I am using the following method to send a JSON representation of a List of a custom object through a WCF service hosted on my local machine:
[OperationContract]
[WebInvoke(Method = "GET", RequestFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json,
ResponseFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json)]
public List<MyObject> GetObjects()
{
return MyObject.GetObjects();
}
The class MyObject is marked with the [DataContract] attribute, When I request the method using Rest URL, I get the error
This webpage is not available, The connection to localhost was interrupted.
When I remove the [DataContract] atribute, it works fine. I read many articles that you should enable SSL and configure the service behavior to set the certificate name and store and that sort of stuff, but isthis the right and only way to make it work? Shouldn't it be straighforward?
The code for MyObject is :
[DataContract]
public class MyObject
{
[DataMember]
public int ID { get ; set; }
[DataMember]
public string Name { get; set; }
[DataMember]
public string Description { get; set; }
}
Make sure that all the properties marked as [DataMember] have get and set, that is they are not readonly, not sure why but I once faced this issus and solved it like this.
Related
I'm using a C# 9.0 record type as a binding model for a .NET 5.0 Web API project. Some of the properties are required.
I'm using the record positional syntax, but am receiving errors.
public record Mail(
System.Guid? Id,
[property: Required]
string From,
[property: Required]
string[] Tos,
[property: Required]
string Subject,
string[]? Ccs,
string[]? Bccs,
[property: Required]
Content[] Contents,
Attachment[]? Attachments
);
This is then exposed as the binding model for my Index action:
public async Task<ActionResult> Index(Service.Models.Mail mailRequest)
{
…
}
Whenever I try to make a request, however, I receive the following error:
Record type 'Service.Models.Mail' has validation metadata defined on property 'Contents' that will be ignored. 'Contents' is a parameter in the record primary constructor and validation metadata must be associated with the constructor parameter.
I tried removing the attribute on the Contents property, but it then fails for the next (prior) property. I tried using [param: …] instead of [property: …], as well as mixing them, but keep getting the same kind of error.
I looked around the web, and haven't found any suggestion of handling annotations differently for C# 9 records. I did my best, but I'm out of ideas—outside of converting my records to POCOs.
I gave up using Positional constructor, and with the verbose full declaration of the properties, it works.
public record Mail
{
public System.Guid? Id { get; init; }
[Required]
public string From { get; init; }
[Required]
public string[] Tos { get; init; }
[Required]
public string Subject { get; init; }
public string[]? Ccs { get; init; }
public string[]? Bccs { get; init; }
[Required]
public Content[] Contents { get; init; }
public Attachment[]? Attachments { get; init; }
public Status? Status { get; init; }
public Mail(Guid? id, string #from, string[] tos, string subject, string[]? ccs, string[]? bccs, Content[] contents, Attachment[]? attachments, Status status)
{
Id = id;
From = #from;
Tos = tos;
Subject = subject;
Ccs = ccs;
Bccs = bccs;
Contents = contents;
Attachments = attachments;
Status = status;
}
}
Try using only [Required] (instead of [property: Required]), for some reason worked for me
For me it started to work by adding the [ApiController] attribute to the controller.
I found something similar on ASP.NET Core Razor pages getting:
InvalidOperationException: Record type 'WebApplication1.Pages.LoginModelNRTB+InputModel' has validation metadata defined on property 'PasswordB' that will be ignored. 'PasswordB' is a parameter in the record primary constructor and validation metadata must be associated with the constructor parameter.
from
Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.ModelBinding.ModelMetadata.ThrowIfRecordTypeHasValidationOnProperties()
After some digging, I found: https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/blob/main/src/Mvc/Mvc.Core/src/ModelBinding/Validation/DefaultComplexObjectValidationStrategy.cs
So maybe as you've done, the verbose declaration is the way forward.
Positional record attributes in ASP.NET Core background
How do I target attributes for a record class? more background
Using FluentValidation and keeping properties with the full declaration seems to work perfectly in my case. I highly recommend trying this highly polished alternative validation library instead of using the pretty old standard data annotations
public record LoginViewModel
{
public string Mail { get; init; }
public string Password { get; init; }
public bool IsPersistent { get; init; }
}
public class LoginValidator : AbstractValidator<LoginViewModel>
{
public LoginValidator()
{
RuleFor(l => l.Mail).NotEmpty().EmailAddress();
RuleFor(l => l.Password).NotEmpty();
}
}
I have an ASP.NET Web API 2 project to which I have added Swagger - Swashbuckle v5.6.0. Everything works fine. Swagger UI renders test endpoints for my API as expected.
I added a new Controller to my API. There is a GET action with a complex type parameter. For complex types, Web API tries to read the value from the message body. This is the default behaviour.
Here is my GET action:
[HttpGet]
[Route("search")]
[ResponseType(typeof(List<SearchModel>))]
public IHttpActionResult Search(SearchModel searchOptions)
{
//....
return Ok();
}
And her is my complex type:
public class SearchModel
{
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
[DataType(DataType.EmailAddress)]
[EmailAddress]
public string Email { get; set; }
public string AddressLine1 { get; set; }
public string City { get; set; }
public string Telephone { get; set; }
public string MobilePhone { get; set; }
}
The problem:
But Swagger UI doesn't render body parameter field for my complex type in the GET action. For POST and PUT actions Swagger UI renders body parameter fields as expected but not for the complex type in my GET action.
As can be seen in the screenshot Swagger UI renders query parameters fields for attributes in my complex type instead of rendering a body parameter field for my type as it does in the case of POST and PUT.
My GET action is working fine when testing from Postman and filling the json in the body of the request. By setting breakpoint in the action inside Visual Studio I can see the values are bound to my object in the action parameter.
I have tried to decorate the parameter in my action with [FromBody] (which is the default for complex type) but same result.
Is this a bug in Swagger? Or am I missing something?
Sadly, you can't do what you want with Swagger. You can't send a request model in an HTTP GET method. You can however change the swagger UI to look like this:
but you won't be able to receive the model in your controller.
This is a known issue within the Swagger developers and it was discussed in 2016 and the final decision is that swagger won't support a request body in an HTTP GET method. Here is the link to the already closed issue.
You have three options here:
Leave the method as it is, and test it in Postman, but not in Swagger.
Follow the below steps to achieve the picture above, but please note, that it will only fix the UI part and you will always end up with null SearchModel in the controller when you press Try it out! in swagger.
Make it a [HttpPost method instead of [HttpGet].
How to make swagger UI display GET method with request body:
First, create one Attribute class:
public class ModelInBodyAttribute : Attribute
{
public ModelInBodyAttribute(string modelName, string description, bool isRequired)
{
this.ModelName = modelName;
this.Description = description;
this.IsRequired = IsRequired;
}
public string ModelName { get; set; }
public bool IsRequired { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
}
Then you can decorate your method in the controller:
[ModelInBody(modelName: nameof(SearchModel), description: "My model description", isRequired: true)]
[HttpGet]
[Route("search")]
[ResponseType(typeof(List<SearchModel>))]
public IHttpActionResult Search(SearchModel searchOptions)
{
//....
return Ok(new List<SearchModel>());
}
After that create IOperationFilter class (ModelInBodyOperationFilter):
public class ModelInBodyOperationFilter : IOperationFilter
{
public void Apply(Operation operation, SchemaRegistry schemaRegistry, ApiDescription apiDescription)
{
var attribute = apiDescription.GetControllerAndActionAttributes<ModelInBodyAttribute>().FirstOrDefault();
if (attribute == null)
{
return;
}
operation.parameters.Clear();
operation.parameters.Add(new Parameter
{
name = attribute.ModelName,
description = attribute.Description,
#in = "body",
required = attribute.IsRequired,
schema = new Schema { #ref = $"#/definitions/{attribute.ModelName}" }
});
}
}
Lastly, don't forget to register the IOperationFilter in SwaggerConfig:
c.OperationFilter<ModelInBodyOperationFilter>();
When you send the request via swagger, you will notice that the Curl part is absolutely correct, but still, in your controller there is nothing.
There are endless discussions on whether you should have a PAYLOAD "Body content" in a GET request. As you mentioned it's supported by HTTP but you will find in the internet that many people suggest not to do it. I guess that swagger team also expect you not to use it.
I am trying to use ASP.Net OData v4 (e.g. ODataController) to allow access where the key is a string. 95% of the examples out there use an integer as a key and the couple of posts I've found that discuss the steps to use a string as the key aren't working for me.
In all cases, I am trying to access my resource with the following URL:
/api/ContactTypes('Agency')
Optimistically, I started with just changing the type of the key from int to key:
public SingleResult<ContactType> Get([FromODataUri] string key)
But I get a 404 response. Changing the URL to an integer, /api/ContactTypes(1) does "work" in that it routes to the correct method and that the key is a string type, but obviously, that doesn't help me. This is the scenario described in this post: How to get ASP.Net Web API and OData to bind a string value as a key? except that that post implies that accessing the URL the way I am should work (and also is for OData v3).
After further searching, I found this article: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/davidhardin/2014/12/17/web-api-odata-v4-lessons-learned/ which basically says that you have to decorate the Get method with an explicit routing:
[ODataRoute("({key})")]
public SingleResult<ContactType> Get([FromODataUri] string key)
If I do that alone, though, I get "The path template '({key})' on the action 'Get' in controller 'ContactTypes' is not a valid OData path template. Empty segment encountered in request URL. Please make sure that a valid request URL is specified."
The comments in this post (https://damienbod.com/2014/06/16/web-api-and-odata-v4-crud-and-actions-part-3/) suggest that I need to decorate the Controller with an ODataRoutePrefix:
[ODataRoutePrefix("ContactTypes")]
public class ContactTypesController : ODataController
That seems counter-intuitive since I do not have anything ASP.Net should be confusing. My controller name is already following convention and I have no Web API controllers that could be confusing it.
Regardless, it does seem to "fix" the issue in that the error goes away, but then I am right back at square one (e.g. only integer values can be passed in the URL).
What am I missing?
Full controller code:
[Authorize]
[ODataRoutePrefix("ContactTypes")]
public class ContactTypesController : ODataController
{
PolicyContext _Db;
public ContactTypesController(PolicyContext db)
{
if (db == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException("db");
this._Db = db;
}
public ContactTypesController() : this(new PolicyContext())
{
}
protected override void Dispose(bool disposing)
{
_Db.Dispose();
base.Dispose(disposing);
}
[EnableQuery]
[ODataRoute()]
public IQueryable<ContactType> Get(ODataQueryOptions options)
{
return _Db.ContactType;
}
[EnableQuery]
[ODataRoute("({key})")]
public SingleResult<ContactType> Get([FromODataUri] string key)
{
IQueryable<ContactType> result = _Db.ContactType.Where(p => p.ContactTypeKey == key);
return SingleResult.Create(result);
}
Full WebApiConfig:
public static void Register(HttpConfiguration config)
{
// Web API configuration and services
// Web API routes
config.MapHttpAttributeRoutes();
builder.EntitySet<ContactType>("ContactTypes");
config.MapODataServiceRoute(
routeName: "ODataRoute",
routePrefix: "api",
model: builder.GetEdmModel()
);
}
1.If in your EdmModel, the string property is key, then no ODataRoute is need, for example:
public class Product
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public double Price { get; set; }
}
ConventionModelBuilder will use property named "Id" as the key, or you should specify it's a key like:
public class Product
{
[Key]
public string StringKey { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public double Price { get; set; }
}
Then the call like localhost\api\Products('test') should just go to
public SingleResult<Product> GetProduct([FromODataUri]string key)
2.If you already have a int as a key, but you want use string as another key, then you should try this feature: http://odata.github.io/WebApi/#04-17-Alternate-Key , and you can call like:
localhost\api\Products(StringKey='test')
I've been using service stack for a while and came upon a scenario where the POST method uses the default instance of the IReturn object (with all the properties defaulting to their datatype values). The values supplied as part of the Route (/product/1234345/) are the only ones populated. I've laid out an example below:
[Route("/search/{searchMethod}/books")]
public class SearchRequest : IReturn<SearchResponse>
{
public SearchProvider searchProvider { get; set; }
public string searchTerm { get; set; }
public string categoryID { get; set; }
public long maxResults { get; set; }
//Only this property gets populated if method is post
public string searchMethod { get; set; }
}
public SearchResponse Any(SearchRequest searchRequest)
{
//This works only for non-post requests
return Put(searchRequest);
}
public SearchResponse Get(SearchRequest searchRequest)
{
//This works
return Put(searchRequest);
}
public SearchResponse Post(SearchRequest searchRequest)
{
//This does not
return Put(searchRequest);
}
public SearchResponse Put(SearchRequest searchRequest)
{
//Code for put method goes here
}
I'm then using a client to call these methods
SearchServiceClient searchClient = new SearchServiceClient(SearchServiceAPIUrl);
SearchResponse searchResponse = searchClient.Search(SearchProvider.SampleSearchProvider, searchterm, categoryID, 100,"conservative");
Any help is really appreciated
Thanks
I've always just populated my request object in the constructor and sent it to the service
searchClient.Post(new SearchRequest(SearchProvider.SampleSearchProvider,
searchterm, categoryID, 100,"conservative")):
I finally found the solution after tinkering with the DTO. It seems for post requests all DTO properties needed to have a [DataMember] attribute for serialization/deserialization and make sure that the class also has a [DataContract] attribute.
I have a Request DTO set up for performing a PUT against a service that results in an update.
I require both route parameters AND a json payload to be sent as the PUT (this payload is the ApprovalRoleData object below, and represents the new state of the object I want to have reflected on the server):
[Route("/qms/{QAID}/reviewers/{RoleType}", "PUT")]
public class UpdateReviewer
{
public string QAID { get; set; }
public string RoleType { get; set; }
public ApprovalRoleData UpdatedRoleData { get; set; }
}
Within my service, I have a Put() call that accepts this DTO: The issue is that the ApprovalRoleData object is not being deserialized (but the QAID and RoleType are):
public object Put(UpdateReviewer request)
{
string QAID = request.QAID; //can see value
string RT = request.RoleType; //can see value
ApprovalRoleData ard = request.UpdatedRoleData; //null
}
Is there a way like in WebAPI to specify that I want model binding to work with both route parameters AND a body?
Side Note:
Also, getting the underlying stream so I can just parse myself with base.RequestContext.Get<IHttpRequest>().InputStream didn't work since there was no remaining stream to read (i'm assuming the part of ServiceStack that does the model binding probably consumed the stream by the time I got to it?)