I am new to asp and have written a project that will connect to a database, retrieve number records and then present those records to the user in a paginated table. The user can then click on a record to edit, make the edit, save the change and be returned to the original table view. The update page is strongly typed.
I am struggling to keep track of which pagination page was last viewed and then navigating back to it. I.e. if the user is on page 5 of 10, they then update a record in from page 5, when the edit is saved the table is shown again but it has gone back to page 1. What is the best method to keep track of the last pagination page?
Any help appreciated.
Chris
Typically I will pass the page number in form submissions, and then when redirecting after save, pass it as part of the query string, so your action can provide the correct page of data back to the view.
This also lets users bookmark specific pages, which can be useful, or even just refresh the current page if necessary, without losing their place.
You may also need to pass sort information, if that feature is available.
I've found it's nice to save it in viewstate:
ex:
ViewState("paging") = 1
In the end I used a session cookie on the server to keep track of the pages shown and last search. This meant I could navigate between pages/controller and keep track of which page was showing in each and didn't need to pass lots of parameters around. I added a new class:
public class SearchModel
{
public string TargetController { get; set; }
public string TargetMethod { get; set; }
public string OriginalSearchCriteria { get; set; }
public string NewSearchCriteria { get; set; }
public int Page { get; set; }
public void SetCriteria(String newCriteria, int pageIn)
{
if (!newCriteria.Equals(OriginalSearchCriteria))
{
OriginalSearchCriteria = newCriteria;
Page = 1;
}
else
{
Page = pageIn;
}
}
public void SetPage(int newPage)
{
if (newPage != 0)
Page = newPage;
}
}
In the controller I just added:
private SearchModel GetSearch()
{
SearchModel search = (SearchModel)Session["CgRefCodeSearch"];
if (search == null)
{
search = new SearchModel();
search.Page = 1;
search.OriginalSearchCriteria = "";
Session["CgRefCodeSearch"] = search;
}
return search;
}
On each function in the controller I could then reference this:
GetSearch().SetPage(page);
CurrentPage = GetSearch().Page etc...
This was based on stuff I read in this Pro ASP.NET MVC 3 Framework, Third Edition by Adam Freeman; Steven Sanderson. Its really simple but works OK.
Related
I'm trying to set up a Tagging tool for images. Basically I have two tables, one for pictures, and one for tags. Both are connected with a many to many setup. I can already add a single tag to a picture, and the same tag to different pictures. However, when I try to add a second tag to an image I get an exception complaining about a unique constraint that I simply don't see.
public class MediaEntity
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public ICollection<TagEntity> Tags { get; set; }
}
public class TagEntity
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public ICollection<MediaEntity> MediaEntities { get; set; }
}
public void updateMedia(MediaEntity model)
{
using (var db = new MediaContext(_dbLocation))
{
db.Update(model);
db.SaveChanges();
}
}
public class MediaContext : DbContext
{
private const string DB_NAME = "PT.db";
private string _path;
public DbSet<MediaEntity> MediaTable { get; set; }
public DbSet<TagEntity> TagTable { get; set; }
public MediaContext(string path)
{
_path = path;
ChangeTracker.AutoDetectChangesEnabled = false;
}
protected override void OnConfiguring(DbContextOptionsBuilder options)
=> options.UseSqlite($"Data Source={Path.Combine(_path, DB_NAME )}");
}
As far as I can tell my setup should create a normal many-to-many relationship, and it the database I also see pretty much this. EF automatically creates a TagTable, MediaTable, and MediaEntityTagEntityTable. But when I try to add a second tag I get this:
SqliteException: SQLite Error 19: 'UNIQUE constraint failed:
MediaEntityTagEntity.MediaEntitiesId, MediaEntityTagEntity.TagsId'.
Data from the table showing I can have the same tag on different pictures:
MediaEntitiesId
TagEntitiesId
1B48E85B-F097-4216-9B7A-0BA34E69CBFF
CF581257-F176-4CDF-BF34-09013DCEAA27
CE33F03F-5C80-492B-88C6-3C40B9BADC6C
CF581257-F176-4CDF-BF34-09013DCEAA27
523178A1-C7F8-4A69-9578-6A599C1BEBD5
0C45C9D1-7576-4C62-A495-F5EF268E9DF8
I don't see where this unique constaint comes in. How can I set up a proper many-to-many relationship?
I suspect the issue you may be running into is with the detached Media and associated Tags you are sending in. You are telling EF to apply an 'Update' to the media, but the DbContext will have no idea about the state of the Tags attached. Assuming some tags may have been newly attached, others are existing relationships. If the Context isn't tracking any of these Tags, it would treat them all as inserts, resulting in index violations (many to many) or duplicate data (many to one / one to many)
When dealing with associations like this, it is generally simpler to define more atomic actions like: AddTag(mediaId, tagId) and RemoveTag(mediaId, tagId)
If you are applying tag changes along with potential media field updates in a single operation I would recommend rather than passing entire entity graphs back and forth, to use a viewModel/DTO for the tag containing a collection of TagIds, from that apply your tag changes against the media server side after determining which tags have been added and removed.
I.e.:
public void updateMedia(MediaViewModel model)
{
using (var db = new MediaContext(_dbLocation))
{
var media = db.Medias.Include(x => x.Tags).Single(x => x.MediaId = model.MedialId);
// Ideally have a Timestamp/row version number to check...
if (media.RowVersion != model.RowVersion)
throw new StaleDataException("The media has been modified since the data was retrieved.");
// copy media fields across...
media.Name = model.Name;
// ... etc.
var existingTagIds = media.Tags
.Select(x => x.TagId)
.ToList();
var tagIdsToRemove = existingTagIds
.Except(model.TagIds)
.ToList();
var tagIdsToAdd = model.TagIds
.Except(existingTagIds)
.ToList();
if(tagIdsToRemove.Any())
media.Tags.RemoveRange(media.Tags.Where(x => tagIdsToRemove.Contains(x.TagId));
if(tagIdsToAdd.Any())
{
var tagsToAdd = db.Tags.Where(x => tagIdsToAdd.Contains(x.TagId)).ToList();
media.Tags.AddRange(tagsToAdd);
}
db.SaveChanges();
}
}
Using this approach the DbContext is never left guessing about the state of the media and associated tags. It helps guard against stale data overwrites and unintentional data tampering (if receiving data from web browsers or other unverifiable sources), and by using view models with the minimum required data, you improve performance by minimzing the amount of data sent over the wire and traps like lazy load hits by serializers.
I always explicitly create the join table. The Primary Key is the combination of the two 1:M FK attributes. I know EF is supposed to map automatically, but since it isn't, you can specify the structure you know you need.
My current problem is (probably) not necessarily directly related to MVC 6, but how working with database actually works, and therefore any help/suggestions in this matter would be more than appreciated.
For the sake of this question, let's say that we have a very simple database with the following tables (C# classes) [we are using Entity Framework to work with the database]:
public class ShoppingUser
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string UserName { get; set; }
public ICollection<ShoppingItem> Items { get; set; }
}
public class ShoppingItem
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Quantity { get; set; }
public string Text { get; set; }
public bool ToRemove { get; set; }//if item has been bought, it can be removed from the shopping list
}
This demo will be for a super duper simple shopping list app, where user (ShoppingUser who is registered in the system can have a List of ShoppingItem where user can decide on what is the text of the item (e.g. Bread, Butter, Tomatoes, ...) and also a quantity (3 pieces, 5kg, ... simple string)
Afterwards in my ASP.NET Core app, I have defined a repository which is communicating with the database and has access to the ShoppingItem class (as we are only interested in shopping items of currently logged in user).
Example of some method we could use here:
public IEnumerable<ShoppingItem> ReturnUserItems(string sUsername)
{
if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(sUsername))
return null;
var result = _context.ShoppingUsers.Include(n => n.Items).Where(n => n.UserName == sUsername).FirstOrDefault();
if (result != null)
return result.Items;
else
return null;
}
Finally we have an API controller with JsonResult for either GET, POST, DELETE, ..., which is used for communication between client side AngularJs App and our server side logic.
Example of GET Method:
// GET: /<controller>/
[HttpGet("")]
public JsonResult Get(string sUserName)
{
try
{
var results = _repository.ReturnUserItems(User.Identity.Name);
if (results != null)
{
var result = Mapper.Map<IEnumerable<ShoppingItemViewModel>>(results);
return Json(result);
}
Response.StatusCode = (int)HttpStatusCode.OK;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Response.StatusCode = (int)HttpStatusCode.BadRequest;
return Json(new { Message = ex.Message });
}
return null;
}
Here comes the tricky part (at least for me). From video tutorials I have learned, that I should never (or almost never) expose my real database model to the website (I guess it's for security reasons). Due to that (as visible from my GET method above) I have declared my ShoppingItemViewModel which contains only properties I want to expose to the user (e.g. meaning that Id of my item is not visible).
This is how it looks like:
public class ShoppingItemViewModel
{
public string Quantity { get; set; }
[Required]
public string Text { get; set; }
[Required]
public bool ToRemove { get; set; }//if item has been bought, it can be removed from the shopping list
}
And for the communication from my AngularJS App I am using simple $http.get and $http.post calls for retrieving / posting updated data.
Finally the question:
My problem is, that if a user decides to either delete an item from his shopping list, or decides to change the content of either text / quantity (meaning that originally in the database it was tomatoes - 5 kg but he manages to buy only 2 kg and therefore changes the quantity to tomatoes - 3kg), how can the app understand which elements have actually been changed and how? The problem I have in this case is, that we are no longer exposing the database Id of the items.
If I was writing a desktop app, where I wouldn't have to create this sub view (ShoppingItemViewModel), my EntityFramework is intelligent enough to check & update all the changes in my database. Unfortunately in this case, I do not understand how this is achievable.
When I was thinking about it I came with the following: Add a new property into the ShoppingItem and ShoppingItemViewModel: public string sCustomKey {get; set; }, which would serve as a unique key for every item. This way, we no longer need to expose our database Id, but we are exposing the 'fake' one.
Second question:
I case my solution would be accurate, what is the best way to update items in the database? The only way I can think of is iterating through all the items in the database and manually check for changes?
Example of what I have in mind:
//IEnumerable<ShoppingItem> would be re-mapped result of ShoppingItemViewModel we have received back from the website
public void UpdateValues(IEnumerable<ShoppingItem> items, string sUserName)
{
//retrieves list of shopping items for specified customer
var allItems = _context.ShoppingUsers
.Include(n => n.Items)
.FirstOrDefault(n => n.UserName == sUserName);
//updates the values
foreach (var sItem in items)
{
var updatedItem = allItems.Items.FirstOrDefault(n => n.Text == sItem.sCustomKey);
if (updatedItem == null)
{
//create new item
var newItem = new ShoppingItem();
newItem.Text = sItem.Text;
newItem.ToRemove = sItem.ToRemove;
allItems.Items.Add(newItem);
}
else
updatedItem.ToRemove = sItem.ToRemove;
}
_context.SaveChanges();
}
But this approach does not seem right to me.
Any help regarding these matters would be more than appreciated as I am still learning how to work with ASP.NET Core and web projects.
In your first question, exposing the item ID in the ViewModels is fine. In your domain layer, you can add validation logic that those ID exists/valid item.
Alternatively, you can use a Guid for your item/product because the ID (int) can easily be predicted.
As far as updating the items, you should not use the "username" as Identifier (of the cart) because that can be predicted/altered by the calling client. You can use Guid either persisted(to Db) or
in-memory. You can add validation as well if this Guid belongs to this username/emailAddress. So updating the items in the cart, consider adding/removing one at a time if that is doable
instead of sending list of items.
I think you have misunderstood something.
Here comes the tricky part (at least for me). From video tutorials I have learned, that I should never (or almost never) expose my real database model to the website (I guess it's for security reasons). Due to that (as visible from my GET method above) I have declared my ShoppingItemViewModel which contains only properties I want to expose to the user (e.g. meaning that Id of my item is not visible).
ViewModel <=> Domain Model <=> ReadModel (Database Model)
The point is that you shouldn't use your ReadModel(Database model) as your ViewModel in Presentation Layer (MVC). All three models will have identity.
I'm trying to better understand how to properly structure my ASP.NET MVC code to handle a situation where a single view contains multiple forms. I feel that it makes sense to submit the forms to their own action methods, so that each form can benefit from its own view model parameter binding and validation, and to avoid putting all form parameters into 1 larger, monolithic view model.
I'm trying to code this pattern, but I can't seem to tie the loose ends together.
I've written some example action methods below, along with example view model classes, that I think demonstrate what I'm trying to achieve. Lets say that I've got an Item Detail action method and view. On this Detail view, I've got two forms - one that creates a new Comment and another that creates a new Note. Both Comment and Note forms POST to their own action methods - DetailNewComment and DetailNewNote.
On success, these POST handler action methods work just fine. On an invalid model state though, I return View(model) so that I can display the issues on the original Detail view. This tries to render a view named Brief though, instead of Detail. If I use the overloaded View call that allows me to specify which view to render, then now I have issues with the different view model classes that I'm using. The specific view model classes now no longer work with the original DetailViewModel.
I get the feeling that I'm doing this completely wrong. How am I supposed to be handling this scenario with multiple forms? Thanks!
public ActionResult Detail(int id)
{
var model = new ItemDetailViewModel
{
Item = ItemRepository.Get(id)
};
return View(model);
}
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult DetailNewComment(int id, ItemDetailNewCommentViewModel model)
{
if (!ModelState.IsValid)
{
return View(model);
}
var comment = CommentRepository.Insert(new Comment
{
Text = model.Text
});
return RedirecToAction("Detail", new { id = id; });
}
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult DetailNewNote(int id, ItemDetailNewNoteViewModel model)
{
if (!ModelState.IsValid)
{
return View(model);
}
var note = NoteRepository.Insert(new Note
{
Text = model.Text
});
return RedirectToAction("Detail", new { id = id; });
}
... with view models something like ...
public class ItemDetailViewModel
{
public Item Item { get; set; }
}
public class ItemDetailNewCommentViewModel
{
public string Text { get; set; }
}
public class ItemDetailNewNoteViewModel
{
public string Text { get; set; }
}
For your case I'd recommend to have a master model for example your
ItemDetailViewModel class to which you'll add a property for each sub-model
public class ItemDetailViewModel
{
public Item Item { get; set; }
public ItemDetailNewCommentViewModel NewCommentModel {get;set;}
public ItemDetailNewNoteViewModel NoteModel {get;set;}
}
Your Detail view will be the master view and the other two will be partial views.
Master view will receive an instance of ItemDetailViewModel as model and inside view you will render your partials by passing Model.NewCommentModel and Model.NoteModel as their corresponding models. For being able to use separate actions for each form, instead of regular forms you can use ajax forms, thus you will send to the server only relevant information without altering the rest of the master view.
The chief problem here is what happens when the user messes up and their post doesn't pass validation server-side. If you choose to take them to a page where just the one form is presented, then you can post to a different action, but if you want both forms re-displayed, then they both should point to the same action.
Really, you just have to make a choice. I've seen sites handle it both ways. Personally, I prefer to re-display the original form, which means handling both forms in the same action. It can lead to bloat, but you can factor out a lot of logic from the action such that you end up with mostly just a branch depending on which form was submitted.
I'm creating an ASP.Net MVC 5 website. In my website, there is a voting system which is very similar to the one StackOverflow uses. I have successfully created the system in which users submit the votes. However one neat feature of SO is that it prevents users from rapidly clicking vote buttons (i.e. voting too fast). Currently my Vote class is something like this:
public class RestaurantReviewVote
{
[Key]
public int ID { get; set; }
public virtual NormalUser User { get; set; }
public virtual ItemReview Reivew { get; set; }
[Range(-1, 1)]
public int Value { get; set; }
public DateTime Created { get; set; }
}
What I have in mind is to do something like this:
rapidActivity = db.Votes.Where(v => v.User.Id == userId && (DateTime.UtcNow - v.Created < THRESHOLD)).Any();
However, I think running this everytime a user submits a vote would be too much pressure on the database. (maybe I'm wrong) How can I do it with performance in mind?
PS:
If you think there's a better way to do the voting system, please tell me. I appreciate any kind of help. Thanks.
I think your solution is reasonable for throttling the votes. You can always cache the last vote time for the user if you don't want to query the database each time.
This could also be an edge case for performance. If the check only occurs when someone is voting, then you're not going to have to incur this penalty on every page load. Chances are you're going to have to do other queries to register a vote anyway, so you could wrap this up in your Vote() method:
(note that you can combine the Where() and the Any() methods)
public bool Vote(int restaurantId)
{
if (db.Votes.Any(v => v.User.Id == userId && (DateTime.UtcNow - v.Created < THRESHOLD))
{
throw new VoteException("You are voting too quickly");
}
...
}
I'm doing a custom 404 page for a large website that's undergoing a redesign. There are about 40 high-use pages that customers may have bookmarked, and our new site structure will break these bookmarks.
On my custom 404 page, I want to alert them to the new URL if they attempt to navigate to one of these high-use pages via its old URL. So I have a couple of dynamic controls on the 404 page, one for a "did-you-want-this?" type of dialog, and another for a "if-so-go-here (and update your bookmark)" type of dialog. That's the easy part.
To suggest a new URL, I'm looking at the requested URL. If it has key words in it, I'm going to suggest the new URL based on that, and them I'm firing off the appropriate did-you-want..., and if-so... suggestions on the 404 page as mentioned above.
So I want to store these 40-ish key/value pairs (keyword/new-URL pairs) in a data structure, and I'm not sure what would be best. Dictionary? IDictionary? What's the difference and which is more appropriate?
Or am I totally on the wrong track?
Thanks for your time.
I would use the Dictionary<T,T> from the System.Collections.Generic namespace.
You could use NameValueCollection.
Maybe this is overkill for your use case, but I'd probably allow for multiple keywords per Uri, and a relative weight score. Then, dynamically score the keywords that match.
class UriSuggester {
private List<SuggestedUri> Uris { get; set; }
Uri[] GetSuggestions(Uri originalUri) {
var suggestionHits = new Dictionary<SuggestedUri, int>();
foreach (var keyword in KeyWords.Parse(originalUri)) {
// find suggestions matching that keyword
foreach (var suggestedUri in Uris.Where(u => u.Keywords.Contains(keyword)) {
// add a hit for keyword match
suggestionHits[suggestedUri] += 1;
}
}
// order by weight * hits
return suggestionHits.Keys
.OrderBy(s => s.Weight * suggestionHits[s])
.Select(s => s.Uri)
.ToArray();
}
}
class SuggestedUri {
public Uri Suggested { get; set; }
public int Weight { get; set; }
public Keyword[] Keywords;
}
class Keyword {
public string Value { get; set; }
public static Keyword[] Parse(Uri uri);
override Equals;
override GetHashCode;
}
Dictionary would be fine. Wether you store it as the interface type IDictionary or Dictionary itself wouldn't matter much in this case as it's not going to be passed much around, besides on the 404 page itself.
Have you considered doing some URL rewriting to still support the old URLs?
You can consider writing your own class logic and then assign that to a List data structure as following:
public class KeyValuesClass
{
private string a_key;
private string a_value;
public KeyValuesClass(string a_key, string a_value)
{
this.a_key = a_key;
this.a_value = a_value;
}
public string Key
{
get{ return a_key; }
set { a_key = value; }
}
public string Value
{
get{ return a_value; }
set { a_value = value; }
}
}
somewhere in the code
List<KeyValuesClass> my_key_value_list = new List<KeyValuesClass>();
my_key_value_list.Add(new KeyValuesClass("key", "value");
But you can consider Dictionary as our fellow programmer mentioned it above :)