incoming request is first parsed from a raw string into a GraphQL AST using our graphql-parser-hs library. At that point, no semantic analysis is performed: the output of that phase will be a GraphQL document: a simple AST, on which no semantic verification has been performed. The second step is to apply those "schema parsers": their input is that GraphQL AST, and their output is a semantic representation of the query (see the Output section).
To summarize: ahead of time, based on our metadata, we generate schema parsers: they will parse an incoming GraphQL AST into a transformed semantic AST, based on whether that incoming query is consistent with our metadata.
The Parser
type
We have different types depending on what we're parsing: Parser
for types in
the GraphQL schema, FieldParser
for a field in an output type, and
InputFieldsParser
for field in input types. But all three of them share a
similar structure: they combine static type information, and the actual parsing
function:
data Parser n a = Parser
{ parserType :: TypeInfo
, parserFunc :: ParserInput -> n a
}
The GraphQL schema is a graph of types, stemming from one of the three roots: the
query_root
, mutation_root
, and subscription_root
types. Consequently, if
we correctly build the Parser
for the query_root
type, then its TypeInfo
will be a "root" of the full graph.
What our combinators do is recursively build both at the same time. For
instance, consider nullable
from Hasura.GraphQL.Parser.Internal.Parser
(here
simplified a bit for readability):
nullable :: MonadParse m => Parser m a -> Parser m (Maybe a)
nullable parser = Parser
{ pType = nullableType $ pType parser
, pParser = \case
JSONValue A.Null -> pure Nothing
GraphQLValue VNull -> pure Nothing
value -> Just <$> pParser parser value
}
Given a parser for a value type a
, this function translates it into a parser
of Maybe a
that tolerates "null" values and updates its internal type
information to transform the corresponding GraphQL non-nullable TypeName!
into
a nullable TypeName
.
Output
While the parsers keep track of the GraphQL types, their output is our IR: we transform the incoming GrapQL AST into a semantic representation. This is clearly visible with input fields, like in field arguments. For instance, this is the definition of the parser for the arguments to a table (here again slightly simplified for readability):
tableArguments
:: (MonadSchema m, MonadParse n)
=> SourceName -- ^ name of the source we're building the schema for
-> TableInfo b -- ^ internal information about the given table (e.g. columns)
-> SelPermInfo b -- ^ selection permissions for that table
-> m (
-- parser for a group of input fields, such as arguments to a field
-- has an Applicative instance to allow to write one parser for a group of
-- arguments
InputFieldsParser n (
-- internal representation of the arguments to a table select
IR.SelectArgs b
)
)
tableArguments sourceName tableInfo selectPermissions = do
-- construct other parsers in the outer `m` monad
whereParser <- tableWhereArg sourceName tableInfo selectPermissions
orderByParser <- tableOrderByArg sourceName tableInfo selectPermissions
distinctParser <- tableDistinctArg sourceName tableInfo selectPermissions
-- combine them using an "applicative do"
pure do
whereArg <- whereParser
orderByArg <- orderByParser
limitArg <- tableLimitArg
offsetArg <- tableOffsetArg
distinctArg <- distinctParser
pure $ IR.SelectArgs
{ IR._saWhere = whereArg
, IR._saOrderBy = orderByArg
, IR._saLimit = limitArg
, IR._saOffset = offsetArg
, IR._saDistinct = distinctArg
}
Running the parser on the input will yield the SelectArgs
; if used for a field
name article
, it will result in the following GraphQL schema, if introspected
(null fields omitted for brevity):
{
"fields": [
{
"name": "article",
"args": [
{
"name": "distinct_on",
"type": {
"name": null,
"kind": "LIST",
"ofType": {
"name": null,
"kind": "NON_NULL",
"ofType": {
"name": "article_select_column",
"kind": "ENUM"
}
}
}
},
{
"name": "limit",
"type": {
"name": "Int",
"kind": "SCALAR",
"ofType": null
}
},
{
"name": "offset",
"type": {
"name": "Int",
"kind": "SCALAR",
"ofType": null
}
},
{
"name": "order_by",
"type": {
"name": null,
"kind": "LIST",
"ofType": {
"name": null,
"kind": "NON_NULL",
"ofType": {
"name": "article_order_by",
"kind": "INPUT_OBJECT"
}
}
}
},
{
"name": "where",
"type": {
"name": "article_bool_exp",
"kind": "INPUT_OBJECT",
"ofType": null
}
}
]
}
]
}
Input
There is a noteworthy peculiarity with the input of the parsers for GraphQL input types: some of the values we parse are JSON values, supplied to a query by means of variable assignment:
mutation($name: String!, $shape: geometry!) {
insert_location_one(object: {name: $name, shape: $shape}) {
id
}
}
The GraphQL spec doesn't mandate a transport format for the variables;
the fact that they are encoding using JSON is a choice on our
part. However, this poses a problem: a variable's JSON value might not
be representable as a GraphQL value, as GraphQL values are a strict
subset of JSON values. For instance, the JSON object {"1": "2"}
is
not representable in GraphQL, as "1"
is not a valid key. This is not
an issue, as the spec doesn't mandate that the variables be translated
into GraphQL values; their parsing and validation is left entirely to
the service. However, it means that we need to keep track, when
parsing input values, of whether that value is coming from a GraphQL
literal or from a JSON value. Furthermore, we delay the expansion of
variables, in order to do proper type-checking.
Consequently, we represent input variables with the following type
(defined in Hasura.GraphQL.Parser.Schema
):
data InputValue v
= GraphQLValue (G.Value v)
| JSONValue J.Value
Whenever we need to inspect an input value, we usually start by "peeling the
variable" (see peelVariable
in Hasura.GraphQL.Parser.Internal.TypeChecking
),
to guarantee that we have an actual literal to inspect; we still end up with
either a GraphQL value, or a JSON value; parsers usually deal with both, such as
nullable
(see section The Parser Type), or like scalar
parsers do (see Hasura.GraphQL.Parser.Internal.Scalars
):
float :: MonadParse m => Parser 'Both m Double
float = Parser
{ pType = schemaType
, pParser =
-- we first unpack the variable, if any:
peelVariable (toGraphQLType schemaType) >=> \case
-- we deal with valid GraphQL values
GraphQLValue (VFloat f) -> convertWith scientificToFloat f
GraphQLValue (VInt i) -> convertWith scientificToFloat $ fromInteger i
-- we deal with valid JSON values
JSONValue (A.Number n) -> convertWith scientificToFloat n
-- we reject everything else
v -> typeMismatch floatScalar "a float" v
}
where
schemaType = NonNullable $ TNamed $ Definition "Float" Nothing TIScalar
This allows us to incrementally unpack JSON values without having to fully transform them into GraphQL values in the first place; the following is therefore accepted:
# graphql
query($w: foo_bool_exp!) {
foo(where: $w) {
id
}
}
# json
{
"w": {
# graphql boolean expression
"foo_json_field": {
"_eq": {
# json value that cannot be translated
"1": "2"
}
}
}
}
The parsers will unpack the variable into the JSONValue
constructor, and the
object
combinator will unpack the fields when parsing a boolean expression;
but the remaining JSONValue $ Object [("1", String "2")]
will not be
translated into a GraphQL value, and parsed directly from JSON by the
appropriate value parser.
Step-by step:
- the value given to our
where
argument is aGraphQLValue
, that contains aVVariable
and its JSON value; - when parsing the argument's
foo_bool_exp
type, we expect an object: we "peel" the variable, and our input value becomes aJSONValue
, containing one entry,"foo_json_field"
; - we then parse each field one by one; to parse our one field, we
first focus our input value on the actual field, and refine our
input value to the content of thee field:
JSONValue $ Object [("_eq", Object [("1", String "2")])]
; - that field's argument is a boolean expression, which is also an object: we repeat the same process;
- when finally parsing the argument to
_eq
, we are no longer in the realm of GraphQL syntax: the argument to_eq
is whatever a value of that database column is; we use the appropriate column parser to interpret{"1": "2"}
without treating is as a GraphQL value.
Recursion, and tying the knot
One major hurdle that we face when building the schema is that, due to
relationships, our schema is not a tree, but a graph. Consider for instance two
tables, author
and article
, joined by two opposite relationships (one-to-one
AKA "object relationship, and one-to-many AKA "array relationship",
respectively); the GraphQL schema will end up with something akin to:
type Author {
id: Int!
name: String!
articles: [Article!]!
}
type Article {
id: Int!
name: String!
author: Author!
}
To build the schema parsers for a query that selects those tables, we are going to end up with code that would be essentially equivalent to:
selectTable tableName tableInfo = do
arguments <- tableArguments tableInfo
selectionSet <- traverse mkField $ fields tableInfo
pure $ selection tableName arguments selectionSet
mkField = \case
TableColumn c -> field_ (name c)
Relationship r -> field (name r) $ selectTable (target r)
We would end up with an infinite recursion building the parsers:
-> selectTable "author"
-> mkField "articles"
-> selectTable "article"
-> mkField "author"
-> selectTable "author"
To avoid this, we memoize the parsers as we build them. This is, however,
quite tricky: since building a parser might require it knowing about itself, we
cannot memoize it after it's build; we have to memoize it before. What we end
up doing is relying on unsafeInterleaveIO
to store in the memoization cache a
value whose evaluation will be delayed, and that can be updated after we're done
evaluating the parser. The relevant code lives in Hasura.GraphQL.Parser.Monad
.
This all works just fine as long as building a parser doesn't require forcing its own evaluation: as long as the newly built parser only references fields to itself, the graph will be properly constructed, and the knot will be tied.
In practice, that means that the schema building code has two layers of
monads: most functions in Hasura.GraphQL.Schema.*
, that build parsers for
various GraphQL types, return the constructed parser in an outer monad m
which
is an instance of MonadSchema
; the parser itself operates in an inner monad
n
, which is an instance of MonadParse
.
The GraphQL context
It's in Hasura.GraphQL.Schema
that we build the actual "context" that is
stored in the SchemaCache: for each role we build the
query_root
and the mutation_root
(if any) by going over each source's table
cache and function cache. We do not have dedicated code for the subscription
root: we reuse the appropriate subset of the query root to build the
subscription root.