admin/twenty
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions 1 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

feat: new relation in graphql-query-runner (#9883)

Browse Source 
Fix https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/300

Within GraphQLQueryRunner the new relation format will be used when the
feature flag `IsNewRelationEnabled` is set to true.
This commit is contained in:
Jérémy M
2025-01-29 17:04:39 +01:00
committed by GitHub
parent 29745c6756
commit 07197d1e6d
31 changed files with 729 additions and 138 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

87
packages/twenty-server/src/engine/api/graphql/workspace-query-runner/factories/query-result-getters/query-result-getters.factory.ts
View File

@ -16,10 +16,11 @@ import { AttachmentQueryResultGetterHandler } from 'src/engine/api/graphql/works
import { PersonQueryResultGetterHandler } from 'src/engine/api/graphql/workspace-query-runner/factories/query-result-getters/handlers/person-query-result-getter.handler';
import { WorkspaceMemberQueryResultGetterHandler } from 'src/engine/api/graphql/workspace-query-runner/factories/query-result-getters/handlers/workspace-member-query-result-getter.handler';
import { CompositeInputTypeDefinitionFactory } from 'src/engine/api/graphql/workspace-schema-builder/factories/composite-input-type-definition.factory';
import { FeatureFlagKey } from 'src/engine/core-modules/feature-flag/enums/feature-flag-key.enum';
import { FeatureFlagService } from 'src/engine/core-modules/feature-flag/services/feature-flag.service';
import { FileService } from 'src/engine/core-modules/file/services/file.service';
import { ObjectMetadataMaps } from 'src/engine/metadata-modules/types/object-metadata-maps';
import { isRelationFieldMetadataType } from 'src/engine/utils/is-relation-field-metadata-type.util';
import { isRelationFieldMetadata } from 'src/engine/utils/is-relation-field-metadata.util';
import { isDefined } from 'src/utils/is-defined';
// TODO: find a way to prevent conflict between handlers executing logic on object relations
@ -135,6 +136,11 @@ export class QueryResultGettersFactory {
): Promise<ObjectRecord> {
const objectMetadataMapItem = objectMetadataMaps.byId[objectMetadataItemId];
const isNewRelationEnabled = await this.featureFlagService.isFeatureEnabled(
FeatureFlagKey.IsNewRelationEnabled,
workspaceId,
);
const handler = this.getHandler(objectMetadataMapItem.nameSingular);
const relationFields = Object.keys(record)
@ -143,9 +149,7 @@ export class QueryResultGettersFactory {
objectMetadataMapItem.fieldsByName[recordFieldName],
)
.filter(isDefined)
.filter((fieldMetadata) =>
isRelationFieldMetadataType(fieldMetadata.type),
);
.filter((fieldMetadata) => isRelationFieldMetadata(fieldMetadata));
const relationFieldsProcessedMap = {} as Record<
string,
@ -153,38 +157,53 @@ export class QueryResultGettersFactory {
>;
for (const relationField of relationFields) {
const relationMetadata =
relationField.fromRelationMetadata ?? relationField.toRelationMetadata;
if (!isNewRelationEnabled) {
const relationMetadata =
relationField.fromRelationMetadata ??
relationField.toRelationMetadata;
if (!isDefined(relationMetadata)) {
throw new Error('Relation metadata is not defined');
if (!isDefined(relationMetadata)) {
throw new Error('Relation metadata is not defined');
}
// TODO: computing this by taking the opposite of the current object metadata id
// is really less than ideal. This should be computed based on the relation metadata
// But right now it is too complex with the current structure and / or lack of utils
// around the possible combinations with relation metadata from / to + MANY_TO_ONE / ONE_TO_MANY
const relationObjectMetadataItemId =
relationMetadata.fromObjectMetadataId === objectMetadataItemId
? relationMetadata.toObjectMetadataId
: relationMetadata.fromObjectMetadataId;
const relationObjectMetadataItem =
objectMetadataMaps.byId[relationObjectMetadataItemId];
if (!isDefined(relationObjectMetadataItem)) {
throw new Error(
`Object metadata not found for id ${relationObjectMetadataItemId}`,
);
}
relationFieldsProcessedMap[relationField.name] =
await this.processQueryResultField(
record[relationField.name],
relationObjectMetadataItem.id,
objectMetadataMaps,
workspaceId,
);
} else {
if (!isDefined(relationField.relationTargetObjectMetadataId)) {
throw new Error('Relation target object metadata id is not defined');
}
relationFieldsProcessedMap[relationField.name] =
await this.processQueryResultField(
record[relationField.name],
relationField.relationTargetObjectMetadataId,
objectMetadataMaps,
workspaceId,
);
}
// TODO: computing this by taking the opposite of the current object metadata id
// is really less than ideal. This should be computed based on the relation metadata
// But right now it is too complex with the current structure and / or lack of utils
// around the possible combinations with relation metadata from / to + MANY_TO_ONE / ONE_TO_MANY
const relationObjectMetadataItemId =
relationMetadata.fromObjectMetadataId === objectMetadataItemId
? relationMetadata.toObjectMetadataId
: relationMetadata.fromObjectMetadataId;
const relationObjectMetadataItem =
objectMetadataMaps.byId[relationObjectMetadataItemId];
if (!isDefined(relationObjectMetadataItem)) {
throw new Error(
`Object metadata not found for id ${relationObjectMetadataItemId}`,
);
}
relationFieldsProcessedMap[relationField.name] =
await this.processQueryResultField(
record[relationField.name],
relationObjectMetadataItem.id,
objectMetadataMaps,
workspaceId,
);
}
const objectRecordProcessedWithoutRelationFields = await handler.handle(