Gabriela
06/12/2019, 2:23 PMArnaud
06/12/2019, 4:58 PMArnaud
06/12/2019, 4:58 PMArnaud
06/12/2019, 4:59 PMCliff
06/12/2019, 6:51 PMjasonmj
06/12/2019, 10:43 PMjasonmj
06/12/2019, 10:54 PMMatt Abrams
06/13/2019, 1:20 AMprisma.yml
, datamodel.prisma
, prisma deploy/generate
should fit into the equation.
Coming from a heroku background, typically the prisma deploy/generate step would be setup through a release step - my question is how and where this should fit into the picture as far as kubernetes goes. Current ideas: include prisma deploy/generate as a build step in the graphql server dockerfile, or maybe leverage an init container - any suggestions? Thanks!H
06/13/2019, 1:38 AMAdam Ahrens
06/13/2019, 5:32 AMAdam Ahrens
06/13/2019, 6:15 AMMatt Abrams
06/13/2019, 6:39 AMtype Link {
id: ID! @id
createdAt: DateTime! @createdAt
description: String!
url: String!
}
but it’s resulting in following error:
Link
✖ The field `id` is reserved and has to have the format: id: ID! @unique or id: UUID! @unique.
Is the @id
directive not supported anymore, or is something else going on here?Matt Abrams
06/13/2019, 6:42 AMAdam Ahrens
06/13/2019, 7:16 AMPeter Rogov
06/13/2019, 12:16 PMtype CommodityVendor {
id: Int! @id
name: String!
purchaseOrders: [CommodityPurchaseOrder!]!
}
type CommodityPurchaseOrder {
id: Int! @id
vendor: CommodityVendor!
}
I can now make queries with infinite recursion. Like this:
query {
commodityVendors {
id
name
purchaseOrders {
id
vendor {
id
name
purchaseOrders {
id
vendor {
id
name
}
}
}
}
}
}
What should be the correct approach to limit such situations and only allow querying purchaseOrders
under commodityVendors
but not on nested levels?Yehonatan Levi
06/13/2019, 12:16 PMantoineg
06/13/2019, 12:18 PMPeter Rogov
06/13/2019, 12:20 PMantoineg
06/13/2019, 12:43 PMYehonatan Levi
06/13/2019, 1:02 PMOlaf
06/13/2019, 1:19 PMMike Stecker
06/13/2019, 5:03 PMUser
(id, email, password, role), Profile
(all the profile fields) and Account
(for user settings/preferences)... The reason for this is because I've been reading that the User table should be as simple as possible. Is that correct? I'll also have other
My question is: can I create a record for all 3 of these in the same mutation when the user signs up or do I need to run 3 separate mutations? Also... for the user's Profile
, I want to have moderation on the admin side, so I'm thinking there will also be a "draft" type function I'll have to add too. Not sure if that information is needed but I thought I'd throw it out therePeter Rogov
06/13/2019, 5:10 PMI've been reading that the User table should be as simple as possibleDepends on your project architecture and requirements. I don't think it has anything to do with Prisma and/or datamodel. This is more a design consideration.
Peter Rogov
06/13/2019, 5:11 PMHasen
06/13/2019, 6:24 PMH
06/14/2019, 12:15 AMAdam Ahrens
06/14/2019, 3:04 AMSomteey
06/14/2019, 5:45 AMAdam Ahrens
06/14/2019, 6:31 AMCCBCodeMonkey
06/14/2019, 6:32 AM