When using WebControls in Sitecore, there is a way to customize caching behavior - override GetCachingID method.
Is there a way to achieve something like this with Sublayouts(UserControls)? I'd like to add custom "VaryBy" options(example - "Vary By Moon Position").
Yes, sublayout caching can vary by several different criteria by default. You can leverage varying by parameters to do this. The vary-by's are:
Vary by Data
Vary by Device
Vary by Login
Vary by Parameters
Vary by Query String
Vary by User
The approach for you to customize here is Vary by Parameters and YOU define what the parameters are. You can do this in Presentation Details where you dynamically assign a sublayout to an item (there is a section at the bottom of the control properties to define parameters) or you can set this via C# code. Here an example using C# code to statically assign a sublayout into my layout:
<h1>My website</h1>
<h2>My site is great</h2>
<sc:Sublayout ID="slMyControl" path="~/path/to/my/control.ascx" VaryByParm="true" Cachable="true" runat="server" />
(One thing to note in the above code, the attribute for VaryByParam is actually VaryByParm in Sitecore, which is obviously a typo in their code.)
Now in the C#, set the parameters programatically:
slMyControl.Parameters = "myKey1=MyVal1&myKey2=myVal2";
If you can get a Moon Position in C#, then convert it to a string and assign it to the parameters:
slMyControl.Parameters = "position=" + getMoonPosition().ToString();
I recently cached a calendar by the month and year which appear in the query string. Simple example with no error handling:
slEventCalendar.Parameters = string.Format("m={0}&y={1}", Request.QueryString["m"], Request.QueryString["y"]);
The parameter string you end up with eventually becomes part of the actual cache key. Coupling this with other vary by options just making a more complex cache key with more criteria and thus more cached instances. The general rule is, cache by the least amount of criteria you need to which will result in the most amount of use from that cached instance.
Related
As we know, ASP.NET WebForms will generate a Unique ID (as well as name) to a control to prevent collisions in the control heirarchy. Let's say we have a TextBox control with an assigned ID of "MyTextBox" in the markup. If this textbox is on a page with a Master Page then the TextBox control will be given a Unique ID of "ctl00$MainContent$MyTextBox" or something similar.
What I want to know is, for a given page, is it possible to know what the prefix WILL BE? In my above example I would like to know all controls I create on that page will be assigned with a prefix of "ctl00$MainContent$". I have examined the Page object and I cannot find an easy way to extract this information. Note: inspecting already existing controls on the page (like the TextBox) isn't an option. I simply need to know, at run time, what the prefix would be.
-- EDIT: Why do I need to do this? --
Ultimately I am trying to solve the problem that this post illustrates:
ASP.NET 4.5 TryUpdateModel not picking Form values in WebForm using Master-Page
I'm using the ModelBinding features introduced in ASP.NET 4.5. Problem is, as the above post points out, is that the name value collection found in the form will NOT match up with your model's properties. The built-in FormValueProvider expects a one-to-one match with the form key (name) and the model's properties. Unfortuantely, the form's keys will have the typical "ctl00$MainContent$" prefix to the names.
I have a semi-working solution where I created a custom IValueProvider that compares the end of the form key with the model's property. This works 95% of the time, but there's always a chance of multiple hits.
Ideally, and this is what I'm trying to figure out, if I could determine WHAT the prefix is I can then prefix that the IValueProvider's passed in key, look for that in the form and find the exact match.
So that is why I'm wondering if there's any way to know what the prefix should be for a given page.
The real answer is to simply code in such a way that you never have to know this information. that might not always be easy - but that's quite much what we do. You can certainly in code behind get/grab the "id" of the given button.
so for example, I become VERY tired of having to wire up a little toast message all over the place. So, I put in a little js routine (in the master page).
But I did need the client ID of a given control.
Well, the code behind needed (wants) to place the toast message next to whatever I clicked on.
So my server side "toast" message caller of course will after the server side code is done does the common "script" inject that will run when the page finally makes it final trip back down to the browser, displays the page, and then of course runs that script I injected.
So, my server side code does this:
MyToast2(Me, btnUpdate.ClientID.ToString, "Update ok!", "Settings changed")
So note how I get/grab/pass the "ID" of the control that the server is going to render. You can use ClientID to get the the final "ID" used for that control in code behind.
So, that btnUpdate is just a simple button placed on the web form. But who cares what super ugly "ID" the server assigns. i just need the "id" of the control so the JavaScript client side can pick up that control - and thus know/get/have the position of the control, and thus I get this result:
Or if I am some place else - again I can call that js routine - and that routine needs the current control. so might have this:
So, I can now just call a routine and pop up a message - not have to write any new js code for the gallzion notices and little pops I have all over the place.
so the little javaScript routine of course does this:
function toastcallm(cntrol, h, t, d) {
var cmd = $('#' + cntrol);
var mypos = cmd.position();
bla bla bla
But only important was that I get/determine and pass the used server "client" id to that routine - I don't really care what it is , or how to see, or how to list them out. I suppose a better jQuery selector or using wild card might work - but I really don't want to know the control ahead of time - but only that I can get the clientID used when I need it.
I simply write code that assumes somewhere along the way when I need such a client id, I simply get it and use it.
So, on the server side? Well, we always build and write code based on the control ID, but you want to get your hands on the actual id? Then you can use in the server code behind:
btnUpdate.ClientID.ToString
(ie: somecontrol.ClientID).
As I said, is it a logical approach to set page theme based on query string on page load event(in masterpage)?
For example, get culture from http://mydomain.com/{cultureId}/somepage.aspx and setting page theme based on {cultureId}
I would recommend using the browser settings instead, if culture is actually what you are looking for. This is available on the request.UserLanguages property.
If not, you could of course use some request string parameter, but, you would need to handle all links, etc, yourself, to include the correct culture.
The Nlog has some ASP.NET logging features (see the list of layout renderers), for example
${aspnet-request}
For log form item, I need to know name of item.
${aspnet-request:form=myVariable}
But how to log all from items, which hames in unknown?
For example
${aspnet-request:form}
I'd write my own LayoutRenderer, myself (in fact, just did something nearly identical, recently) - one of the best parts about NLog is how extensible the framework is. Depending on how you're doing configuration will determine how you reference/load your custom layoutrenderer, but the sky is really the limit in terms of what you can do.
Off the top of my head, you could take one of two approaches with a custom renderer: wrap/extend the existing asp request renderer and just proxy all calls, or get a hook to the request object the same way the nlog one does (which is tricky; it calls out to grab the COM instance, if memory serves).
The approach I took was to embed the NameValueCollection in the outgoing LogEventInfo object itself (in the properties dictionary), then use a custom layout renderer to extract that collection and render it.
How would you tackle this problem:
I have data in my data store. Each item has information about:
URL = an arbitrary number of first route segments that will be used with requests
some item type = display will be related to this type (read on)
title = used for example in navigation around my application
etc.
Since each item can have an arbitrary number of segments, I created a custom route, that allows me to handle these kind of requests without using the default route and having a single greedy route parameter.
Item type will actually define in what way should content of a particular item be displayed to the client. I was thinking of creating just as many controllers to not have too much code in a single controller action.
So how would you do this in ASP.NET MVC or what would you suggest would be the most feasible way of doing this?
Edit: A few more details
My items are stored in a database. Since they can have very different types (not inheritable) I thought of creating just as many controllers. But questions arise:
How should I create these controllers on each request since they are related to some dynamic data? I could create my own Controller factory or Route handler or possibly some other extension points as well, but which one would be best?
I want to use MVC basic functionality of using things like Html.ActionLink(action, controller, linkText) or make my own extension like Html.ActionLink(itemType, linkText) to make it even more flexible, so Action link should create correct routes based on Route data (because that's what's going on in the background - it goes through routes top down and see which one returns a resulting URL).
I was thinking of having a configuration of relation between itemType and route values (controller, action, defaults). Defaults setting may be tricky since defaults should be deserialized from a configuration string into an object (that may as well be complex). So I thought of maybe even having a configurable relation between itemType and class type that implements a certain interface like written in the example below.
My routes can be changed (or some new ones added) in the data store. But new types should not be added. Configuration would provide these scenarios, because they would link types with route defaults.
Example:
Interface definition:
public interface IRouteDefaults
{
object GetRouteDefaults();
}
Interface implementation example:
public class DefaultType : IRouteDefaults
{
public object GetRouteDefaults()
{
return new {
controller = "Default",
action = "Show",
itemComplex = new Person {
Name = "John Doe",
IsAdmin = true
}
}
}
Configuration example:
<customRoutes>
<route name="Cars" type="TypeEnum.Car" defaults="MyApp.Routing.Defaults.Car, MyApp.Routing" />
<route name="Fruits" type="TypeEnum.Fruit" defaults="MyApp.Routing.Defaults.Fruit, MyApp.Routing" />
<route name="Shoes" type="TypeEnum.Shoe" defaults="MyApp.Routing.Defaults.Shoe, MyApp.Routing" />
...
<route name="Others" type="TypeEnum.Other" defaults="MyApp.Routing.Defaults.DefaultType, MyApp.Routing" />
</customRoutes>
To address performance hit I can cache my items and work with in-memory data and avoid accessing the database on each request. These items tend to not change too often. I could cache them for like 60 minutes without degrading application experience.
There is no significant performance issue if you define a complex routing dictionary, or just have one generic routing entry and handle all the cases yourself. Code is code
Even if your data types are not inheritable, most likely you have common display patterns. e.g.
List of titles and summary text
item display, with title, image, description
etc
If you can breakdown your site into a finite number of display patterns, then you only need to make those finite controllers and views
You them provide a services layer which is selected by the routing parameter than uses a data transfer object (DTO) pattern to take the case data and move it into the standard data structure for the view
The general concept you mention is not at all uncommon and there are a few things to consider:
The moment I hear about URL routing taking a dependency on data coming from a database, the first thing I think about is performance. One way to alleviate potentialy performance concerns is to use the built in Route class and have a very generic pattern, such as "somethingStatic/{*everythingElse}". This way if the URL doesn't start with "somethingStatic" it will immediately fail to match and routing will continue to the next route. Then you'll get all the interesting data as the catch-all "everythingElse" parameter.
You can then associate this route with a custom route handler that derives from MvcRouteHandler and overrides GetHttpHandler to go to the database, make sense of the "everythingElse" value, and perhaps dynamically determine which controller and action should be used to handle this request. You can get/set the routing values by accessing requestContext.RouteData.Values.
Whether to use one controller and one action or many of one or many of each is a discussion unto itself. The question boils down to how many different types of data do you have? Are they mostly similar (they're all books, but some are hardcover and some are softcover)? Completely different (some are cars, some are books, and some are houses)? The answer to this should be the same answer you'd have if this were a computer programming class and you had to decide from an OOP perspective whether they all have a base class and their own derives types, or whether they could be easily represented by one common type. If they're all different types then I'd recommend different controllers - especially if each requires a distinct set of actions. For example, for a house you might want to see an inspection report. But for a book you might want to preview the first five pages and read a book review. These items have nothing in common: The actions for one would never be used for the other.
The problem described in #3 can also occur in reverse, though: What if you have 1,000 different object types? Do you want 1,000 different controllers? Without having any more information, I'd say for this scenario 1,000 controllers is a bit too much.
Hopefully these thoughts help guide you to the right solution. If you can provide more information about some of the specific scenarios you have (such as what kind of objects these are and what actions can apply to them) then the answer can be refined as well.
We heard a lot about the vulnerabilities of using QueryStrings and the possible attacks.
Aside from that, yesterday, an error irritated me so much that i just decide to stop using QueryStrings, i was passing something like:
Dim url As String = "pageName.aspx?type=3&st=34&am=87&m=9"
I tried to
Response.Write(url)
in the redirecting page, it printed the "type" as 3, then i tried it in the target page, it printed 3,0....i know this can be easily dealt with, but why? i mean why should i pass 3 and have to check for 3.0 in the next page's load to take my action accordingly???
So what should we use? what is the safest way to pass variables, parameters...etc to the next page?
You could use Cross-Page Postbacks.
Check also this article:
How to: Pass Values Between ASP.NET Web Pages
There are many options you can use, most of them requires you to build a strategy to pass variables between pages.
In most projects I use this strategy, I create a formVariables class to hold currently active items. it has properties which you will need to pass by querystring. and I store this class at session. and in my base page I read it from session. so in every page I get values over this object. the only negative thing about this method is to clean up items when you finished your work on it..
hope this helps.
I would sugest you avoid using Session to pass variables between pages as this breaks the stateless model of the web.
if you have just stored some values in session that relate to a certain page then the user uses their browsers back button to go back to the same page whcih should have a different state then you are not going to know about it.
It leads to the possibility of reading session values that are not relevant to the page the user is currently viewing - Which is potentially very confusing for the end user.
You will also run into issues with session expiration if you rely on it too much.
I personally try to avoid using session where possible in preference of hidden form values + query strings that can be read on postback + navigation.
The best / most secure way to pass info between pages is to use the session.
// On page 1:
this.Session["type"] = 3;
// On Page 2:
int type = (int)this.Session["type"];
You can store any kind of object in the session and it is stored on the server side, so the user can't manipulate it like a query string, viewstate, or hidden field
You said:
it printed 3,0....i know this can be easily dealt with, but why? i mean why should i pass 3 and have to check for 3.0
There's a difference between "3,0" (three comma oh) and "3.0" (three point oh). You also said that you were "passing something like".
In a query string, if you pass multiple values in the same key, they will be seperated with commas.
As all values are passed as strings there's no way that an int "3" is going to magically become decimal "3.0" unless you parse it as such when you request it.
I'd go back and double check what you are passing into your URL, if it ends up as something like:
pageName.aspx?type=3&st=34&am=87&m=9&type=0
Then when you read back
Request.QueryString["type"]
You'll get "3,0" back as the comma seperated list of values in that key.
First, in asp .net you can use several strategys to pass values between pages. You have viewstate too, however the viewstate store the value and the use is in different scenarios , you can use it too. Sessions instead, and of course by post in a form.
If your problem is the security, I recommended you to create 2 users for accesing the data. One user with read only access, this for accessing the pages ( Sql Inyection prevent ) and validate the data throw the querystring. And One with write access for your private zone.
Sorry, for my unreadeable English.
I like to use query string as I like users to be able to bookmark things like common searches and the like. E.g. if a page can work stand-alone then I like to it to be able to work stand-alone.
Using session/cross-page postbacks is cool if you needed to come from another page for the page you're on to make sense, but otherwise I generally find querystrings to be the better solution.
Just remember that query strings are unvalidated input and treat them with the caution you would treat any unvalidated input.
If you do proper security checks on each page load then the querystring is fine and most flexible IMHO.
They provide the most flexibility as the entry poitn to a page is not dependant on the sender as in some other options. You can call a page from any point within your own app or externally if needed via querystrings. They can also be bookmarked and manually modified for testing or direct manipulation.
Again the key is adding proper security and validation to the querystring, and not processing it blindly. Keep in mind that the seucirty goes beyond having edit or read access, depending on the data and user, they may not have access to the data with thos paranters at all, in cases where data is owned and private to specific users.
We have tried various methods, in an attempt to hide the querystring but in the end have gone back to it, as it is easier to do, debug, and manage.