Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Offset based pagination should use offset instead of (or optionally) skip. #292

Closed
tlester opened this issue Jul 2, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #294
Closed

Offset based pagination should use offset instead of (or optionally) skip. #292

tlester opened this issue Jul 2, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #294
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@tlester
Copy link

tlester commented Jul 2, 2021

Describe the bug
Evidently, the way Apollo 3 wants to handle pagination now since it's deprecating the fetchMore call back requires the paginaiton variables be "offset" and "limit". Since neo4j uses "skip" instead of "offset", this will break.

Type definitions
If applicable, add your type definitions to help us reproduce the bug.

To Reproduce
Newst Apollo client... use skip instead of offset... it'll break.

Expected behavior
since apollo is the biggest graphql client, I'd expect neo4j/graphql to accept what they expect as it's kind of a standard.

Here's more:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/62742379/apollo-3-pagination-with-field-policies

@tlester tlester added bug Something isn't working inbox labels Jul 2, 2021
@litewarp
Copy link
Contributor

litewarp commented Jul 3, 2021

I posted a temporary workaround using @graphql-tools/wrap in the discord, but thought I'd put it here in case anyone else needs it.

@darrellwarde darrellwarde linked a pull request Jul 5, 2021 that will close this issue
6 tasks
@darrellwarde
Copy link
Contributor

This has now been changed and will be released in 2.0.0. 🙂

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants