I'd want our API to be as simple and usable as possible. But building APIs is hard. There is always something that people want different. We are trying to meet the needs but it's not always possible. Sometimes bugs become features, sometimes unintentional breaking changes happen. Changing the functionality as described is possible and not very complicated. I'm only trying to figure out if it makes more sense this way or the way it works now. ... View more

I can change the implementation so that fields assigned from unset variables are ignored. In your example, you set phone, mobilePhone, and privatePhone:   mutation UpdateCompany( $companyID: Int! $customerNo: Int!, $phone: String, $mobilePhone: String, $privatePhone: String, ) { useCompany(no: $companyID) { associate_update( filter: { customerNo: { _eq: $customerNo } }, value: { phone: $phone mobilePhone: $mobilePhone privatePhone: $privatePhone } ) { affectedRows } } }      But only set $phone in the variables:   { "companyID" : 4000000, "customerNo": 11000, "phone": "94000000" }   We can identify variables that are not given a value, and then leave out the fields assigned through them. The query would be treated by our service as it was written like this:   mutation UpdateCompany( $companyID: Int! $customerNo: Int!, $phone: String ) { useCompany(no: $companyID) { associate_update( filter: { customerNo: { _eq: $customerNo } }, value: { phone: $phone } ) { affectedRows } } }   Is this what you would want? ... View more

I understand that this is a problem because it's a breaking change. I want to mention that this has not been done on purpose, although we did not realize the change in behavior. To be honest, we didn't have a test where fields are set in an insert/update operation from a variable that is not set. I'll make sure to include that now. ... View more

I see you are defining some parameters but do not supply values for them.   You are explicitly asking for the update of 3 fields:   value: { phone: $phone mobilePhone: $mobilePhone privatePhone: $privatePhone }   Why do you expect these would not be set?    Parameters/variables without a supplied value take the default value of their types. For string, it's empty. Now that I'm thinking about it, I'd argue that it didn't work as it supposed to previously.   How should we make the different between a sting variable without a supplied value which is seen as an empty string and a string variable set to an empty string "" ? ... View more

We enabled some extra logging that will hopefully catch more information about your problem. Can you run it again and give us a trace ID? ... View more

We have enabled some extra logging. If you reproduce the error we would probably get more information about the cause. ... View more

I am investigating it, but you do get data so you should be able to use that. The fact that there are error messages does not make the response invalid. That's not how GraphQL is designed. I suppose you don't get all the companies, one of them should probably missing, which is not OK, I understand, but my point is that you can get partial results and those should be, generally, treated as successfully.  ... View more

There is no meaningful info in the logs, but the error indicates that there is a problem reading the answer from the backend. It's curious that you have two identical requests in the batch, with different args, and only the second fails. Also, if I am executing the same query I am not getting errors.    Did you try to execute the second request that fails normally, not as part of a batch and see if you get the same problem? ... View more

So you actually get the list of companies, but you also get an error message, and because you have errors you consider the response as invalid. Is that correct?  The \u0026 character is ampersand, "Test company & AS", but this should not be a problem. ... View more

I believe I reproduced what you're describing (although maybe a bit differently).   I created and order with a single line, quantity 10. The order looked like this: { "data": { "useCompany": { "order": { "items": [ { "orderNo": 1489, "orderDate": 20240319, "joindown_OrderLine_via_Order": { "items": [ { "orderNo": 1489, "lineNo": 1, "productNo": "101", "quantity": 10, "finished": 0, "finishDateAsDate": "0001-01-01", "finishAtAsTime": "00:00" } ] } } ] } } } } Next, I ran the mutation you shown, trying to finish 10. The result I got was: { "data": { "useCompany": { "mutationResult": { "affectedRows": 1, "items": [ { "finished": 0, "finishDateAsDate": "0001-01-01", "finishAtAsTime": "00:00" } ] } } } } This means nothing was finished. If I read the order again, I get the same values as previously: "items": [ { "orderNo": 1489, "lineNo": 1, "productNo": "101", "quantity": 10, "finished": 0, "finishDate": 0, "finishDateAsDate": "0001-01-01", "finishAtAsTime": "00:00" } If I run the finish processing mutation finish_order($cid : Int!, $ono : Int!, $pno : String) { useCompany(no : $cid) { order_processings { finish( filter: {orderNo:{_eq : $ono}}, args : { finishType : 2, group : { key : $pno, quantity : 10.0 } } ) { succeeded items { handledOrderLine { lineNo finishedNow } } } } } } it is reported that 10 items were finished: { "data": { "useCompany": { "order_processings": { "finish": { "succeeded": true, "items": [ { "handledOrderLine": [ { "lineNo": 1, "finishedNow": 10 } ] } ] } } } } } But when I read the order, it looks like the quantity is unchanged, and nothing is finished: "items": [ { "orderNo": 1489, "lineNo": 1, "productNo": "101", "quantity": 10, "finished": 0, "finishDate": 0, "finishDateAsDate": "0001-01-01", "finishAtAsTime": "00:00" } This is not a GraphQL issue. But we need some input from someone that knows better (than me) the business logic here. ... View more

Distinct is available for now only in the old table_aggregate fields. ... View more

I understood this problem was resolved with the support team. ... View more

This problem is now fixed. https://docs.business.visma.net/docs/releasenotes ... View more

This problem is now fixed. https://docs.business.visma.net/docs/releasenotes ... View more

OK. We can make it without returning an error. ... View more

I get your point: in the context of @export, it's not an error, because the array was evaluated. But if you pass an empty array directly, would you consider it an error? Would you expect a message that your argument was incorrect? Or would you expect an empty result, and nothing about the cause?   Yes, we can do it so that an error is not returned, but I see pros and cons for it. ... View more

We can't just return no data, we should also indicate the problem. So you get an error message back. It would look like this:   { "errors": [ { "message": "The array argument for the _in operator is empty.", "path": [ "useCompany", "associate" ], "extensions": { "details": "GraphQL.ExecutionError: The array argument for the _in operator is empty." } } ], "data": { "useCompany": { "order": { "totalCount": 0, "items": null }, "sellerDetails": null } } }   Seems good? ... View more

Thanks for reporting it. I will investigate the problem. ... View more

You are correct. There should be nothing to return. Will look into it. ... View more

This is due to a change we did for performance improvement in GraphQL. Previously, we would be selecting entire rows, no matter now many fields you wanted from a table. Now, we are only selecting exactly what you ask for. However, if you ask for nothing, you get nothing. Therefore, you cannot have join-only fields in the schema, such as here: taxAndAccountingGroup { items { joindown_TaxAndAccountingInformation_via_TaxAndAccGroup { items { joinup_TaxCode_via_TaxCodeSales { joinup_Vat { rate } } } } As you figured it out, it works, if you add at least one field. But you did that do that with joinup_TaxCode_via_TaxCodeSales. Here is a query that works: query GetTaxAndAccountGroups($cid: Int!) { useCompany(no : $cid) { taxAndAccountingGroup { totalCount items { taxAndAccountingGroupNo description joindown_TaxAndAccountingInformation_via_TaxAndAccGroup { totalCount items { taxAndAccountingGroup description joinup_TaxCode_via_TaxCodeSales { taxCode joinup_Vat { rate } } } } } } } } Result: { "data": { "useCompany": { "taxAndAccountingInformation": { "totalCount": 8, "items": [ { "taxAndAccountingGroup": 1, "description": "Avgiftspliktig høy sats", "joinup_TaxCode_via_TaxCodeSales": { "taxCode": 3, "description": "Utgående MVA - høy sats", "joinup_Vat": { "rate": 25 } } }, { "taxAndAccountingGroup": 2, "description": "Avgiftsfritt", "joinup_TaxCode_via_TaxCodeSales": { "taxCode": 4, "description": "Avgiftsfritt salg innland", "joinup_Vat": null } }, ... View more

Thank you for reporting. I am looking into it. ... View more

What exactly do you mean? Do you want to find whether it's possible to do insert, update, or delete for a particular table? ... View more

Do you mean like this? query gl_balance_multiple_dimensions { useCompany(no: 1234567) { generalLedgerBalanceForOrgUnit1(filter: { year: { _eq: 2023 } }) { items { accountNo year period cbDomestic orgUnit1 } } generalLedgerBalanceForOrgUnit2(filter: { year: { _eq: 2023 } }) { items { accountNo year period cbDomestic orgUnit2 } } } } ... View more