Docs
Launch GraphOS Studio

Namespacing by separation of concerns

Organize root-level operation fields into namespaces

schema-design

Most APIs provide their capabilities as root-level of the Query and Mutation types, resulting in a flat structure. For example, the GitHub API has approximately 200 of these root-level ! Even with tools like the Apollo Explorer, navigating and understanding larger "flat" graphs can be difficult.

NOTE

Make sure to read the Caveats section below. While the name spacing pattern works well for queries, can have side-effects that may not be inline with the spec.

To improve the logical organization of our 's capabilities, we can define namespaces for our root-level . These are that in turn define and fields that are all related to a particular concern.

For example, we can define all the related to User objects in a UsersMutations namespace object:

type UsersMutations {
create(profile: UserProfileInput!): User!
block(id: ID!): User!
}

We can then define a similar namespace for Comment :

type CommentsMutations {
create(comment: CommentInput!): Comment!
delete(id: ID!): Comment!
}

Now, both our User and Comment types have an associated create , which is valid because each is defined within a separate namespace type.

Finally, we can add our namespace types as the return values for root-level of the Mutation type:

type Mutation {
users: UsersMutations!
comments: CommentsMutations!
}

We can use the same pattern for queries that involve User and Comment types:

type UsersQueries {
all: [User!]!
}
type CommentsQueries {
byUser(user: ID!): [Comment!]!
}
# Add a single root-level namespace-type which wraps other queries
type Query {
users: UsersQueries!
comments: CommentsQueries!
}

With our namespaces defined, client now use a nested format, which provides context on which type is being interacted with:

mutation CreateNewUser($userProfile: UserProfileInput!) {
users {
create(profile: $userProfile) {
id
firstName
lastName
}
}
}
query FetchAllUsers {
users {
all {
id
firstName
lastName
}
}
}

NOTE

You don't need to repeat the text user in the names of the UsersQueries type, because we already know all these apply to User objects.

Namespaces for serial mutations

Unlike all other in a , the root-level fields of the Mutation type must be resolved serially instead of in parallel. This can help prevent two from interacting with the same data simultaneously, which might cause a race condition.

mutation DoTwoThings {
one {
success
}
# The `two` field is not resolved until after `one` is resolved.
# It is not resolved at all if resolving `one` results in an error.
two {
success
}
}

With namespaces, your that actually modify data are no longer root-level fields (instead, your namespace objects are). Because of this, the mutation fields are resolved in parallel. In many systems, this doesn't present an issue (for example, you probably want to use another mechanism in your mutation to ensure transactional consistency, such as a saga orchestrator).

mutation DoTwoNestedThings($createInput: CreateReviewInput!, $deleteInput: DeleteReviewInput!) {
reviews {
create(input: $createInput) {
success
}
# Is resolved in parallel with `create`
delete(input: $deleteInput) {
success
}
}
}

If you want to guarantee serial execution in a particular , you can use client-side to create two root that are resolved serially:

mutation DoTwoNestedThingsInSerial($createInput: CreateReviewInput!, $deleteInput: DeleteReviewInput!) {
a: reviews {
create(input: $createInput) {
success
}
}
# Is resolved serially after `a` is resolved
b: reviews {
delete(input: $deleteInput) {
success
}
}
}

Caveats

As pointed out by members from the GraphQL Technical Steering Committee, while the above approach does execute in a , it does not satisfy the GraphQL spec requirement that:

resolution of other than top-level fields must always be side effect-free and idempotent.

Instead it is recommended that any be defined at the root level so they are executed serially and in accordance with the expectations of the specification.

At this time the only solution the specification provides for grouping related is naming conventions and ordering these fields carefully - there's currently no spec-compliant solution to having an overwhelming number of fields on the root mutation type. However, there are some interesting proposals to address this issue that we encourage community members to review and provide feedback on, in particular the proposal for GraphQL Namespaces and the proposal for serial fields.

Next
Home
Edit on GitHubEditForumsDiscord

© 2024 Apollo Graph Inc.

Privacy Policy

Company