My project uses ApplicationInsightsHttpModule which initializes Operation.Id from Microsoft.ApplicationInsights.RequestTelemetry HTTP value set by a client UI application. Now I want my API to be consumed by a third party which will provide X-Operation-Id HTTP header to correlate our activities. How do I make Application Insights to initialize Operation.Id from that header if it's present in a request?
This says that the standard context is managed automatically by AI so I need a code sample that shows how to properly initialize Operation.Id with a custom value. The following code isn't working, the header value is ignored:
var operationInitializer = TelemetryConfiguration.Active.TelemetryInitializers.OfType<Microsoft.ApplicationInsights.Web.OperationCorrelationTelemetryInitializer>().FirstOrDefault();
if (operationInitializer != null)
{
operationInitializer.RootOperationIdHeaderName = "X-Operation-Id";
}
The code that you included in your question should be working at first glance: you are looking for correct initializer and overriding correct property. However there could be multiple reasons why it is not working as expected, and debugging this is hard, because it would require you to actually step into Application Insights code (if you do decide, the sources for every release are archived on GH).
My recommendation in your case would be to take a different approach - instead of trying to override this property, create and register your own telemetry initializer to set Operation.ID from your header. If you set this property, OperationCorrelationTelemetryInitializer will ignore it and not override. This way you confirm that your headers can be read correctly, and you can easily set breakpoint in Initialize method to debug.
At the moment the question was asked AI SDK had version 2.2. Recently I've upgraded to the latest version 2.4 and it's working now as intended. So, if you pass say 'HELLO' in X-Operation-Id HTTP header (you still need that code in the question in Application_Start()) and then ask for a telemetry in Application_BeginRequest() (or wherever HttpContext is available):
RequestTelemetry telemetry = HttpContext.Current.GetRequestTelemetry();
telemetry.Id will contain something like |HELLO.d0b9d5b7_.
That hexadecimal suffix increases if you pass 'HELLO' in the next request so Id is always unique. I don't know if that can be overridden though.
Related
I'm using Soap UI Free for testing my ASP.NET web API. I've made a CREATE request to the API and then a test for it and it works - the API saves my data and returns response 200 with some JSON object which also contains the ID value for the newly saved object. How can I use that ID value in the next test which will delete the object?
I found this article on the Soap UI website but it says the technique only applies to Soap UI Pro (which I don't have):
https://www.soapui.org/docs/functional-testing/properties/transferring-properties/
Apparently the method from the article also applies to the free version of SoapUI. It just doesn't say that and even though it mentions how to perform it, it doesn't really explain, how exactly.
You just have to right-click on a test case and then choose Add Step -> Property Transfer.
In the property transfer set-up window:
you have to provide a JsonPath to the value to retrieve (eg. $.data.id),
and then the parameter in the next API call to which you want the value to be copied.
So, if you call a CREATE and receive a response with a Json object:
{ "data":
{ "id": "fhiugreuuieryiuweyr893ry9yr43"
}
}
you can then set up the Property Transfer step by typing $.data.id in the Source section's text field and typing "id" in the Property field in the Target section (which could be your eg. READ, UPDATE or DELETE call).
And your tests tree will look eg. like this:
I have a PASOE Business Class Entity setup as a Web Service. I'm trying to determine how to create a custom header that will allow me to pass in a hashed token. Is this something that I need to upgrade to 11.7.4 for DOH(OpenEdge.Web.DataObject.DataObjectHandler)? Or is this something that I simply add into a method that's defined in the class? Apologies, for the lack of code to illustrate my situation, but I'm not sure where to begin.
If you're using a Business Entity with the web transport then you're using the DOH, and the below applies. If you're using the rest transport then you are not using the DOH, and are more limited in your choices.
There is doc available on the DOH at https://documentation.progress.com/output/oe117sp/index.html#page/gssp4/openedge-data-object-handler.html - it's for 11.7.4 but largely applies to all versions (that is, from 11.6.3+). This describes the JSON mapping file, which you'll need to create an override to the default, generated one.
If you want to use the header's value for all operations, then you may want to use one of the DOH's events. There's an example of event handlers at https://github.com/PeterJudge-PSC/http_samples/blob/master/web_handler/data_object_handler/DOHEventHandler.cls ; you will need to start that handler in a session startup procedure using new DOHEventHandler() (the way that code is written is that it makes itself a singleton).
You can now add handling code for the Invoking event which fires before the business logic is run.
If you want to pass the header value into the business logic you will need to
Copy the generated mapping file <service>.gen to a <service.map> , in the same folder. "gen" files are generated and will be overwritten by the tooling
In the .map file, add a new arg entry. This must be in the same order as the parameters to the BE's method.
The JSON should look something like the below. this will read the value of the header and pass it as an input parameter into the method.
{ "ablName": "<parameter_name>",
"ablType": "CHARACTER",
"ioMode": "INPUT",
"msgElem": {"type": "HEADER", "name": "<http-header-name>"}
}
So there are several parts to this question.
The 2 example endpoints (in simplest form):
user/{id}/profile
movie/{id}/info
I expect to create 2 controllers (UserController & MovieController).
How do I implement a view area before controller name?
Both of these are what I would consider a view. Therefore I would like to append a "view" in the url before the controller, as both controllers ONLY supply views. I later expect to also have a user controller in a different place that does NOT return views.
However, ALL my endpoints should start with /api/.
i.e. I want this:
api/view/user/{id}/profile
api/view/movie/{id}/info
But how do I register an area (/view/) while using "custom routing" (i.e.: httpConfiguration.MapHttpAttributeRoutes())? Any examples of this I couldn't find?
Where should I put versioning?
The client is an app, and will require versioning, so that we can make changes to the methods without breaking old versions of the app.
We are unsure where it would be best to place the versioning, and how the placement affects the development of new versions (if it does so at all?).
Possibilities:
1. api/v1/view/user/{id}/profile
2. api/view/v1/user/{id}/profile
3. api/view/user/{id}/profile/v1
version the whole API. This would upgrade the whole API to a new version, even if we only required a single method/endpoint to make an app-breaking change.
Are there any advantages to this that I am not seeing?
version the area. Same as above, just slightly fewer controllers affected.
version the method. Seems like the simplest, as only the single changed method is affected. But the url is very ugly.
Does anyone have an example of versioning in an MVC or Web Api structure that doesn't upgrade the whole API, but still keeps a somewhat nice structure in their URLs?
I ended up using https://github.com/Microsoft/aspnet-api-versioning as suggested by NightOwl888.
1.
Made my 2 controllers extend another controller with a const field that defined the routeprefix that they should share:
protected const string RoutePrefix = "api/view/v{version:apiVersion}";
...
[RoutePrefix(RoutePrefix + "/user")]
2.
The placement of the /v1/ doesn't matter with this Library. And allowed for either updating the controller or individuals methods, as seen fit per case basis.
I am attempting to migrate from version 3.2.0 to 3.3.0. I am getting a compile error. I could not find an entry in the "Breaking Changes" section but here are my two errors in hope someone can guide me to a workable alternative.
public void RegisterTypeSingleton<T>(Type component, string name)
{
if (_container.Kernel.HasComponent(name))
_container.Kernel.RemoveComponent(name);
_container.Register(Component.For<T>().ImplementedBy(component).Named(name).LifeStyle.Singleton);
}
It seems Kernel.RemoveComponent() function has been depreciated. What has replaced this?
The second compiler error is at _container.Register(Component.For<T>().ImplementedBy(component).Named(name).LifeStyle.Singleton);
I am getting "The Type 'TService' must be a reference type in order to use it as a parameter.
I think you might be upgrading from an older version than 3.2.0. See below.
The removal of IKernel.RemoveComponent() is documented in the Breaking Changes document with v3.0.0. Here is the extract where Krzysztof explains why it was removed:
change - Removed the following methods:
GraphNode.RemoveDepender,
GraphNode.RemoveDependent,
IKernel.RemoveComponent,
IKernelEvents.ComponentUnregistered,
INamingSubSystem.this[Type service],
INamingSubSystem.GetHandler,
INamingSubSystem.GetService2Handler,
INamingSubSystem.GetKey2Handler,
INamingSubSystem.UnRegister(String key),
INamingSubSystem.UnRegister(Type service)
Also INamingSubSystem.Register now takes only IHandler as its argument
impact - low
fixability - none
description - The methods were implementation of "remove component from the container" feature
which was flawed and problematic, hecen was scraped.
fix - Working around is quite dependant on your specific usage. Try utilizing IHandlerSelectors.
For changed Register method, just update your calling code not to pass the name.
handler.ComponentModel.Name is now used as the key, as it was happening in all places so far
anyway, so this change should have no real impact.
RegisterComponent() won't overwrite an existing service registration, it'll just register another component for the same service, unless you specify the same name where it'll throw an exception informing you there is another component registered with that name. If your application doesn't replace components very often you could use the IsDefault() method on the registration to get Windsor to resolve the new component by default, just note the other component is still registered.
If your application replaces components often and you don't want the other registrations left there, you'd be best using a custom IHandlerSelector or ISubDependencyResolver so Windsor will ask you each time what component you want used for a specific service.
Also in v3.0.0 a change was made to ensure that value types cannot be passed to the registration methods. You'll need to add a generic constraint to your method that accepts a generic parameter so that it also only accepts reference types:
public void RegisterTypeSingleton<T>(Type component, string name)
where T : class
{
...
}
I wonder whether there is a workaround for using the standard XmlSiteMapProvider within a non asp.net application, like WinForm/Console or, in my case, VS Unit Test one.
The following code fails, because it cannot create a path to the .sitemap file inside a private GetConfigDocument method.
XmlSiteMapProvider provider = new XmlSiteMapProvider();
NameValueCollection providerAttributes = new NameValueCollection();
providerAttributes.Add("siteMapFile", "Web.sitemap");
provider.Initialize("XmlSiteMapReader", providerAttributes);
provider.BuildSiteMap();
I feel the right solution is to write another provider.
I do not see why not. It is just a provider that implements an interface. You may not need many of the features, but you can access the API for what it provides you. Your WinForms screens can simply use the Urls for identification so that you can determine your place in the hierarchy.
What you may have to do is create a custom implementation of the provider because it will use the HttpContext to get the Url of the current web request to identify current placement while you will need to get that value differently. That is what could be tricky because your WinForm application could be displaying multiple windows at time. If you know there is only one window showing at a time you could use a static value which is set prior to accessing the SiteMap API.
Now you have to question the value of using an API if you have to do all of the work. There may not be enough benefit to make it worthwhile.