Are there plans for a Reactive implementation

[mjohnston-il]

Hi all,
We're currently using the latest version in Micronaut but the generated code signatures requires us to block on the remote call. Have you considered adding a reactive programming approach that returns Mono/Flux objects?

[etienne-sf]

Hello,

Hum, not yet.

I'm working on the 2.x version, to use the spring-graphql dependency.

Once this is done, I guess that it would be a good target.

But I must first check what would be the impact (on both the plug-in itself, and the code of the application that would use the code)

Étienne

[teragrid]

Hi team,

Is there any update yet on the Reactive implementation?

Thanks,

[etienne-sf]

Hello,

The 2.x version is based on webflux, so it should use the reactive implementation.

But, when checking before answering your question, I discovered this: if you're using subscription, then you have to add the spring-boot-starter-websocket, which (by default) add the spring-webmvc dependency.

And there is an issue in the doc about the mvc being used.
I'll check all this and get back to you.

[etienne-sf]

Hello, after reading the code once more, my previous answer is partially wrong.

The code uses the ´web flux´ dependency.
But the code that uses the generated code doesn't have access to the GraphQL reactive stuff.
So your code won't be reactive.

I'll change that. But it may be a complex change.

[etienne-sf]

The Reactive implementation is now commited. It will be available in the next release, coming soon.

The implementation now generates:

• Two executors for each query, mutation and subscription: the old one, non reactive, and a reactive one.
• The GraphQLRepositories are also available in reactive mode.

Etienne

[teragrid]

Thank you so much for your update! I will check on my side to see if any issues