Better support of queryKeys / mutationKeys

[russell-dot-js]

Right now the queryKeys & mutationKeys are generated from the "ActualOperationName" from nswag, and it looks like all the options to customize queries/mutations omit our ability to change the key

So, for example, something like this could be generated:

export function getAllUsersQueryKey(...params: any[]): QueryKey {
  return trimArrayEnd([
      'Client',
      'getAllUsers',
    ]);
}

While this might also get generated:

export function createUserMutationKey(): MutationKey {
  return trimArrayEnd([
      'Client',
      'createUser',
    ]);
}

We currently have no way, as far as I can tell, to control react-query's caching, and tell it that "createUser" changes the result of "getAllUsers". Attempting to change nswag's strategy e.g. /operationGenerationMode:MultipleClientsFromOperationId does not seem to make any difference (likely because of the usage of ActualOperationName.

Why not let devs pass in their own queryKeys, either in addition or instead of the generated ones?

[russell-dot-js]

https://tanstack.com/query/v4/docs/framework/react/guides/updates-from-mutation-responses saved me - but would be great to have some control

[dseipp]

Greetings, thanks for this amazing tool!

It would be great to have some options in the query key area. One hopefully easy option would to use the controller name as the first parameter. Being able to dump query cache after updates is important to having the most up to date result.

[Shaddix]

Thanks for the interest!

Could you please elaborate, why you want the control over query keys?

From initial post it seems to me that @russell-dot-js you assume, that if the keys of query and mutation are the same, the query is automatically invalidated after mutation is executed. Did I get it correctly?
Though, according to react-query docs it is not so, and react-query itself asks you to invalidate/setQueryData manually in mutation's onSuccess.

I agree that making it easier to configure invalidations for mutations would be great, but personally I haven't found any better way than via writing onSuccess handler manually