Lazy type resolution #1
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
andheiberg
force-pushed
the
lazy-type-resolution
branch
from
d86c494 to
244e6be
Compare
andheiberg
force-pushed
the
lazy-type-resolution
branch
from
ffd5833 to
e7664c7
Compare
…edServiceMappingPass I see now that in fact there are many things that relu on this… - TypeResolver - ResolverResolver - MutationResolver - AccessResolver
andheiberg
force-pushed
the
lazy-type-resolution
branch
2 times, most recently
from
10219be to
0ea7250
Compare
Sadly further layers of the stack requires modification but this is fine for now.
andheiberg
force-pushed
the
lazy-type-resolution
branch
from
af5dab5 to
6a9f6df
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Completely forgot that my mods were in the overblog fork.
I quickly switched it out for using the typeresolver. Haven't tested it though.
It's now been thoroughly tested and deployed to a test instance in prod mode. Everything is identical to devel except for introspection which has a minor flaw in the sense that types implementing an interface won't be availible from search unless they're referenced directly somewhere in the schema. This is a bug with webonyx that we should fix separately.
How much faster is it? ~30ms per request in prod.
For a company.name request it's 33ms and for a larger request getting shareholdings and using more of the schema it's 30ms. If you used the entire schema it would obviously have no difference.