Aggregate filter is wrongly generated for non-List relationship

[darrellwarde]

Type definitions

type Post {
    content: String!
    author: User! @relationship(type: "HAS_AUTHOR", direction: OUT)
}

type User {
    id: ID!
    name: String!
    posts: [Post!]! @relationship(type: "HAS_AUTHOR", direction: IN)
}

Test data

No response

Steps to reproduce

1. Generate a schema using the above type definitions

What happened

The following input type will be generated:

input PostWhere {
    AND: [PostWhere!]
    NOT: PostWhere
    OR: [PostWhere!]
    author: UserWhere
    authorAggregate: PostAuthorAggregateInput
    authorConnection: PostAuthorConnectionWhere
    authorConnection_NOT: PostAuthorConnectionWhere
    author_NOT: UserWhere
    content: String
    content_CONTAINS: String
    content_ENDS_WITH: String
    content_IN: [String!]
    content_NOT: String @deprecated(reason: \\"Negation filters will be deprecated, use the NOT operator to achieve the same behavior\\")
    content_NOT_CONTAINS: String @deprecated(reason: \\"Negation filters will be deprecated, use the NOT operator to achieve the same behavior\\")
    content_NOT_ENDS_WITH: String @deprecated(reason: \\"Negation filters will be deprecated, use the NOT operator to achieve the same behavior\\")
    content_NOT_IN: [String!] @deprecated(reason: \\"Negation filters will be deprecated, use the NOT operator to achieve the same behavior\\")
    content_NOT_STARTS_WITH: String @deprecated(reason: \\"Negation filters will be deprecated, use the NOT operator to achieve the same behavior\\")
    content_STARTS_WITH: String
}

The authorAggregate field is totally irrelevant in this scenario.

Expected behaviour

The field not to be present.

Version

3.17.0

Database version

5.4

Relevant log output

No response

[neo4j-team-graphql]

Many thanks for raising this bug report @darrellwarde. 🐛 We will now attempt to reproduce the bug based on the steps you have provided.

Please ensure that you've provided the necessary information for a minimal reproduction, including but not limited to:

• Type definitions
• Resolvers
• Query and/or Mutation (or multiple) needed to reproduce

If you have a support agreement with Neo4j, please link this GitHub issue to a new or existing Zendesk ticket.

Thanks again! 🙏

[neo4j-team-graphql]

Many thanks for raising this bug report @darrellwarde. 🐛 We will now attempt to reproduce the bug based on the steps you have provided.

Please ensure that you've provided the necessary information for a minimal reproduction, including but not limited to:

• Type definitions
• Resolvers
• Query and/or Mutation (or multiple) needed to reproduce

If you have a support agreement with Neo4j, please link this GitHub issue to a new or existing Zendesk ticket.

Thanks again! 🙏

[neo4j-team-graphql]

We've been able to confirm this bug using the steps to reproduce that you provided - many thanks @darrellwarde! 🙏 We will now prioritise the bug and address it appropriately.