In Azure Remote Monitoring, you can create your own CloudToDeviceMethods. How do you add parameters to those methods?
Usually those methods look like this:
function main(context, previousState, previousProperties) { ... }
...in a .js file that has the name of a specific method. But I don't see how I can add parameters to a method like that. I also want to see those parameters in the Azure Remote Monitoring Solution Accelerator web, so I can call that method and send in some parameters.
A CloudToDeviceMethod supports exactly one parameter, and that is the JSON payload that you can give to it. Of course you can add many properties to that payload to act like separate parameters. On the device side, reading that parameter looks like this in C# and like this in JavaScript (Node example)
You mentioned that you want to be able to add those parameters in the Remote Monitoring Solution Accelerator. This is entirely possible with some changes to the ReactJS code. The main files you need to look at are the Job page, right now it calls the device method without a body. Eventually the request is built here, you can see the JsonPayload is left empty.
Related
I have a custom handler written in Go running as an Azure Function. It has an endpoint with two methods:
POST /entities
PUT /entities
It was easy to make my application run as an Azure function: I added "enableForwardingHttpRequest": true to host.json, and it just works.
What I need to achieve: life happened and now I need to enqueue a message when my entities change, so it will trigger another function that uses a queueTrigger to perform some async stuff.
What I tried: The only way I found so far was to disable enableForwardingHttpRequest, and change all my endpoints to accept the Azure Function's raw JSON input and output, and then output a message in one of the fields (as documented here.
It sounds like a huge change to perform something simple... Is there a way I can enqueue a message without having to change all the way my application handles requests?
As per this Github document as of now custom handlers related to go lang in Azure functions having a bug and which need to be fixed.
I need to set up an application in Azure and make communicate 2 functions (one written in C# and one written in JavaScript).
The C# fragment consists in analyzing a XML feed, get the data and save in objects then finally send them to the other JavaScript function by parameter.
I did read that we could establish communication between both functions using HTTP calls but is it possible to do it with parameters ?
If not, would have any suggestions in order to achieve something like this properly? I'm getting started with Azure and i don't have enough visibility to know what is recommened in such a situation
Thank you for your advices
Yes, this is absolutely possible. How you do this is up to you. If you look at the default HTTP trigger templates, you can see that they take parameters (for example, as query string parameters). You can find more examples in the HTTP and webhook recipes documentation.
You can use other trigger types for cross-function communication as well. Take a look at this documentation for related best practices: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-functions/functions-best-practices#cross-function-communication
I am wondering if it is possible to configure an Azure Function App to accept a URI-path ID as is typically used in RESTful services, e.g. /api/foo/1, where the function is foo. I haven't been able to find documentation on this and the binding information that I have found suggests that this isn't possible (I don't see a way to map it). It doesn't "just work" with the typical HTTP trigger (which supports /api/foo?id=1). In that configuration one receives a 404 response, I'm guessing because it doesn't know to call the foo function with the ID suffix in the URI.
In case it matters, I'm using C# to write my function.
You are correct that URI parameters are not supported at this time. If you'd like, you can create a feature suggestion for this here in our repo. Thanks :)
The Problem
I'm aware of the basic way to create a route/endpoint in ServiceStack using methods with names like "Get", "Post", "Any", etc inside a service but in the particular case that I'm trying to work with I have an existing service (which I can make an IService via inheritance) that can not be retrofitted w/ServiceStack attributes and currently uses DTOs for the requests and responses.
This service contains many functions that I do not want to manually mask (as this is a pass-through layer) but otherwise already conform to ServiceStack's requirements. What I'm wondering is if there's a way to manually create these routes in a way that would work like I've mocked up here. My existing functions and DTOs already contain the information I would need to define the routes so if this approach is possible it would only require me to enumerate them at initialization time as opposed to generating the services layer manually.
I noticed there is an extension method on Routes.Add that takes an Expression of type Expression> but I was not able to get that working because I believe the underlying code makes assumptions about the type of Expression generated (LambdaExpression vs MemberExpression or something like that). I also may be barking up the wrong tree if that's not the intended purpose of that function but I can not find documentation anywhere on how that variant is supposed to work.
Why?
I'm not sure this is necessary but to shed some light on why I want to do this as opposed to retrofitting my existing layers: The current code is also used outside of a web service context and is consumed by other code internally. Retrofitting ServiceStack in to this layer would make every place that consumes it require ServiceStack's assemblies and be aware of the web service which is a concern I want separated from the lower code. We were previously using MVC/WCF to accomplish this goal but we want some of the features available from ServiceStack.
the current architecture looks like this:
data -> DAL -> discrete business logic -> composition -> web service
Hopefully that makes enough sense and I'm not being obtuse. If you would like any more details about what I want to do or why I'll try to update this post as soon as possible.
Thanks!
You might use the fallback route in order to provide your own routing mechanism.
Then you get the request.Path property and route using your own mapping of path:Function which can be stored in a simple dictionary.
Anyway, if you go this path I don't see much benefit in using servicestack. It seems you just need an http handler that routes requests to existing services.
The docs shown on this page demonstrate how to send arbitrary parameters from a sender app to a receiver app:
https://developers.google.com/cast/chrome_sender
Specifically, here:
request.parameters = "v=abcdefg";
But, I don't see how the receiver app is supposed to access those parameters once sent? Does someone have an example of jscript for a receiver to see this string?
It looks like Chromecast pulls down the built-in application settings from the following URL: https://clients3.google.com/cast/chromecast/device/config
If you take a look at that file, you'll notice that many of the URLs look like this:
https://www.youtube.com/tv?${POST_DATA}
Notice that ${POST_DATA} is specified as part of the URL that defines the application. I am only guessing, but I would assume that unless your application is setup similarly on Google's whitelist, that you'll be unable to receive that data via the URL.
It may be worth using a channel to send the data you require to your application instead of trying to use request.parameters.
This should be passed in the query parameter section of the URL that the receiver loads. For example, if your app URL is:
http://example.com/foo.html
and you set:
request.parameters = "bar=baz";
then the full URL should come out as:
http://example.com/foo.html?bar=baz
From your receiver JavaScript, you can interrogate this value with document.location.search.