4 ms·
That’s an architectural difference. Firebase predates graphql. I think the idea is at a high level they both target the same type of customer and use case, i.e.
by abalone 9y ago
That’s an architectural difference. Firebase predates graphql. I think the idea is at a high level they both target the same type of customer and use case, i.e. rapid development. No?
- ryanmarsh 9y agoThat’s not the problem GraphQL was invented to solve AFAIK. Subscriptions were added to graphql later. As I understand it graphql was created to abstract various api endpoints and tie the nodes together with resolvers so that queries would be more efficient. Firebase is a real-time db. When you hit it you hit a single endpoint. That’s very different. I can’t imagine anyone well versed in graphql and Firebase and their histories conflating the two but yet my other comments to this are getting downvoted.
- jkarneges 9y agoFrom the outside, it would appear that AppSync's main goal is to provide a realtime data/sync solution, and that their choice to use GraphQL was likely a design decision rather than the entire reason for AppSync's existence. Of course, I say this as an outsider, not familiar with the details of the project, and having only read what's on the AppSync website. If AppSync really does exist solely to deliver GraphQL to the world, hopefully you can understand how this might not be apparent to other HN commentors. Anyway just trying to explain how there could be confusion, after reading a bunch of the comments on here.
- abalone 9y agoYeah, that’s still just an architectural difference. Nobody is conflating graphql and Firebase. It’s AppSync and Firebase. AppSync gives you more flexibility with the back end thanks in part to graphql, which is cool, but for most people it’s in the same “rapid development” solution category as Firebase.