Fix N+1 problem in GraphQL federation

[Sheikhharis50]

Hi guys,

I have pasted a link below where I have explained the issue, I would like to discuss related to the N+1 problem in the Federation.
I can also provide an example of it.

Issue comment
#115 (comment)

Example Repository for federation (take a look at ProductType)
https://github.com/Sheikhharis50/graphql-federation/blob/master/product-service/app_product/types.py

Moreover, @patrick91 has mentioned related to async resolver_reference in the below issue, we might also need that.
#591

[patrick91]

I think adding support for async resolver_reference shouldn't be too difficult, @Sheikhharis50 do you want to try?

[Sheikhharis50]

Yes, I would love to, can you guide me through it?

[patrick91]

@Sheikhharis50 sorry for disappearing, do you still want to work on this?

[Sheikhharis50]

Yes, can you guide me how can i contribute?

[patrick91]

sure, are you on discord? we can chat there 😊 I spent a bit of time investigating this and it's not that simple unfortunately 😊

[Sheikhharis50]

yes, I use discord, that's my id "sheikhhariszahid#3299".

[ThirVondukr]

I'm probably a bit too late but you can use dataloaders to solve N+1: https://gitlab.com/manga-microservices/identity/-/blob/main/src/gql/users/types.py#L18

[patrick91]

wait, we support async resolve_reference?

[ThirVondukr]

Hey, it works 🤷

[patrick91]

oh, I didn't realise that 🤦‍♂️ maybe we need to add a test for this then

[patrick91]

finally took some time to check this, and yes, it is supported thanks to graphql-core resolve value. I'll make a PR to add a test so we don't break this support in future :D