graphql along with existing hapijs routes

[BhaskaranR]

Hi,
I currently have some rest services which i don’t want to convert to graphql. For the new services i would like to use GraphQL.

I tried registering both hapijs rest api routes and graphql. I could still access the rest api but could not access graphql route unless the auth strategy is commented. I need the auth for my existing routes. How do I configure auth for graphql route?

server.auth.strategy('jwt', 'jwt', true,
{ key: config.get("jwtSecret"),
validateFunc: validate,
verifyOptions: { ignoreExpiration: true }
});

server.register({
 register: new apollo.ApolloHAPI(),
   options: graphqlOptions,
   routes: { prefix: '/graphql' },
});

server.register({
   register: new apollo.GraphiQLHAPI(),
   options: { endpointURL: '/graphql' },
});

   server.route(user.routes);
   server.route(device.routes);
   server.route(posts.routes);

[helfer]

Can you describe the problem a bit more accurately? Do you not want to authenticate the requests made to the graphql route? If that's your issue, I think it might be a HAPI configuration problem, not an issue with Apollo Server.

[BhaskaranR]

Do you not want to authenticate the requests made to the graphql route? no, but the existing rest api routes take in auth, which break the graphql route. I get a 401 for the graphql route. how can i specify config : { auth : false }for graphql route?

{"statusCode":401,"error":"Unauthorized","message":"Missing authentication"}

[BhaskaranR]

@helfer any pointer please? do you have any example that uses both rest service and graphql with the auth strategy?

[BhaskaranR]

@helfer I have hit a road block with this. Can you please let me know if the apollo server plugin takes the config : { auth : false } or the auth strategy set by hapi server?? I tried setting in the options, routes etc. nothing works. Am I doing something wrong?

[helfer]

@BhaskaranR I don't know, because I didn't write that part. Maybe @nnance can help?

If I were you, I would try send the authentication token with the graphql request as well, because presumably you already have it on the client? Alternatively you can run two separate servers.

PS: I see you already found this issue, so I think you have your answer: outmoded/discuss#162

PPS: It seems this would be easy if we used server.route instead of server.register. @nnance what's the reason we need to use register vs. route?

[nnance]

@BhaskaranR I am working on some improvements to the HAPI implementation and this is one area I am working on improving. I will reach out when I have more detail

[SimonDegraeve]

I see only three ways to allow full control on HAPI routes:

1. Get the route configuration from the plugin constructor.

import { Server } from 'hapi';
import { ApolloHAPI as Apollo } from 'apollo-server';

const server = new Server();
server.connection({ port: 3000 });

server.register({
  register: new Apollo({
    route: {
      // Route configuration
    }
  }),
  options: { schema: myGraphQLSchema },
  routes: { prefix: '/graphql' },
});

2. Export a handler creator and let people build their own route if they want to.

import { Server } from 'hapi';
import { createApolloHandler } from 'apollo-server';

const server = new Server();
server.connection({ port: 3000 });

const apolloHandler = createApolloHandler({ schema: myGraphQLSchema });

server.route({
  method: 'POST',
  path: '/',
  config: {
    handler: apolloHandler,
    // Route configuration
  },
});

3. Change the shape of the options passed to the register function.

import { Server } from 'hapi';
import { ApolloHAPI as Apollo } from 'apollo-server';

const server = new Server();
server.connection({ port: 3000 });

server.register({
  register: new Apollo(),
  options: { 
    route: {
      // Route configuration
    },
    schema: myGraphQLSchema },
  routes: { prefix: '/graphql' },
});

The 3) is the closest to the HAPI ecosystem but require a breaking change.

[helfer]

@SimonDegraeve @nnance I think we'll bump the version for the next release, so a breaking change won't be an issue. Let's make sure we make the API as close to perfect as we can!

[nnance]

@SimonDegraeve @BhaskaranR I have opened a PR that should resolve this issue. Feedback welcome. #127