I need to configure the hangfire inside .NET Core 2.1 project based on database connectionstring selected by user.
What I have tried :-
I have added required NuGet packages(Owin and Hangfire) and configure the hangfire inside Configure method of Startup(Startup.cs) class as follows
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app, IHostingEnvironment env, IHttpContextAccessor httpContextAccessor)
{
//Other required code goes here
var storage1 = new Hangfire.SqlServer.SqlServerStorage(ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["DatabaseConnectionString"]);
app.UseHangfireDashboard("/Dashboard", new DashboardOptions(), storage1);
}
It is working fine. but the problem is I want to configure the hangfire based on the databaseconnectionstring selected by user using UI(User will select databaseconnectionstring from dropdown).
Question(s) :-
Is it possible to configure the hangfire inside controller? How?
Can we pass IApplicationBuilder inside controller?(To configure the hangfire as did in Startup.cs)
Using middleware can I do this? How?
Is there any other way to do this?
You can do this with IoC by setting JobStorage to your custom implementation
services.AddScoped<JobStorage>(x =>
{
// resolve your storage, from IHttpContextAccessor or some other way
return new SqlServerStorage(...);
});
services.AddScoped<IBackgroundJobClient>(x => new BackgroundJobClient(
x.GetRequiredService<JobStorage>(),
x.GetRequiredService<IBackgroundJobFactory>(),
x.GetRequiredService<IBackgroundJobStateChanger>()));
This would mean that JobStorage and IBackgroundJobClient are now Scoped and resolved on each request. This is just an idea, you'll probably need to do some more configuration that's required for your case to work.
Related
I'm working on a simple .NET 6 application to enable data update notifications in our front-end application. I've built something similar in .NET 5 before, but I'm running across a DI issue that's got me stumped. In 5, all hubs that were mapped automatically have an IHubContext that is set up in the container for them as well. That doesn't appear to be the case anymore in 6.
System.InvalidOperationException: Unable to resolve service for type 'Microsoft.AspNet.SignalR.IHubContext`1[SignalRNotifications.Hubs.NotificationHub]' while attempting to activate 'SignalRNotifications.Controllers.NotificationController'.
The new non-startup DI in 6 looks weird to me, but I'm just not seeing anything available that says how to fix it. Any suggestions on how to get an IHubContext to inject into my controller?
Thanks!
Update: Here is some pertinent code:
using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Builder;
using SignalRNotifications.Hubs;
var builder = WebApplication.CreateBuilder(args);
// Add services to the container.
builder.Services.AddControllers();
builder.Services.AddSignalR().AddAzureSignalR();
var app = builder.Build();
// Configure the HTTP request pipeline.
app.UseHttpsRedirection();
app.UseAuthorization();
app.MapControllers();
app.UseRouting();
app.UseEndpoints(endpoints =>
{
endpoints.MapHub<NotificationHub>("/NotificationHub");
});
app.Run();
Dependency injection is done in the controller in the most predictable of ways:
namespace SignalRNotifications.Controllers
{
[AllowAnonymous]
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class NotificationController : ControllerBase
{
private readonly IHubContext<NotificationHub> _notificationContext;
public NotificationController(IHubContext<NotificationHub> notificationContext)
{
_notificationContext = notificationContext;
}
System.InvalidOperationException: Unable to resolve service for type
'Microsoft.AspNet.SignalR.IHubContext`1[SignalRNotifications.Hubs.NotificationHub]'
while attempting to activate
'SignalRNotifications.Controllers.NotificationController'.
The issue might be related to you having installed the wrong version of SignalR and adding the wrong namespace reference. You are using Microsoft.AspNet.SignalR.IHubContext, instead of Microsoft.AspNetCore.SignalR.IHubContext.
According to your code and refer to the Asp.net Core SignalR document, I create a sample and inject an instance of IHubContext in a controller, everything works well. But I notice that when using the IHubContext, we need to add the using Microsoft.AspNetCore.SignalR; namespace, like this:
So, please check your code and try to use:
using Microsoft.AspNetCore.SignalR;
I have a test web site which uses the aspnetCore [AuthorizeAttribute] at the entire controller level to ensure only Authenticated Users can hit this site.
While we debug and test new features, we constantly have to comment out the attribute in each controller, which I know will be easy to forget and might get merged some day.
We've had good success with checking to see if a Debugger is attached before...I am wondering which AuthenticationScheme I should specify to allow anonymous, only if debugging.
I extend the base AuthorizeAttribute so I have an easy place to shim in some code.
public class MyAppAuthorizeAttribute : AuthorizeAttribute
{
public MyAppAuthorizeAttribute()
: base(Policies.MyAppAuthorize)
{
if (System.Diagnostics.Debugger.IsAttached)
{
Console.WriteLine("Skipping auth for debug"); //we hit this line but...
this.AuthenticationSchemes = AllowAnonymousAttribute //this setting does not work
}
else
{
this.AuthenticationSchemes = "IntegratedWindowsAuthentication";
}
}
}
Seems like a good candidate for IWebHostingEnvironment.IsDevelopment():
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app, IWebHostEnvironment env)
{
if (!env.IsDevelopment())
{
app.UseAuthentication();
app.UseAuthorization(); // maybe optional, depends on your case
}
...
Your requirement may be necessary in some cases where the user is required to be authenticated BUT not actually referenced in the code (e.g: the code does not access any info on the current identity, especially related to the business model of the user).
So I assume that you are aware of that because the following will just simply remove the requirement to check for authenticated user when the code runs in the development environment. There is another way to auto sign-in a dummy user which can be better in some scenarios.
Here is the first solution, it configures a default policy only which does not include the DenyAnonymousAuthorizationRequirement (which is the only requirement contained in the default policy). That means if you have multiple policies used somewhere (with AuthorizeAttribute), only the default will be ignored (while debugging). The second solution (shown later) may suit that scenario better.
//inject IHostingEnvironment in the Startup constructor
public Startup(IConfiguration configuration, IHostingEnvironment env){
HostingEnvironment = env;
}
public IHostingEnvironment HostingEnvironment { get; }
//in the ConfigureServices method in Startup.cs
services.AddAuthorization(o => {
if (HostingEnvironment.IsDevelopment()){
o.DefaultPolicy = new AuthorizationPolicyBuilder(CookieAuthenticationDefaults.AuthenticationScheme)
//there should be at least 1 requirement
//here we add a simple always-passed assertion
.RequireAssertion(e => true).Build();
}
//...
});
We need to use IHostingEnvironment (in .net core 2.2, since 3.0 we have 2 alternatives IWebHostEnvironment and IHostEnvironment) so we inject it in the Startup constructor and store it in a readonly property (as you see above). There is another way is try to get the ASPNETCORE_ENVIRONMENT variable directly like this:
var isDevelopment = Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable("ASPNETCORE_ENVIRONMENT") == "Development";
Here is the second solution in which you use a custom global IAsyncAuthorizationFilter to auto sign-in a dummy user (so it's always authenticated for all requests).
public class AllowAnonymousFilterAttribute : Attribute, IAsyncAuthorizationFilter
{
readonly IHostingEnvironment _hostingEnvironment;
public AllowAnonymousFilterAttribute(IHostingEnvironment env){
_hostingEnvironment = env;
}
public async Task OnAuthorizationAsync(AuthorizationFilterContext context)
{
if (_hostingEnvironment.IsDevelopment() && !context.HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated)
{
//prepare a dummy user to auto sign-in
HttpContext.User = new ClaimsPrincipal(new[] {
new ClaimsIdentity(new []{ new Claim(ClaimTypes.NameIdentifier,"admin")},
CookieAuthenticationDefaults.AuthenticationScheme)
});
await HttpContext.SignInAsync(CookieAuthenticationDefaults.AuthenticationScheme,
HttpContext.User);
}
}
}
Register the filter globally, here I write code for .net core 2.2:
services.AddMvc(o => {
//register the filter only for development (should be debugging)
if (HostingEnvironment.IsDevelopment()){
o.Filters.Add<AllowAnonymousFilterAttribute>();
}
//...
});
I'm sure there are still some other solutions but what I've introduced here are fairly simple and good enough for your purpose.
P/S: the first solution I've introduced above suits for .net core 2.2 (actually currently I do not have access to newer versions of .net core, it's a pity). For the newer versions, the Authorization middleware is separate so you may just simply not call .UseAuthorization() middleware in the Configure method (of course for development environment only) as one other answer suggests.
I have asp.net core 3.1 web api app where I have registered a service as singleton,
services.AddSingleton<ISecretKeyReader, AzureKeyVaultReader>();
Now I am using BuildServiceProvider to register Logging like this
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddSingleton<ISecretKeyReader, AzureKeyVaultReader>();
services.AddLogging((builder) =>
{
var provider = services.BuildServiceProvider().GetRequiredService<ISecretKeyReader>();
});
}
This above code giving warning like,
Calling BuildServiceProvider from application code result in an additional copy of singleton service being created. Consider alternative such as dependency injection as parameter to configure.
Now I am seeing we have IServiceProvider option in IApplicationBuilder,
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app, IWebHostEnvironment env)
{
var x = app.ApplicationServices;
}
But not sure how to use this in ConfigureServices. Any suggestion? Thanks!
I'm not sure if this will help solve your problem, but one,
What if you use Transient instead if Singleton ...
services.AddTransient<ISecretKeyReader, AzureKeyVaultReader>();
Or, two ..
Pass IApplicationBuilder as an argument to the ConfigureServices method, so you a third parameter to that method that will be resolved using dependency injection.
I'd like to add my app's build number to all logs in an ASP.NET Core 3.1 app that is using Application Insights for log storage. Is this possible without having to use BeginScope and EndScope everywhere? I assumed it would be part of the ConfigureLogging startup hook, but didn't see anything. I've done this in the past with Serilog's enrichers, but am not using that library currently.
You can achieve that with TelemetryInitializer. (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-monitor/app/api-filtering-sampling#addmodify-properties-itelemetryinitializer)
public class BuildNumberTelemetryInitializer : ITelemetryInitializer
{
public void Initialize(ITelemetry telemetry)
{
(telemetry as ISupportProperties).Properties.Add("BuildNumber", "ValueForBuildNumber");
}
You need to add this initializer to the config, which is done like below if you are on Asp.Net Core applications.
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddSingleton<ITelemetryInitializer, BuildNumberTelemetryInitializer >();
}
I have created the web application with the web api. The application contains some Controllers for example TodoController:
namespace TodoApi.Controllers
{
[Route("api/[controller]")]
public class TodoController : Controller
{
private readonly TodoContext _context;
public TodoController(TodoContext context)
{
_context = context;
}
[HttpGet]
public IEnumerable<TodoItem> GetAll()
{
return _context.TodoItems.ToList();
}
}
}
If I create the GET request - /api/todo - I get the list of Todos from database.
I have a list of controllers and api endpoints like above.
I would like distribute this api to another application ideally like middleware - my idea is register in Startup.cs like this:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddTodoApi();
}
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app, IHostingEnvironment env, ILoggerFactory loggerFactory)
{
app.UseTodoApi();
}
This will be awesome use case for my api but I don't know how this controllers api endpoints rewrite like middleware and return same JSON data same approache like using classic Controllers.
How can I write the middleware in .NET Core for creating API endpoints?
Instead of the separate middleware, you may configure the MVC middleware to discovery controllers from another assembly:
// using System.Reflection;
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
...
services
.AddMvc()
.AddApplicationPart(typeof(TodoController).GetTypeInfo().Assembly);
Controllers are part of MVC middleware, they are not a separate part of request pipeline (but this is what middlewares are). When you register the custom middleware, it by default invokes on each request and you have HttpContext context as an input parameter to work with/edit
Request/Response data. But ASP.NET Core provides Map* extensions that are used as a convention for branching the pipeline.
Map branches the request pipeline based on matches of the given request path. If the request path starts with the given path, the branch is executed.
Example:
private static void HandleMapTodo(IApplicationBuilder app)
{
app.Run(async context =>
{
await context.Response.WriteAsync("/api/todo was handled");
});
}
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app)
{
app.Map("/api/todo", HandleMapTodo);
}
Note, that as middleware knows nothing about MVC middleware, you have only access to "raw" request and do not have features like model binding or MVC action filters.
Because it looks like the perfect microservices approach (similar than what my team is doing right now) I'd create a client assembly that can consume your API, the one that contains your TodoController, if you define a contract, and interface, for that API you can register it in your other assembly as it was a midleware and also you could mock that behaviour in your unit tests.
So, as I said, you could inject your client in ConfigureServices method, you can create:
public static IServiceCollection AddTodoRestClient(this IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddSingleton<ITodoRestClient, TodoRestClient>();
return services;
}
Also consider that you will need to provide the enpoint so, it might looks like:
public static IServiceCollection AddConfiguredTodoClient(this IServiceCollection services, string todoEndpoint)
{
AddTodoClient(services);
ITodoRestClient todoRestClient = services.BuildServiceProvider().GetService<ITodoRestClient>();
// Imagine you have a configure method...
todoRestClient.Configure(services, todoEndpoint);
return services;
}
You can create those methods in a TodoRestClientInjector class and use them in Configure method on your startup.
I hope it helps
--- MORE DETAILS TO ANSWER COMMENTS ---
For me TodoClient is a Rest client library that implements calls to the ToDo API, (I've edited previous code to be TodoRestClient) methos like, i.e., CreateTodoItem(TodoDto todoItem) which implementation would call to the TodoController.Post([FromBody] item) or GetTodos() which wuold call TodoController.Get() and so on and so forth....
Regarding the enpoints... This approach implies to have (at least) two different applications (.NET Core apps), on the one hand the ASP NET Core app that has your TodoController and on the other hand a console application or another ASP NET Core API on which startup class you'll do the inyection adn the Rest client (the Todo Rest client) configuration ...
In a microservices approach using docker, in a dev environment, you'll use docker-compose-yml, but in a traditional approach you'll use concrete ports to define the endpoints...
So, imagine that you have in the second service a controller that need to use TodoController, to achieve so I'll use the above aproach and the "SecondController" would look like:
public class SecondController : Controller
{
private readonly SecondContext _context;
private readonly TodoRestClient _todoRestClient;
public TodoController(SecondContext context, ITodoRestClient todoRestClient)
{
_context = context;
_todoRestClient= todoRestClient;
}
// Whatever logic in this second controller... but the usage would be like:
_todoRestClient.GetTodos()
}
Just few final hints: it's key to minimize calls between services because it increases latency, and more and more if this happens on cascade. Also consider Docker usage, looks challenging but it is quite easy to start and, indeed, is thought to be used in scenarios that the one you presented and solutions like mine.
Again, I hope it helps.
Juan