I am creating a WCF data service on top of a EF 4.1 code first data model that goes against a multi-tenant database. In order to enforce the rules of accessing the multi-tenancy I want to require a string id (that is required by all of our MVC-based REST services) be passed as part of the url route. So, for example, right now I have a service route like this:
http://mysample.net/mysamplesvc.svc/Users
That returns all users in the db w/o a filter. I want to partition this by client by requiring the client id be passed as part of the request like this:
http://mysample.net/mysamplesvc.svc/client123/Users
If it is not passed-in or is invalid I will handle it as required. However, I do not see any example like this anywhere. I think I must be searching incorrectly as this seems like a pretty common scenario.
TIA!
The sample service at http://services.odata.org/(S(readwrite))/OData/OData.svc/ does this (it creates a new instance of the data for each (S(...)) in the URL).
The service code is the last sample on this page: http://www.odata.org/ecosystem#samplecode
Related
I have developed an application which was MVC application. It has a requirement that the application will return json data for one get request.
So I have added apicontroller and created a get method to return json data.
So far so good. but then I thought, is it really needed to add apicontroller to create just one get method.
I started exploring and googling what is the difference other than content negotiation. Got lots of answers and articles but non of them were satisfactory.
So here is the actual confusion, why can't I just create a method in the MVC controller with JsonResponse and return the json data(Which I know only is need for my requirement, but other application on different domain will consume it).
Can anyone convince me why should I use apicontroller instead of MVC JsonResponse for my requirement or should I not be using apicontroller at all.
apology if there is any mistake.
If I get it right the question is Can we use MVC action to serve json content answer is yes! Is it okay to use Json Result? answer is It depends where do you want to consume it
Say I am an in a Web Environment where I have no need for the APIs (that means I am not going to serve my data to multiple clients) If that's the scenario where only your View is going to consume data returned from your Action Method you are good to go. An Action returning a Json Result is basically an Action Result and that's what it is made for.
but If you are in a REST scenario and you need your backend to serve your data to the client de facto standard is to use an independent Web API for that.
Controllers' main responsibility should be to work as an intermediary between your View and Model and whatever service layer you want to bring inside it. on the other hand, Web APIs are data-driven there only purpose is to serve data (use them if you need them)
Web APIs are good cause they give you the flexibility of serving the data to possibly any client that might need it. That's what I would pick if I am starting from scratch but if I only need to serve data to one client Controller Action methods will be way to go.
Hope this helps.
I have a group of microservices, called "client-Foo", where Foo is the name for some particular third-party client.
Using those names as-is creates some really ugly endpoint urls, so I want to translate them to a much nicer hierarchal form.
I added a custom PatternServiceRouteMapper that take the serviceId client-Foo and turns it into the url client/Foo.
This gives the url I want, but also breaks the service mapping because it also changes the registered serviceId to client/Foo; thus, when Zuul goes to route it fails because there is no client/Foo service, its id is client-Foo!
I cannot hardcode any paths because the application requires an arbitrary number of different "client-*" services.
By looking at ZuulProxyAutoConfiguration, you can see that you can replace some beans to achieve your goal and in particular you should consider providing your own implementation of RouteLocator interface or extend DiscoveryClientRouteLocator class.
Your service instances could also register in Eureka server with additional data in metadataMap that your RouteLocator could use.
I would simply add a configuration defined Zuul route :
zuul:
routes:
client-foo: /foo/**
Also I would advise against having a dash in a service-id as it can confuse the config server api (in /config/foo-profile.yml where profile is the spring profile for which you want to get the config).
In my Angular app, I want to display a table which contains the following
a) URL
b) Social share counts divided by different social networks
Using Sails.js, I already have the api created for the URL when the results show up, I can display the URL now I'm confused how to get the appropriate social counts showing right besides
Here's the API I'm using: https://docs.sharedcount.com/
by itself, I can see the JSON it produces
But here are my questions:
Should I create a new api (model/controller) for social count data or include it in my model where I have the 'url' action defined?
If I create a new api or include the social_counts as an action in the current, what would my JSON query look like? to retrieve the URL's, I'm using default API blueprint that Sails provides, so:
http://www.example.com/url/find?where={"title":{"contains":"mark"}}
Struggling a bit in terms of the thought process, would be great to get input on this
It depends on your app. is your app will store that data or just consume it? If it need to store, of course you need the API. In purpose for modification or aggregating the data for example.
No, you can't do that. That shortcut method only works if you have the data in your database and let the Sails Waterline ORM and Blueprint API served it.
Perhaps, if you only need to consume the data from that Sharedcount API, you didn't need to use Sails as a backend, in this context. Just use Angular as a client of that API. Except if you need to modify the data first and store it in your own database, so Sails will helps with it's Waterline ORM and Blueprint API.
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.
Lets say I have the Hello World web service defined, from the Service Stack examples, but instead of just calling it as /hello/{name}, I want to be able to call it as /hello/{name}/id, where I define id to be a separate parameter (by storing it in refId, within a CustomUserSession).
In other words, I want to split the authentication and the actual web service call into 2 parts, but I don't want to expose this id in the actual web service call, because this is private, only within my system. How would I go about doing this? My ideal workflow is:
client calls web service : /hello/{name}
authentication happens. As part of this authentication, I get hold of this secret id
I now call the web service as /hello/{name}/id
It's almost as if I want to call a web service from within another web service.
I apologize if this seems like a misguided question, but how can I go about achieving this workflow?
Thanks
I recommend taking a look at ServiceStack routing. Your service will only be called if it matches an existing route (or uses a pre-defined route) which means if you only had:
[Route("/hello/{name}")]
It wont match /hello/{name}/{id} and your service wont be called. To match that route you can either have an explicit route for it, e.g:
[Route("/hello/{name}/{id}")]
But this is public info which you're saying you would like to hide. The alternative is to use a wildcard route, e.g:
[Route("/hello/{name*}")]
Which matches any /hello/* route inc. /hello, /hello/foo, /hello/foo/id, /hello/foo/id/and/more/etc.
But what gets populated in your Hello.Name property would be foo/id which you'd have to detect and parse in your service.
An alternative is to supply the hidden id in a QueryString or POST'ed form parameter which you can use in ServiceStack to further populate any request DTO, e.g. using the original route:
[Route("/hello/{name}")]
Will let you call the service with /route/foo?id=secret which if your Request DTO had an id property will be populated with secret. If you didn't have (or want) to have an id property you can still access the param with:
base.Request.QueryString["id"];
base.Request.FormData["id"];
But since you want this to be hidden, you should probably avoid passing it in the url which is visible by everyone (inc. web proxies, http logs, and other middle ware). A better place to hide a param is to pass it as a custom HTTP header, e.g: X-id: secret which you can access in your service with:
base.Request.Headers["X-id"];