I'm relatively new to NestJs and am wondering how can I access the INestApplication application context created in my server bootstrap from an imported Module or Controller? I'm building a framework on top of NestJS and need access to lists of specific types components/services etc that have been provided by my framework as well as applications written with the framework.
For Modules, you are unable to do that since they will be invoked before the ApplicationContext will get bootstrapped. What might help, depending on your case, are Dynamic Modules.
For Controllers, you can use the ModuleRef, which allows you to dynamically import anything from the ApplicationContext.
Very important to note is the { strict: boolean }-option
onModuleInit() {
// Will search only inside the ModuleContext
this.service = this.moduleRef.get(Service);
// Will search in the whole application
this.service = this.moduleRef.get(Service, { strict: false });
}
Related
Background
I'm working on a large application that needs to be upgraded. If I were starting from scratch I'd do this all differently. But right now I need to figure out a fix without touching hundreds of files.
For the same reason, I ideally need this code to work on Nest 6. This project needs to be upgraded to the latest nest, but there are some things that need to be fixed to do this. Before I can do that, I need to resolve the current issue, which is blocking us from upgrading off of node 12
Problem
I have a logger class. This class is supposed to pull in some information from the REQUEST context, if one is available (basically, some headers). If no request context is available, this can be ignored.
For simplicity in talking about this, we can say that I need a provider Logger which returns either a RequestAwareLogger or PlainLogger instance, depending on whether or not it is being resolved from a request scope. Alternately, I need the provider to return the same class, with either a request injected (via #Inject(REQUEST)), or left undefined.
Edit For posterity: If I were writing this from scratch, I'd just update the logger.log call to consume this information directly by passing in the request object, or the fields I needed tracked. But since this is a huge project already, I'd have to modify 1000 lines of code in different files, many of which don't have direct access to the request. This will be a longer term effort
Unfortunately, there is no built-in way to do this in Nest. However, it is possible to create a custom provider that would achieve the same effect.
Here is an example provider that would return either a RequestAwareLogger or PlainLogger instance, depending on whether or not it is being resolved from a request scope:
#Injectable()
export class LoggerProvider {
constructor(
#Optional() #Inject(REQUEST) private readonly request?: Request,
) {}
getLogger(): PlainLogger | RequestAwareLogger {
// If a request is available, return a RequestAwareLogger instance
if (this.request) {
return new RequestAwareLogger(this.request);
}
// Otherwise, return a PlainLogger instance
return new PlainLogger();
}
}
Then, you can use this provider in your logger service like so:
#Injectable()
export class LoggerService {
constructor(private readonly loggerProvider: LoggerProvider) {}
log(message: string) {
const logger = this.loggerProvider.getLogger();
// Use the logger instance
logger.log(message);
}
}
Note that this provider will only work if Nest's IoC container is used to resolve the logger service. If you are using a different IoC container (e.g. in a non-Nest application), you will need to create a custom provider for that container.
I have just started my first loopback project and chosen loopback4 version for the application. Its purely a server application which will interact with databases (Redis and mongodb) and will call external API services due to micro-service architecture.
Now, I have 3 datasources in my application i.e. mongodb, Redis, and REST based datasource to call external services. I am facing 2 problems in going forward.
1. Environment specific configurations of Datasources: I need to maintain configuration for all three datasources according to the NODE_ENV environment variable. For lb3 i found this solution,
https://loopback.io/doc/en/lb3/Environment-specific-configuration.html#data-source-configuration
which does not work in lb4. One solution is to add configuration files having names mongodb.staging.json and mongodb.production.json and same for redis and rest datasources in directory src/datasources, and load this config according to NODE_ENV variable using if condition and pass it to the constructor of datasource. It works but it does not seem nice, as it should be application's responsibility to do this.
Can somebody suggest me lb3 equivalent solution for the above?
2. Calling External APIs via datasource: in lb4, To call external services its recommended to have a separate REST based datasource and its service to call it via controller. Now, In REST datasource config, one has to define a template of all the API calls which will happen to the external service https://loopback.io/doc/en/lb4/REST-connector.html#defining-a-custom-method-using-a-template.
As my application calls external service heavily with relatively large number of request parameters. It becomes really messy to declare each API call with its request params and to maintain this in the datasource config which will be environment specific.
Can somebody tell me a more robust and cleaner alternative of the above problem?
Thanks in advance!!
Using environment variables in datasource configs
The datasource config is simply a JSON file that's imported in into *.datasource.ts. Hence, you can replace that JSON file with a Typescript file and import it accordingly. LoopBack 4 does not provide any custom variable substitution mechanism. Instead, it is recommended to use process.env.
Recent CLI versions replace the JSON config in favour of using a single Typescript file:
import {inject} from '#loopback/core';
import {juggler} from '#loopback/repository';
const config = {
name: 'db',
connector: 'memory',
};
export class DbDataSource extends juggler.DataSource {
static dataSourceName = 'db';
static readonly defaultConfig = config;
constructor(
#inject('datasources.config.db', {optional: true})
dsConfig: object = config,
) {
super(dsConfig);
}
}
The dependency injection in the constructor allows you to override the config programmatically via the IoC container of the application.
Further reading
https://loopback.io/doc/en/lb4/DataSources.html
Calling external APIs without REST connector
The REST connector enforces a well-defined interface for querying external APIs so as to be able to do validation before sending out the request.
If this is not favourable, it is possible to create a new Service as a wrapper to the HTTP queries. From there, you can expose your own functions to handle requests to an external API. As Services do not need to follow a rigid structure, it is possible to customize it to your use-case.
It is also possible to create a new request directly inside the controller using either built-in or external libraries.
Overall, there isn't a 100% right or wrong way of doing certain things in LoopBack 4. Hence why the framework provides numerous ways to tackle the same issue.
Sometimes I need to use some methods which implemented in nestjs code structure in separate from this classes
For example we have such architecture:
entities
-entity.entity.ts
-entity.module.ts
-entity.service.ts
-entity.providers.ts
So how Can I use method or property from entity.service in separate class? Such like this:
import EntityService from './entities.entity.service'
export class SeparateClass{
propertyFromEntityService: string
constructor() {
this.propertyFromEntityService = EntityService.propertyFromEntityService
}
}
And one more important point. I don’t want to implement this separate class in the nestjs structure, I just want to use it as a regular class. Thank you
If you are not wanting to use dependency injection via Nest, but you still want to use a property from a class in the Nest application, you'll need to manually instantiate the class, providing whatever dependencies that class has, and then pulling the property from the service. The other option, if this class will be used outside of the Nest context, but still while the Nest application is running, is you can use the Nest application to get the service via app.get(EntityService), but this does require you to have access to app after the NestFactory has created the application.
We are moving from an on premise-like application to a multi tenant cloud application.
for my web application we made a very simple interface based on IPlugin, to create a plugin architecture. (customers can have/install different plugins)
public interface IWebPlugin : IPlugin
{
string ContentBaseUrl { set; get; }
}
We have some plugins that would normally be loaded in on startup. Now i'm migrating the code to load at the beginning of a request (the Register function is called on request start), and scope everything inside this request.
It's not ideal but it would bring the least impact on the plugin system for now.
I could scope the Container by making an AppHost child container which would stick to the request:
Container IHasContainer.Container
{
get
{
if (HasStarted)
return ChildContainer;
return base.Container;
}
}
public Container ChildContainer
{
get { return HttpContext.Current.Items.GetOrAdd<Container>("ChildContainer", c => Container.CreateChildContainer()); }
}
problem case
Now im trying to make plugins work that actually add API services.
appHost.Routes.Add<GetTranslations>("/Localizations/translations", ApplyTo.Get);
But this service is unreachable (and not visible in metadata). How do i make it reachable?
I see you execute the following in ServiceController AfterInit. Re-executing this still wouldnt make it work.
//Copied from servicestack repo
public void AfterInit()
{
//Register any routes configured on Metadata.Routes
foreach (var restPath in appHost.RestPaths)
{
RegisterRestPath(restPath);
//Auto add Route Attributes so they're available in T.ToUrl() extension methods
restPath.RequestType
.AddAttributes(new RouteAttribute(restPath.Path, restPath.AllowedVerbs)
{
Priority = restPath.Priority,
Summary = restPath.Summary,
Notes = restPath.Notes,
});
}
//Sync the RestPaths collections
appHost.RestPaths.Clear();
appHost.RestPaths.AddRange(RestPathMap.Values.SelectMany(x => x));
appHost.Metadata.AfterInit();
}
solution directions
Is there a way i could override the route finding? like extending RestHandler.FindMatchingRestPath(httpMethod, pathInfo, out contentType);
Or could i restart the path compilation/caching? (would be enough for now that the service would be reachable tenant wide )
All configuration in ServiceStack should be contained within AppHost.Configure() and remain immutable thereafter. It's not ThreadSafe to modify ServiceStack's Static Configuration at runtime like trying to modify registered routes or Service Metadata which needs to be registered once at StartUp in AppHost.Configure().
It looks as though you'll need to re-architect your solution so all Routes are registered on Startup. If it helps Plugins can implement IPreInitPlugin and IPostInitPlugin interfaces to execute custom logic before and after Plugins are registered. They can also register a appHost.AfterInitCallbacks to register custom logic after ServiceStack's AppHost has been initialized.
Not sure if it's applicable but at runtime you can "hi-jack Requests" in ServiceStack by registering a RawHttpHandler or a PreRequestFilter, e.g:
appHost.RawHttpHandlers.Add(httpReq =>
MyShouldHandleThisRoute(httpReq.PathInfo)
? new CustomActionHandler((req, res) => {
//Handle Route
});
: null);
Simple answer seems to be, no. The framework wasn't build to be a run-time plugable system.
You will have to make this architecture yourself on top of ServiceStack.
Routing solution
To make it route to these run-time loaded services/routes it is needed to make your own implementation.
The ServiceStack.HttpHandlerFactory checks if a route exist (one that is registered on init). so here is where you will have to start extending. The method GetHandlerForPathInfo checks if it can find the (service)route and otherwise return a NotFoundHandler or StaticFileHandler.
My solution consists of the following code:
string contentType;
var restPath = RestHandler.FindMatchingRestPath(httpMethod, pathInfo, out contentType);
//Added part
if (restPath == null)
restPath = AppHost.Instance.FindPluginServiceForRoute(httpMethod, pathInfo);
//End added part
if (restPath != null)
return new RestHandler { RestPath = restPath, RequestName = restPath.RequestType.GetOperationName(), ResponseContentType = contentType };
technically speaking IAppHost.IServiceRoutes should be the one doing the routing. Probably in the future this will be extensible.
Resolving services
The second problem is resolving the services. After the route has been found and the right Message/Dto Type has been resolved. The IAppHost.ServiceController will attempt to find the right service and make it execute the message.
This class also has init functions which are called on startup to reflect all the services in servicestack. I didn't found a work around yet, but ill by working on it to make it possible in ServiceStack coming weeks.
Current version on nuget its not possible to make it work. I added some extensibility in servicestack to make it +- possible.
Ioc Solution out of the box
For ioc ServiceStack.Funq gives us a solution. Funq allows making child containers where you can register your ioc on. On resolve a child container will, if it can't resolve the interface, ask its parent to resolve it.
Container.CreateChildContainer()
Was wondering if there's a recommended best-practice way of grouping similar services together in what's becoming a larger and larger project. Say that most of my services can be lumped in either dealing with "Pro" data or "Amateur" data (the data goes way beyond a simple flag in a table, the data itself is totally different, from different tables, on the pro or amateur side.
I know I can add routes to my classes...
/pro/service1
/am/service2
It looks like I can put the DTOs in namespaces....
What about the Service.Interface items (Service and Factory classes). Would you put those into namespaces also?
Finally, is there a way for the metadata page to reflect these groupings? I started to go down this road, but all the services listed out in alphabetical order, and you couldn't see the route or namespace differences between service1 and service2.
thank you
If you want, you can split multiple Service implementations across multiple dlls as described on the Modularizing Services wiki.
You can safely group service implementation classes into any nested folder groupings without having any impact to the external services. But changing the namespaces on DTO's can have an effect if your DTO's make use of object, interfaces or abstract classes which emit type info containing full namespaces.
In ServiceStack v4.09+ (now on MyGet) the MetadataFeature includes the ability to customize the ordering of the metadata page, e.g you can reverse the order of the metadata pages with:
var metadata = (MetadataFeature)Plugins.First(x => x is MetadataFeature);
metadata.IndexPageFilter = page => {
page.OperationNames.Sort((x,y) => y.CompareTo(x));
};
Organising your large project:
For a complex service(s) I setup 4 projects in one solution.
AppHost, This takes care of the configuration of the service. (References Model, Service and Types)
Model, This is the database model (Does not reference other projects)
Service, This is the implementation of the service only, not the interfaces or DTOs (References Model and Types)
Types, This includes my Interfaces, DTOs and routes. (Does not reference other projects)
Having a separate Types library allows the distribution to clients, for example for use with the ServiceStack JsonServiceClient.
Yes you can namespace the Interfaces, DTOs and factory classes, any way you want. They will work as long as they are referenced in your service correctly.
If you are trying to separate more than one service, you should consider separating your service code into logical folders within the Service project. i.e.
/Service/Pro
/Service/Amateur
Wrap the outer code of your Service methods in a public partial static class MyServiceStackApplication, with an appropriate name. Then reference this as the assembly in the AppHost constructor. So for example:
Pro Service (Service Project/Pro/UserActions.cs)
public partial static class MyServiceStackApplication
{
public partial class Pro
{
public class UserActionsService : Service
{
public User Get(GetUserRequest request)
{
}
}
// ...
}
}
Pro Service (Service Project/Pro/OtherActions.cs)
public partial static class MyServiceStackApplication
{
public partial class Pro
{
public class OtherActionsService : Service
{
public Other Get(GetOtherRequest request)
{
}
}
// ...
}
}
Amateur Service (Service Project/Am/UserActions.cs)
public partial static class MyServiceStackApplication
{
public partial class Amateur
{
public class UserActionsService : Service
{
public User Get(GetUserRequest request)
{
}
}
// ...
}
}
etc.
You can see from the above code we can have multiple files, all separated out and organised, but one assembly for ServiceStack to reference in the AppHost:
public AppHost() : base("Pro & Amateur Services", typeof(MyServiceStackApplication).Assembly) {}
Using the reference to the MyServiceStackApplication assembly, and using the partial keyword allows you to organise the code into manageable groupings.
Metadata:
Unfortunately separating the metadata by namespace isn't supported. You could try and customize the MetaDataFeature yourself, but it does seem like a useful feature, being able to separate multiple services where they are hosted in the one ServiceStack application. I would suggest you raise a feature request.
Mythz is bringing out features faster than lightning. :) Seems like he has that covered in the next release and you should be able to apply a custom filter to HostContext.Metadata.OperationNamesMap.