Description
PR - #168
I use graphene
and graphene-pydantic
libraries.
Code example. You can run this for testing.
https://gist.github.com/dima-dmytruk23/aaeba0fbc7a539c1f8bf3d0914fce580
The client does not pass the name
field, but it is still present in the mutation as None
. Input query turns into a UserUpdateInput
, which is when the default values are filled in to the dictionary. So then when code passes the dictionary in to build the UserUpdate
, it sets all the fields -- so exclude_unset
doesn't exclude anything, since all the fields were in fact set.
I am fairly sure it's not in graphene-pydantic
, though, since that is only responsible for converting to the GrapheneInputObjectType
.
I propose to resolve this issue by adding the exclude_unset
flag to the GraphQLSchema
class and use it in the coerce_input_value function
.
Activity
Cito commentedon May 8, 2022
As explained in the PR, I prefer examples that use Graphql-Core directly. Your example involves the two additional libs Graphene and Graphene-Pydantic which could both cause the problem - this makes it very hard and time-consuming for me to see if there is really an issue with Graphql-Core that needs to be fixed. Note again, that the goal of Graphql-Core is to be a Python port of GraphQL.js. Changes or additions to the API to support other libraries are only added in rare cases if you can argue that there is no other solution for these other libraries to solve a certain use case.
In this case, I don't think there is a problem in GraphQL-Core. It behaves exactly like you expect, by ignoring the unset values.
Here is your example code, expressed in GraphQL-Core only:
When I run this with the current version 3.2.1 of GraphQL-Core, I get:
As you see, the name is not passed to the mutation resolver.
To me it looks like your issue is caused by Graphene or Graphene-Pydantic. Note that they may also use an older version of GraphQL-Core, which may behave differently.