I am working on a multitenant application where we will have multiple base urls based on our customers.
Here I have a requirement to set Redirect URI for each customers. My confusion is can we set any number of uri in an application? Or Is there any limitation or maximum limit of creating the uri?
This application is created as microservice.
Not sure if I get your question right, maybe an example would be beneficial.
In general, you can use path parameters to make an URI customer-specific, e.g. /pre-path/customer/{customerId}/redirect. This is basically one path, but customerId is used as parameter to distinguish multiple users and can have "infinite" different values.
Related
We want to show a different website depending on the current State of the visiting user, is it possible? I've seen you can do Restriction, but I guess this is kind of the opposite.
Without a Redirect would be awesome, ie. using different S3 buckets.
You can use Lambda#Edge to inspect the request and redirect the user as you wish.
Here is a standard pretty URL redirect example that you can adjust to your needs.
You can also add multiple origins e.g. S3 buckets and use path matching pattern to direct traffic based on the URL to specific path.
I'm struggling to find an answer to this (perhaps because I'm not asking the question properly) ...
I'm building API to expose resources for a basic social networking service I'm creating.
My understanding is that the structure of URLs in an API is essentially a hierarchy, directory like structure. I think that means I can have multiple endpoints to reach the same resources or collections of resource links.
For example:
I have an endpoint
www.domain.api.org/users/{:uid}/posts
Which will return all posts sent by the user or that the user is tagged in. Seems ok, but what if I have an endpoint such as:
www.domain.api.org/posts
Which when hit with a http GET will return all public posts (i.e. all users' posts plus his friends' and public posts).
The difference is that the first URL points to user owned resources whereas the second to public ones (of which the users posts are included of course)
Are these okay or am I doing it the wrong / less sensible way?
To reiterate, can I have multiple endpoints which point to different contexts/views of the same resource?
Basically multiple endpoints for the same resources should be avoided. However in this particular case it does make sense.
What you can do is to introduce optional query param userId to the following endpoint:
www.domain.api.org/posts/?userId=<userId>
If this substitutes the first endpoint you mentioned that's the way to go.
I would like to add ontop of #Opal's answer.
Are these okay or am I doing it the wrong / less sensible way?
Ideally, like Opal mentioned, you would use queryParams in your url. For many applications I have build, I don't know the uids returned from the api beforehand, so selecting an item and passing it inside my url as a query parameter makes sense. But it also has the added benefit of having your key inside your url, allowing you to bookmark it, pass the url to another user and they will automatically see the same data you want them to see.
To iterate: Is your current implementation wrong? No, but ideally you would use a combination of both route parameters are query parameters to achieve this
To create an endpoints, you have to be sure that you have these information at once:
Name of the endpoint
Status: activate or not (required) - is the endpoint activated or disable
Service profile (required) - ID of the Service Profile assigned to the endpoint.
Tariff profile (required) - ID of the tariff Profile assigned to the endpoint.
You can add another optional informations, and be sure of the structure of your endpoint.
Hope this helps you.
I'm working on a site which shows different products for different countries. The current url scheme I'm using is "index.php?country=US" for the main page, and "product.php?country=US&id=1234" to show a product from an specific country.
I'm planning now to implement url rewrite to use cleaner urls. The idea would be using each country as subdomain, and product id as a page. Something like this:
us.example.com/1234 -> product.php?country=US&id=1234
I have full control of my dns records and web server, and currently have set a * A record to point to my IP in order to receive *.example.com requests. This seems to work ok.
Now my question is what other things I'd need to take care of. Is it right to assume that just adding a .htaccess would be enough to handle all requests? Do I need to add VirtualHost to each subdomain I use as well? Would anything else be needed or avoided as well?
I'm basically trying to figure out what the simplest and correct way of designing this would be best.
The data you need to process the country is already in the request URL (from the hostname). Moving this to a GET variable introduces additional complications (how do you deal with POSTs).
You don't need seperate vhosts unless the domains have different SSL certs.
To deal with recent growth our application has been split across two sets of separate infrastructure. Approximately half of our customers are on set 1 and the other half are on set 2.
Both sets have different urls (api1.ourdomain.com and api2.ourdomain.com).
Problem is clients accidentally putt the wrong url and then wonder why they get error messages.
Other then user education any other strategies for dealing with this mess?
Is it possible to redirect requests to the correct endpoint?
Thanks.
I don't think your question is detailed enough to provide meaningful feedback. There are obviously several factors that could easily contribute to a recommendation.
Does your application make use of user profiles (or a similar construct)? If so you might consider associating a primary URI for each user in their profile and include logic in your application to interrogate the profile for each request and redirect if a user goes to the wrong URI.
Is this an authorization issue? If so you might consider including some basic authorization routing that provides a custom 403 page with the proper URL.
If you could provide additional detail I think we could be more helpful.
It looks like there are two ways I can make my REST API. I can have users created with a POST without specifying the URI and it will create the user and return the URI OR I can have the create the users with a PUT and specify the URI themselves.
When should one be used over the other? The key difference here is that in one method MY system is deciding what the unique ID and thus URI for the resource should be, in the other situation THEY are specifying what it should be when I create.
It basically comes down to whether you are willing to cede the control of resource naming to the client.
The biggest issue simply being dealing with conflicts (If I PUT /photo.png and you PUT /photo.png, is that OK?).
Answer those questions, and you're on your way.
When your user is specifying the resource ID, they can PUT to the URI; the ID that they are performing the PUT to is the specification of the resource ID.
When you are specifying the resource ID, they can POST to the URI of the parent / group; your system will assign a URI to the resource, and return that to the client so they can reference their created resource.
The answer to this question hinges on two more specific questions:
Do clients know the location of the resource to be created? (This might be the case if, for instance, users are accessed via the name of the user rather than a server-assigned ID.)
Do clients have a full representation of the resource to be created? (This might not be the case if some portion of your resource is computed by the server.)
If the answer to both of those questions is 'yes', then a PUT is probably appropriate. If you answered 'no' to either, then you ought to stick with a POST.
I can have users created with a POST
without specifying the URI and it will
create the user and return the URI OR
I can have the create the users with a
PUT and specify the URI themselves.
When should one be used over the
other?
Use the first.
In RESTful HTTP the client should never construct URIs. The service should be well-connected, which means that the client should only ever follow URIs given by the server and make requests to those URIs.
It creates better separation between the client and server, and makes it easier to make changes to the service without breaking existing clients.
(And yes, lots of existing APIs get this wrong)
There's a really good post by Fielding related to this topic here:
http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be-hypertext-driven