Does this actually pass as an academic study? It is presented in the format of a study (it looks like one) but to suggest GraphQL is better than REST based on the expenditure of effort for building out the first iteration of code for cherry picked scenarios is a first-year undergraduate CS101 study at best. Also, who funded this study?

I want to know the actual costs of GraphQL. What are the tradeoffs with REST? What are the limitations? We're not going to hear from managers who are damage controlling their decisions, but maybe the developers paying for GraphQL adoption wouldn't mind sharing grievances? Now that money and reputations are at stake, I think that unfortunately it will be a while before the tech community starts admitting to mistakes, just as was done with adopting ORMs.

The typical pitch about GraphQL is that it is intended to alleviate the pain of updating ORM dsl every time a change to an endpoint needs to be made to satisfy frontend requirements. Aren't updates to the GraphQL DSL replacing those made to the ORM? The problem hasn't been eliminated but replaced. One problem was replaced by another problem.

If the worst part about working with a REST api with raw sql calls is that you have to make a few straightforward changes, while maintaining complete control of your sql, you're doing great.