introduce legacy incremental executor#4546
Merged
yaacovCR merged 1 commit intographql:nextfrom Feb 3, 2026
Merged
Conversation
|
@yaacovCR is attempting to deploy a commit to the The GraphQL Foundation Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
yaacovCR
force-pushed
the
legacy-incremental
branch
from
b73204e to
969fa8b
Compare
yaacovCR
force-pushed
the
legacy-incremental
branch
3 times, most recently
from
f7e3f91 to
a6e3522
Compare
yaacovCR
force-pushed
the
legacy-incremental
branch
from
a6e3522 to
473f0f7
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
#4319 claimed this was not possible, but I cannot understand why from my previous comment.
Note: the legacy incremental executor is a branching executor, it uses the legacy format that duplicates fields within the response as well as the underlying legacy behavior in which those fields are re-executed, with potentially conflicting field values. In particular, nulls may bubble up in one branch and not another. The transformer approach from #4319 keeps the legacy format without re-executing because it transforms the non-branching incremental executor response.