Or in other words: How can I create a new entry that has a relationship with a specific collection and only with it?
The following code creates a new entry of the type Brand. How can I place it inside a specific collection?
I'm new to graphql, so if what I would like to achieve is not possible at all or not the way graphql works please tell me
Additional information:
I'm using mlab as my back end, and strapi (headless cms). On strapi I installed graphql as an external plugin.
Thanks in advance
mutation {
createBrand(input: {
data: {
name: "John",
description: "this is my description"
}
}) {
brand {
name
description
}
}
}
To my very limited understanding of graphql, I think that in order to associate a new entry with a specific collection you need to edit the code above and add:
mutation {
createBrand(input: {
data: {
name: "John",
description: "this is my description"
collectionInPlurals: ['collectionId']
}
}) {
brand {
name
description
}
}
}
collectioninPlurals for example could be items if the type of the collection is 'item' and then you provide the id of the specific item
I hope it could benefit others...
Related
I've been trying to build an app and for brevity, assuming that I only have two types of objects with the following fields:
User: user_uid, name, Settings(reference)
Settings: settings_uid, some_settings_json
So far, I've tried creating Settings object first then linking the ready Settings object to the User object getting created.
Creating the settings object:
mutation createSettings {
createSettings(data: {some_settings_json: "{"some_key": "some_value"}" }) {
settings_uid
}
}
Creating the User object:
mutation createUser {
createUser(data: {name: "some_user", settings: <SETTINGS_OBJECT>) {
user_uid
}
}
Although I've checked documentations, tutorials, web; I haven't been able to figure out how to replace <SETTINGS_OBJECT>, so that these two objects would get linked. Note: I don't want to create settings while user is getting created. For that, a tutorial already provides an example.
Any help would be appreciated.
I found it. The link is provided via connect keyword.
mutation createUser {
createUser(data: {
name: "some_name", settings: {
connect: {
settings_uid: "settings_uid"
}
}
}) {
user_uid
}
}
I'm trying to setup the allow list feature in Hasura, but the docs seem pretty sparse. This is one of the queries:
{
hasura_auth(args: {cleartext_password: "xxx", email: "email#mail.com"}) {
jwt_token
}
}
How would I integrate the dynamic parts in an allow list?
I tried this and lot's of variations with no luck:
{
hasura_auth(args: {cleartext_password: $pass, email: $email}) {
jwt_token
}
}
Thanks for your help!
What you have to know is to tell hasura the name of your query with full syntax.
like this...
Operation name is => get_user_by_pk
Operation is
query get_user_by_pk($id: uuid!) {
user_by_pk(id: $id) {
id
username
email
}
}
the main part is you have to use the exact operation in your code having the operation name.
now, in your project, you will send the variable (in this case id[uuid]) to the query handler and send this to your hasura server.
ask me if it is not clear for you.
I have added a resources table to my schema, connecting to a Plants table:
type Resource #model
{
id: ID!
name: String!
Plants: [Plant] #connection(name: "ResourcePlant")
}
Ran amplify push, and all resources were created properly.
Now I wanted to add a Resource, and link it to all Plants properly.
Do you know how is the sintaxe I should use to run the recently created mutation createResource in order to add the items on Plant I want to include to that resource?
I tried to run like this:
mutation CreateResource {
createResource (input: {
name: "Plant",
Plants : {
items :
{ id: "f9a0468e-da74-41d5-8287-1cb6a76b25a5" }
}
}
) {
name,
Plants {
items {
id
}
nextToken
}
}
}
This was the error message:
Validation error of type WrongType: argument 'input' with value
'ObjectValue{objectFields=[ObjectField{name='name',
value=StringValue{value='Plant'}}, ObjectField{name='Plants',
value=ObjectValue{objectFields=[ObjectField{name='items', value=ObjectValue{objectFields=[ObjectField{name='id',
value=StringValue{value='f9a0468e-da74-41d5-8287-1cb6a76b25a5'}}]}}]}}]}'
contains a field not in 'CreateResourceInput': 'Plants' # 'createResource'
How did you define Plant?
And have you checked this example? https://aws-amplify.github.io/docs/cli-toolchain/graphql#connection
Ok, after some headache, I found what was missing in my model. For me so far it has proved to be the best way of doing this relationship...
I have added on my Plant type, on schema definition, a field named plantResourceId (other than the one used for the #connection directive). What I found out was that, by convention, when inserting/updating a record on "Plant" and adding the resource "id" field content of the resource I want to "connect" to that plant, it will automatically be retrieved when "Resources" is queried, for each item - what is better: Out-of-the-box from codegen.
Insert example
mutation CreatePlant {
createPlant(input:{
name: "MyPlant",
plantResourceId: "id-for-connected-resource"
}) {
name,
plantResourceId
}
}
Query example to retrieve items:
query listPlantsOnResource {
listResources(filter: {
name: {
contains: "myfilter"
}
}) {
items {
id
name
Plants
{
items {
id
name
description
}
}
}
}
}
It worked very well!
Thanks all who contributed!
I want to do 2 creations in my GraphQL query. (I know my query structure is not correct, but it's to illustrate my question)
mutation {
affiliateCreate(company: "test mutation") {
$id: id,
affiliateUserCreate(affiliate_id: $id, name: "test name") {
id,
name
},
company
}
}
I want my first id result to be in variable who i pass to the second creation call? I'm very new to GraphQL and i was wondering if it's possible.
Is there any other way possible to do such thing? Or i must do 2 mutation call? The first with affiliateCreate and in it's fallback the second one?
Thank you
What you want to do is not supported by GraphQL. In the Graphcool APIs we approach this kind of situation with what we call nested mutations. I've also heard it being referred to as complex mutations.
A nested create mutation is characterized by a nested input object argument. If you add an input object author to the affiliateCreate mutation, you could use it like that:
mutation createAffiliateAndUser {
affiliateCreate(
company: "test company"
author: {
name: "test user"
}
) {
id
}
}
This would create an affiliate, a user and then link the two together. Similarily, if you add an input object affiliates to the userCreate mutation, it could look like this:
mutation createUserAndAffiliates {
userCreate(
name: "test user"
affiliates: [{
company: "first company"
}, {
company: "second company"
}]
) {
id
}
}
I'm trying to have a representation of nodes on GraphQL more akin to what jsonapi would be like http://jsonapi.org/
What I mean is if we take one of the examples on GraphQL
{
hero {
name
# Queries can have comments!
friends {
name
}
}
}
Have a representation that would be more along these lines
{
hero {
name
# Queries can have comments!
friends {
id
}
},
friends {
id, name
}
}
Is that at all possible in GraphQL
Thanks
It is possible, and there's nothing wrong with having a friends field. In GraphQL terms you can have the following part of the schema:
type User {
id: ID
name: String
firends: [User]
}
type RootQuery {
hero: User
friends(forUserId: ID!): [User]
}
And then you can query this as you like – you can ask for friends separately:
{
friends(forUserId: "12") {
id, name
}
}
But the whole idea of GraphQL is that you don't have to do multiple queries to get the information you need. If you just need a list of users – that's a reasonable query, that most people have (with arguments for pagination and so on). With that said, there's no reason to fetch a list of IDs and to send another fetch query for the data right after that.