Seperate input types for Create vs Update?

[ani-sha]

GraphQL CRUD defines separate input types for create and update or delete. Can we use the conditional update as default which specifies both input and where and proceed with maybe a single mutate type?

Input type for create :

type Mutation {
  createNote(input: CreateNoteInput!): Note
}

Input type for update :

type Mutation {
    updateNote(input: MutateNoteInput!): Note
}

cc: @wtrocki @machi1990 @rareddy

[machi1990]

I think it makes sense to separate the CreateXXXInput from the one that's being used for update for a simple reason that the update input type can have all the fields as optional (you might only need to update certain fields depending on user context in the application) while it is not the case for the CreateXXXInput type and it depends on how the user has defined them.

+1 for having the filter i.e where separate from the update input type. This way, a type has only one responsibility and from the implementation detail it's easier.

Here is what I see:

Input type for update :

type Mutation {
    updateNote(input: MutateNoteInput!): Note
}

 type Mutation {
     updateNote(input: MutateNoteInput!, where: NoteFilter): Note
}

PS: where argument could be named filter or anything.

/cc @craicoverflow

[wtrocki]

Sounds good to me. I will also follow up with those requirements on specification.

Thank you so much @ani-sha

[rareddy]

The variation we were thinking to keep the schema small is, what if we make which fields are optional or not part of the implementation rather than forcing with the schema. For example, in databases, sometimes ID can be auto-generated?

[wtrocki]

Reason for us to pass entire object it is to ensure it's consistency. We build data synchronization solution but for your case that doesn't make sense.