Results 30 comments of Laurent
trafficstars

I've updated the PR to address your comments @erikwrede: - Root type names are left untouched - Prefix is now added to the name of: - ObjectType - InputType -...

I've pushed some changes to add the ability to override `type_name_prefix` for specific types @tcleonard @erikwrede I realized that this is needed when defining external GraphQL Types in a federated...

> @superlevure will test this in combination with some graphene federation v2.0 support reviews ([graphql-python/graphene-federation#4](https://github.com/graphql-python/graphene-federation/pull/4) ) over the weekend, because that's probably the main use case for this feature. Going...

> Hey @superlevure any updates? Would love to get this merged soon 😊 Hey @erikwrede, sorry I haven't had the chance to get back at it yet; it is still...

We've created a fork of this repo with the above fix if you're interested: https://github.com/loft-orbital/graphql-sync-dataloaders/tree/loft-main We've been running dataloaders in productions for a few weeks now without any significant issues,...

You can use a middleware to achieve this: ```python import logging logger = logging.getLogger(__name__) class ExceptionLoggingMiddleware: def resolve(self, next, root, info, **args): try: return next(root, info, **args) except Exception as...

Thanks for the benchmarks, I'll review the PR again tomorrow. Note that I don't have merge rights on this repo, we'll need a review from one of @firaskafri, @sjdemartini, @kiendang...

@dima-kov I had a look at your benchmarks and I have few remarks. First, it looks like you're comparing the `sync` and `async` resolvers on the same branch of `graphene-django`...

If you folks are interested, we maintain a fork of this library over at https://github.com/loft-orbital/graphql-sync-dataloaders/ We solved the multi-threads issue with this commit https://github.com/jkimbo/graphql-sync-dataloaders/commit/e2a1b43ac95bd94cbf581cc839892ebcb95af40a We've been using this in production...

That's a good point! We're not using `async` views currently so we're not impacted by this, but your point is valid nevertheless