Skip to content

feat: make apq a explicitly opt in feature#47

Closed
pvaneveld wants to merge 8 commits into
mainfrom
makeApqOptIn
Closed

feat: make apq a explicitly opt in feature#47
pvaneveld wants to merge 8 commits into
mainfrom
makeApqOptIn

Conversation

@pvaneveld

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
  • fixed an issue were POST calls where implicitly converted into GET calls when a documentId was provided, even though apq was not enabled.
  • removed a deprecated isPersistedQuery flag

@changeset-bot

changeset-bot Bot commented Oct 22, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: d3cb9db

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

@pvaneveld
pvaneveld requested a review from demeyerthom October 22, 2025 08:45
@pvaneveld
pvaneveld force-pushed the makeApqOptIn branch 4 times, most recently from 2ff6a19 to f83a91f Compare October 22, 2025 15:07
* fixed an issue were POST calls where implicitly converted into GET calls when a documentId was provided, even though apq was not enabled.
* removed a deprecated isPersistedQuery flag
mvantellingen added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 1, 2026
APQ is now opt-in on initServerFetcher / initStrictServerFetcher via the `apq`
option (default false), matching the client fetcher. Non-persisted operations
are sent as a full-query POST; documentId (persisted/trusted) operations are
always sent as a cacheable GET, regardless of the flag.

Adapts the opt-in design from #47 onto current main
(preserving the error-hook/logger machinery main has since gained), and keeps
documentId requests on GET.

Co-authored-by: Paul Vaneveld <p.vaneveld@labdigital.nl>
@mvantellingen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

merged in main

@github-actions github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Jul 1, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants