Apache Ignite VS GraphQL Cache

Ignite works as you describe: https://ignite.apache.org/ I wouldn't really recommend this approach, I would think more in terms of subscriptions and topics and less of a 'database'. - Source: Hacker News / about 2 years ago

Last days, I started using Apache Ignite as a cache strategy for some applications. Apache Ignite is an open-source In-Memory Data Grid, distributed database, caching, and high-performance computing platform. Source: over 2 years ago

'id' data type and field to help support caching: https://graphql.org/learn/caching/. Source: over 1 year ago

> Take a look at this. I repeat: client-side caching is not a problem, even with GraphQL. The technical problems regarding GraphQL's blockers to caching lies in server-side caching. For server-side caching, the only answer that GraphQL offers is to use primary keys, hand-wave a lot, and hope that your GraphQL implementation did some sort of optimization to handle that corner case by caching results. Don't take my... - Source: Hacker News / almost 2 years ago

> Checkout Relay.js: https://relay.dev/ Relay is a GraphQL client. That's the irrelevant side of caching, because that can be trivially implemented by an intern, specially given GraphQL's official copout of caching based on primary keys [1], and doesn't have any meaningful impact on the client's resources. The relevant side of caching is server-side caching: the bits of your system that allow it to fulfill... - Source: Hacker News / almost 2 years ago

This is clever! Can anyone help me understand how this lines up with the original value proposition of GraphQL? I was under the impression that the Big Idea behind GraphQL was, amongst other things, client-side caching[1]. I’m probably missing some nuance here, so bear with me: if your GraphQL client is caching properly, then what would this syntax give a developer that a URL query parameter parser couldn’t? [1]... - Source: Hacker News / almost 3 years ago