FastAPI with uvicorn. So far i have everything working fine, now wanted to add extra validation with pydantic and response_model validation. My challange is, the response is a nested object, example:
{
"name": "always the same",
"value": ["ACL1", "ACL2", "ACL3"]
}
I have tried to:
class ACL(BaseModel):
name: str
#app.post(
"get/acls",
response_model=List[ACL]
)
def get_acls(credentials: HTTPBasicCredentials = Depends(security)):
But obviously it will fail. How to define correctly the response model so that it's correctly validated ? (and also visible in openapi documentation page ?)
Thanks,
You can use nested models in Pydantic and by by extension also in FastAPI. Like so:
class ACL(BaseModel):
name: str
class YourResponseModel(BaseModel):
name: str
value: list[ACL]
#app.post("/get/acls", response_model=YourResponseModel)
def get_acl():
return {"name": "always the same", "value": [{"name":"ACL1"}, {"name":"ACL2"}, {"name":"ACL3"}]}
If you don't want nested objects in your value list, then you have to build some logic to parse it. Below is an example of this:
class ACL(BaseModel):
name: str
class AnotherResponseModel(BaseModel):
name: str
value: list[str]
#app.post("/get/acls2", response_model=AnotherResponseModel)
def get_acl():
acls = [ACL(name="ACL1"), ACL(name="ACL2"), ACL(name="ACL3")]
return {"name": "always the same", "value": [acl.name for acl in acls] }
Please note, it is bad practice to mix up POST and GET requests (you are defining a POST endpoint, that will 'get' some ACLs for the end user). That is however unrelated to this question.
Related
I am creating an api and no idea why post method not allowed on any url.
views
class MessagesView(APIView):
permission_classes = (IsAuthenticated,)
def post(self, request):
serializer = MessageSerializer(data=request.data)
if serializer.is_valid():
serializer.save()
return Response(serializer.data, status=status.HTTP_201_CREATED)
return Response(serializer.errors, status=status.HTTP_400_BAD_REQUEST)
chat.urls
urlpatterns = [
path("<str:pk>/", ChatDetail.as_view()),
path("messages/", MessagesView.as_view()),
]
response
{
"detail": "Method \"POST\" not allowed."
}
I am providing the token for the request, so isAuthenticated does not do anything wrong here.
Your first pattern will fire if you visit messages/. Indeed, its <str:pk> parameter matches any string (with at least one character and without slashes). But messages is thus also matched with this view.
What you can do is swap the places of the two urls, then calling messages/ will fire the correct view:
urlpatterns = [
# ↓ messages first
path('messages/', MessagesView.as_view()),
path('<str:pk>/', ChatDetail.as_view()),
]
If pk is an integer, you can further restrict the pk with the <int:…> path converter:
urlpatterns = [
path('messages/', MessagesView.as_view()),
path('<int:pk>/', ChatDetail.as_view()),
]
I am aware of that PACT expects provider data need to be in our control, but I am facing following situation
I have pact contract for multiple consumers, all have some mandatory attribute and some are optional attribute, but business logic suppress all the attribute which are having null value, but according to contract I would still be needing that value as null,
what should I do for it?
Edit 1:
i.e let's say below my contract looks
consumer sent request with below params:
{ "method": "GET", "path" : "/pathOfApi", "headers":{ "accept": "json" } }
Provider responds with below data:
{ "Status": 200,
"body" :[
{"country" : "string",
"countryId" :"string",
"postalcode": "string",
"addressLine1" :"string",
"addressLine2" : "string"
"customerName" : "string",
"customerId" : "string"
}
]
now not all customer has address line 2, now in production if addressLine 2 is null it won't be present in output of api, but for our contract field should be present with null
If your provider does not return a field, but the consumer is expecting null, then either the consumer needs to change their expectation (because it's incorrect) or the provider should update its implementation to return null values.
Just because a consumer asks for something doesn't mean you need to do it!
If in some instances the field is present and other it is not, you need to write two tests to cover each case. I'd suggest covering one case with all of the fields, and another with the minimum set of fields (see https://docs.pact.io/faq/#why-is-there-no-support-for-specifying-optional-attributes).
I have a problem with FastAPI and Pydantic.
I want to build a post api, program show this:
#router.post('/productRoute', response_model=SuccessCreate, status_code=status.HTTP_201_CREATED)
async def create_product_route(create: CreatePR):
query = ProductRouteModel.insert().values(
user_id=create.user_id,
route_id=create.route_id,
route_name=create.route_name,
head=create.head.dict(),
body=create.body,
route=create.route
)
await database.execute(query)
return {"status": "Successfully Created!"}
This is Pydantic class:
class RouteSchema(BaseModel):
id: str
next: Optional[List[str]]
prev: List[str]
class HeadSchema(BaseModel):
b1: str
b2: str
b3: str
class BodySchema(BaseModel):
a1: Optional[str]
a2: Optional[str]
class CreatePR(BaseModel):
user_id: str
route_id: str
route_name: str
head: HeadSchema
body: List[BodySchema]
route: List[RouteSchema]
Finally, this i want to post's parameter format:
{
user_id: "test1",
route_id: "route_1",
route_name: "route_name",
head: {...},
body: [{...}, {...}, ..., {...}],
route: [{...}, {...}, ..., {...}]
}
When I executed, I got TypeError: Object of type BodySchema is not JSON serializable.
How can I fix the program to normal operation?
Your code seems OK. I would not make a strong statement, but I suppose your post body is erroneous. Could you please verify whether your JSON format is correct or not. You could check it by using an online JSON editor (ex: https://jsonbeautifier.org/). Probable errors could be the usage of single quotes, missing/extra commas or even perhaps you forgot to put any quotes on your keys.
I have upgraded to the latest Cloud Endpoints 2.0 as well as the endpoints_proto_datastore to its latest commit. When I now try to generate the API discovery doc I get the following error messages:
Method user.update specifies path parameters but you are not using a ResourceContainer This will fail in future releases; please switch to using ResourceContainer as soon as possible
Method position.update specifies path parameters but you are not using a ResourceContainer This will fail in future releases; please switch to using ResourceContainer as soon as possible
The only two available endpoints are the following two methods which should update the User and the Position model:
#User.method(name='user.update', path='users/{id}', http_method='PUT')
def UserUpdate(self, user):
""" Update an user resource. """
user.put()
return user
#Position.method(name='position.update', path='positions/{id}', http_method='PUT')
def PositionUpdate(self, position):
""" Update a position resource. """
position.put()
return position
Before upgrading to Cloud Endpoints 2.0 everything worked fine. But now if I take a look into the generated discovery file both endpoints have a ProtorpcMessagesCombinedContainer in their request. But the combined container itself is defined with the properties of the Position model!
This is how both methods request attribute are defined:
"request": {
"$ref": "ProtorpcMessagesCombinedContainer",
"parameterName": "resource"
},
And this is the definition of the combined container (which has the properties of the Position model):
"ProtorpcMessagesCombinedContainer": {
"id": "ProtorpcMessagesCombinedContainer",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"displayName": {
"type": "string"
},
"shortName": {
"type": "string"
}
}
},
Does anyone else had this issue with GAE and Cloud Endpoints 2.0?
What am I doing wrong? Usually the endpoints-proto-datastore should handle the ResourceContainer and the methods path parameters. Also the endpoints-proto-datastore wasn't updated for years ... I really don't know where the error comes from.
Thanks for your help!
I have a REST API written in Symfony3, with help from the FOSRestBundle.
It makes use of Symfony form classes for data input (POST, PATCH, PUT actions), which works great for almost all endpoints.
However I have a child endpoint that sets up relations using a form with a single collectionType. A POST request body looks like this:
curl http://localhost/documents/100/related -d #- <<REQUEST_BODY
{
"related": [
{"id": 14},
{"id": 23}
]
}
REQUEST_BODY
However I would like to ommit the "related" field name as this information is already in the URI and seems redundant here. I would like to adjust the form to accept data like this:
curl http://localhost/documents/100/related -d #- <<REQUEST_BODY
[
{"id": 14},
{"id": 23}
]
REQUEST_BODY
But cannot see how to make a Symfony form behave in this way?
To clarify, I want to accept a single form field without having to specify the name of that field in a JSON request.
I had a similar problem a while back. What worked for me, was to use the form factory to create a named form with an empty name, like so (example when inside a typical controller):
/** #var $formFactory FormFactory */
$formFactory = $this->get('form.factory');
$form = $formFactory->createNamed('', $type, $data, $options);
Be aware that a form configured like this will consume all POST (or GET) data. So, if you can't ensure that only the required data will be present, you might need to use allow_extra_fields