I'm new in apigee. I need to configure proxy that make mass callout.
I have a JSON on request like:
{
....
"ETA": 10,
"Price": 50,
"Range": 10,
"Record": "false",
"Phones": [ "phone1","phone2","phone3","phone4","phone5","phone6"]
}
I need to making call with same parameters for each phone. Target endpoint is in the same app.
I make custom .js that gets phones and make a call through httpClient.post but not sure that it is best way. (in this document http://apigee.com/docs/gateway-services/content/best-practices-api-proxy-design-and-development warring about ServiceCallout from one API proxy to another in the same organization, or recursively from an API proxy back to itself) In any tips about how to do it in a right way?
AFAIU, your first req to Twilio API will fetch you a list of phone numbers and then you got to place calls to the phone numbers one by one and you want this to work sequentially.
Why dont you use nodejs for this? Apigee Edge supports APIs developed in NodeJs. You can use modules like async.js to achieve what you need.
My suggestion is to look at the API design itself. If its mass callout, I would build the target endpoint to accept all data at once. This saves the network roundtrips for each call and the latency.
Related
TL;DR
Is there a tool can record all the network activity as I visit a website and create a mock server that responds to those requests with the same responses?
I'm investigating ways of mocking the complex backend for our React application. We're currently developing against the real backend (plus test/staging environments). I've looked around a bit and it looks there are a number of tools for mocking individual endpoints/features and sending the rest through to the real API (Mirage is leading the pack at the moment).
However, the Platonic ideal would be to mock the entire server so that a front end dev can work without an internet connection (again: Platonic ideal). It's a crazy lofty goal, I know this. And of course it would require mocking not only our backend but also requests any 3rd-party data sources. And of course the data would be thin and dumb and stale. But this is just for ultra-speedy front end development, it's just mocking. The data doesn't need to be rich, it'll be up to us to make it as useful/realistic as we need it to be.
Probably the quickest way would be to recreate the responses the backend is already sending, and then modifying as needed for new features or features under test etc.
To do this, we might go into Chrome DevTools and recreate everything on the network tab. Mock every request that was made by hardcoding response that returned. Taking it from there, do smart things like use url pattern matching to return a simple placeholder image for any request to get a user's avatar.
What I want to know is: is there any tool out there that does this automatically? That can watch as I load the site, click a bunch of stuff, take a bunch of actions, and spit out or set up a mock that recreates all the responses? And then we could edit any of them as we saw fit to simplify.
Does something like this exist? Maybe it's a browser tool. Maybe it's webpack middleware. Maybe it's a magic rooster.
PS. I imagine this may not be a specific, actionable enough question for SO. I'll understand if it's closed, but I'd really appreciate being directed somewhere where such questions/discussions would fit? I'm new enough to this world that SO is all I know!
There is a practice called service virtualization - a subset of the test double family.
Wikipedia has a list of tools you can use to do that. Here a couple of examples from that list:
Open Source Wiremock will let to record the mocks and edit the responses programmaticaly
Commercial Traffic Parrot will let you record the mocks and edit the responses via a UI and/or programatically
https://mswjs.io/ can mock all the requests for you. It intercepts all your client`s requests and returns your defined mock data.
I have an application of type asp.net mvc and web api.
I m little bit confused over http post and http put.
When to use what and what is the pros and cons of each.
I have gone through many blogs but no solid reason what is designed for what.
Use POST where you would have to create completely new record from scratch.
Use PUT where you would have to update existed record in your database
Here are Differences between PUT & POST
`POST is Not idempotent`-->
Means running POST operation again and again will create new instance everytime when you run call it.
`PUT is Idempotent`-->
PUT is Idempotent operation calling PUT again and again will result same result.
So POST is not idempotent while PUT is idempotent.
`There is also PATCH` -->
Use patch when you would have to update only few properties of your model.In other words Partial Updates.
Put simply (no pun intended):
POST is usually used to CREATE new objects.
PUT is usually used to UPDATE existing objects
Using the correct HTTP verbs allows you to publish a cleaner API and negates the need for encoding intent within the endpoint (url). For example, compare:
Using the correct verbs:
GET api/user/12345
POST api/user/12345
PUT api/user/12345
DELETE api/user/12345
Hacking the endpoint:
GET api/user/12345
POST api/user/12345/create
POST api/user/12345/update
POST api/user/12345/delete
I think the only Cons of using PUT etc are that not all developers are familiar with them and some third party software may not support them or at least it may not be as easy as using the more familiar verbs like GET & POST.
For example, I had a problem a few weeks ago when a proxy was placed in front of an API just before it was to go live and the proxy didn't support the HTTP PUT verb (maybe a config issue - but we didn't have access to the proxy to fix it) so we had to tweak the API and change it to POST at the last minute (which also meant we had to change the clients (mobile apps) that were using it).
I have a SoapUI Mock Service. I would like it to use WS-Security.
I configured the project WS-Security Configurations, both Outgoing and Incoming.
I use a Test Suite to send a request and it is properly processed with Timestamp, Signature and Encrypt WSS Entries. But the response from the Mock Service is a plain text fault:
Missing operation for soapAction [] and body element
[{http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#}EncryptedData] with SOAP Version [SOAP 1.1]
From this message I guess that the mock service did not recognize encryption HTML elements. Am I right?
Is there a way to encrypt SoapUI mock service responses using WS-Security?
It is possible. The options can be found after clicking on the mock service in the bottom left part of the screen (unlike all other configuration options that are available in popups). There you can choose outgoing and incoming security configuration set from a dropdown.
It is hidden so well that I ran into the problem twice within three months, performed a research and found my own unanswered question in StackOverflow before a friend showed me the solution.
So I post the answer should anyone need that.
Some background
I am planning to writing a REST service which helps facilitate collaboration between multiple client systems. Similar to how git or hg handle things I want the client to perform all merging locally and for the server to reject new changes unless they have been merged with existing changes.
How I want to handle it
I don't want clients to have to upload all of their change sets before being told they need to merge first. I would like to do this by performing a POST with the Expect 100 Continue header. The server can then verify that it can accept the change sets based on the header information (not hard for me in this case) and either reject the request or send the 100 Continue status through to the client who will then upload the changes.
My problem
As far as I have been able to figure out so far ASP.NET doesn't support this scenario, by the time you see the request in your controller actions the POST body has normally already been completely uploaded. I've had a brief look at WCF REST but I haven't been able to see a way to do it there either, their conditional PUT example has the full request body before rejecting the request.
I'm happy to use any alternative framework that runs on .net or can easily be made to run on Windows Azure.
I can't recommend WcfRestContrib enough. It's free, and it has a lot of abilities.
But I think you need to use OpenRasta instead of WCF in order to do what you're wanting. There's a lot of stuff out there on it, like wiki, blog post 1, blog post 2. It might be a lot to take in, but it's a .NET framework thats truly focused on being RESTful, and not RPC like WCF. And it has the ability work with headers, like you asked about. It even has PipelineContributors, which have access to the whole context of a call and can halt execution, handle redirections, or even render something different than what was expected.
EDIT:
As far as I can tell, this isn't possible in OpenRasta after all, because "100 continue is usually handled by the hosting environment, not by OR, so there’s no support for it as such, because we don’t get a chance to respond in the asp.net pipeline"
I have a web service that is on an internal server. It can be called from any website on our network.
More and more developers are starting to use it. Current probably 20+ pages use this service, and the number is growing fast. I can see a year from now, someone asking what pages are using this service and what methods.
I would like to log the url of the pages that use my web service as the request come in.
It would also be nice to know the method they are calling.I need to do something in such a way, that it does not affect the client web sites.My first thought was that I could write some code in the global.asax.
I have added some code to the Application_BeginRequest to log the request object details, but there does not appear to be anything about the requesting url.
What am I missing? Should I be looking at a different object?
Thanks.
Without disrupting existing users this is going to be difficult. The httpContect.Current.RequestUrl will just return the URL used to call your web service, not which web page called it.
The closest you can do without disrupting existing apps and forcing developers to change them is to grab the HttpContext.Current.Request.UserHostAddress, so you can at least get the IP of the machine calling your service.
Beyond this, what you might want to consider is adding a parameter to your functions for "CallingApp" and then log that in your code. That's pretty much what we did once re realized that we needed to know which apps are calling our service. We actually have an application monitoring service that uses a GUID for every new app we develop, and we pass that GUID to any web service. It[s extra work but to us it was critical because it allows us to know which apps will be affected when we need to perform updates or take the app server down for maintenance.
Edit - added
As a side note, at the point we realized we needed to track this, we had already been using web services for about a year. When faced with the same problem, we created a new set of web services, and included the extra field for the calling app in all of the new services, and then slowly went back and changed the older programs to point to the new services.
IN retrospect, we wish we had known we would need to do this up front because it created a lot of extra work. I'm guessing you'll be facing something similar if you really want to know exactly who is calling your services.
The only thing you can probably retrieve from the consumer is the IP address without changing your interface.
If you can change this you could do this e.g. by adding authentication and logging who is calling what, or by having some simple "token" principle.
However both methods require you to change the interface and therefore break backwards compatibility - which you should never do.
By always ensuring both back and forward compatibility you should not need to know exactly who is calling your service, but only that it is actually used.
#David Stratton
Thanks for your help. I think your suggestions were great. I accually did something very different, after your answer gave me some new ideas.
I should have mentioned that I was generating the web proxy that most of my users were using to make calls against my web service. My client in general do NOT use the proxy that Visual Studio creates.
Here is what did:
I generated my web proxy client again, and added calls to log the httpcontext of the client before every call. Because the proxy is running on the client, he had access to everything I needed. That allowed me to record everything about the client and the specific call they were making. I realize this would not work for most cases. But all of my clients are internal web sites.
It also had the advantage in that the clients did not have to modify their code at all. I just gave them all a new DLL. Problem solved. I get all the tracking data I want, and they did not have to modify their code.
I was stuck trying to solve the problem from the web service's point of view.
I realize that there is still a whole in this implementation, because someone does not have to use my client proxy to call my service. I guess I could force that at some point in the future. For now, they could let Visual Studio genereate a web proxy for my service. However, if they do that I guess I don't care. That is not the recommened way to call my service. I think the only one doing that is an ASP.NET 1.1 web site. When they upgrade, they will probably switch to my generated proxy.
Without implementing some sort of authentication, there isn't a guraenteeted way of knowing exactly who is calling your service - web metrics are the only way you can gauge what volume of traffic is hitting your service.
I'm sure you already know this but the whole point of a web service isn't to know or care who is calling it.
I have successfully used ...
Dim strReferrer As String = HttpContext.Current.Request.UrlReferrer.AbsoluteUri
to get the calling page that called my WEB API 2 Web Service.