I am trying to debug an issue in an asp.net core 3.1 REST API. This application has been upgraded to asp.net core 3.1 from 2.2. The asp.net core 3.1 version includes the package Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.NewtonsoftJson as it doesn't come by default. Otherwise, I don't see much difference.
The problem is that one of the endpoints shown below is working fine in 2.2 but throws an exception in 3.1.
public async Task<ActionResult<MyResponse>> ActionMethod1([FromBody] ChildClass request){
MyResponse response = new MyResponse();//Line 2
//Some code
}
ChildClass:Parent1{
public C_property1{get;set;}
public C_property2{get;set;}
public C_property3{get;set;}
}
Parent1:Parent2{
public p1_property1{get;set;}
public p1_property2{
get{ return SomeClass.Somemethod(p1_property1)//Somemethod throws an exception
}
}
}
When I debugged the issue, I noticed that the 2.2 version doesn't try to initialize the properties of Parent1. But the 3.1 version code tries to initialize the parent1 properties. This makes SomeClass.Somemethod() to be called which throws an exception. On the controller, the breakpoint doesn't even get to Line 2. It is not clear why this version behaves differently.
I thought it could be because of JSON.net deserializer settings. I tried adding the below on all the properties of parent1, it didn't work. Please suggest what could have changed here.
[JsonIgnore] [JsonProperty(Required = Required.Default)]
Related
I have this setup
Asp Core 3.1 API
Shared Lib with MyClass that is sent between API and client
Client App with Com classes
On the MyClass that is sent between them I have a field ComField that references a com class, this is only used on the client app and should not be (de)serialized, therefore I have it marked with [JsonIgnore]
class MyClass{
[JsonIgnore]
public ComThingy ComField {
get{// code here that throws the error when deserilaized on the API}
set{// code here}
}
}
When I write the API to accept the class like this, I get an error when the class is deserialized. The debugger throws the error while deserializing the MyClass, before it enters the method:
[HttpPost]
public async Task<ActionResult<MyClassReply>> Post([FromBody] MyClass myclass){
// code here
}
The API throws an exception that accessing the getter on MyClass throws an error (because that Com stuff isn't on the API).
If I deserialize manually it works fine, but then my swagger doesn't generate the whole API correctly.
[HttpPost]
public async Task<ActionResult<MyClassReply>> Post(){
// this works fine
var rdr = new StreamReader(Request.Body);
var mcj = await rdr.ReadToEndAsync();
var myclass = Newtonsoft.Json.JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<MyClass>(mcj);
// code here
}
So my question is: how come the ASP API builtin deserialization ignores the JsonIgnore attribute and still tries to deal with that property (throwing an error), and why does deserializing manually work as expected (ie ignore that property)? The default pipeline still uses NewtonSoft rght?
And how do I make the default deserialization work correctly?
Starting from ASP.NET Core 3.0, the default JSON serializer is System.Text.Json, and not Newtonsoft.Json. You need to call .AddNewtonsoftJson() in your Startup.cs to use it (see for example this answer).
Your issue might simply be that you're not using the proper JsonIgnore attribute. Both serializers have the same named attribute:
System.Text.Json.Serialization.JsonIgnoreAttribute
Newtonsoft.Json.JsonIgnoreAttribute
Maybe your using statement are importing the Newtonsoft.Json one instead of the System.Text.Json one?
I'm in the process of converting an ASP.NET MVC3 (LinqToSQL, EntityFramework) project to MVC4. I've created a fresh MVC4 project in VS2012, added packages, copied my Views, Controllers, etc.
Most things seem to work fine except when I try to access a controller that makes use of a Respository, as follows:
public class CustomerController : Controller
{
private ICustomerRepository _cr;
public CustomerController()
{
this._cr = new CustomerRepository(TTDataProvider.DB);
}
public CustomerController(ICustomerRepository customerRepository)
{
this._cr = customerRepository;
}
if I'm in VS2012 and debugging, what I'll get is an exception: "Activation error occured while trying to get instance of type CustomerController, key """. The exception is of type Microsoft.Practices.ServiceLocation.Activation and the Inner Exception is: "StructureMap Exception Code: 202\nNo Default Instance defined for PluginFamily TTLW.Models.TTLWDataContext, TTLW, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null"}.
My IoC code is:
using StructureMap;
using FluentSecurity;
using System.Diagnostics;
namespace TTLW {
public static class IoC {
public static IContainer Initialize() {
ObjectFactory.Initialize(x =>
{
x.Scan(scan =>
{
scan.TheCallingAssembly();
scan.WithDefaultConventions();
scan.AddAllTypesOf<IPolicyViolationHandler>();
});
});
return ObjectFactory.Container;
}
}
}
And here's StructureMapMVC.cs
using System.Web.Http;
using System.Web.Mvc;
using StructureMap;
using TTLW.DependencyResolution;
[assembly: WebActivator.PreApplicationStartMethod(typeof(TTLW.App_Start.StructuremapMvc), "Start")]
namespace TTLW.App_Start {
public static class StructuremapMvc {
public static void Start() {
IContainer container = IoC.Initialize();
DependencyResolver.SetResolver(new StructureMapDependencyResolver(container));
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.DependencyResolver = DependencyResolver.Current.ToServiceResolver();
}
}
}
As I say, this was all working without problems in my MVC3 application (although I was of course using the MVC3 version of StructureMap).
Once I hit the exception, if I just choose to continue then everything works (i.e. the controller functions); this is confirmed by choosing "Start Without Debugging" instead of "Debug". When I do that there is no exception thrown and things work as designed.
I've searched and come across posts from Phil Haack, Brett Allred and others (in fact I've already incorporated Allred's code in the last line of StructureMapMVC) but haven't found a solution. I can't consider the project converted as long as this exception is staring me in the face.
I've included all the code and messages I think are reasonable and would appreciate any insights. If you need to see more just let me know.
Thanks in advance.
I am migrating a project that was developed using WebApi Preview 5 (when it was part of WCF) to the final release of WebApi (part of MVC4). There is a document describing the process but it is extremely simplistic and doesn't cover most of the issues.
Now one of the issues I am facing is that a GlobalErrorHandler was created by inheriting from HttpErrorHandler and then overriding OnTryProvideResponse and that was used to hook error handling with Elmah. Now that was registered on AppStart with a line like this:
var configuration = new WebApiConfiguration();
//some other configuration for security and CreateInstance
configuration.ErrorHandlers =
(handlers, endpoint, description) => handlers.Add(new GlobalErrorHandler())
};
//then some registration
RouteTable.Routes.MapServiceRoute<SomeObject>("routeName", configuration);
and then mapping different route to this configuration. All this code doesn't work in the new world of MVC4 WebApi, it seems like there is a conflict between HttpErrorHandler and it can't even implement its members properly.
Now I've seen general posts about how to register Elmah with WebApi but I am trying to stick to the original code as much as possible and I am assuming - may be I am wrong - that there is a direct equivalent to what Microsoft had in the Preview version and what they released in the final one. So my questions:
What is the equivalent of this Global Error handling registation in ASP.NET MVC4 WebApi?
Do I need to do the configuration the same way it is done here (default webapi samples project doesn't seem to have similar code)
What is the equivalent of that route registration line of code: RouteTable.Routes.MapServiceRoute("routeName", configuration);
If you create a quick one-off WebApi MVC project in Visual Studio you will see an App_Start folder which contains some classes which have static methods for handling the registration, specifically:
FilterConfig.cs
WebApiConfig.cs
WebApi Config is where you need to register routes etc...
public static class WebApiConfig
{
public static void Register(HttpConfiguration config)
{
config.Routes.MapHttpRoute(
name: "DefaultApi",
routeTemplate: "api/{controller}/{id}",
defaults: new { id = RouteParameter.Optional }
);
}
}
Filter config is what you need to handle your global errors... Filter config has a default error handler attribute added which you can swap out or out
public class FilterConfig
{
public static void RegisterGlobalFilters(GlobalFilterCollection filters)
{
filters.Add(new HandleErrorAttribute());
}
}
Global.asax calls these static registration scripts like so:
protected void Application_Start()
{
WebApiConfig.Register(GlobalConfiguration.Configuration);
FilterConfig.RegisterGlobalFilters(GlobalFilters.Filters);
}
In regard to Elmah it appears simplying including the Nuget package will register it...
Look for the package Elmah.Mvc
PM> Install-Package Elmah.MVC
it used to be like this How to get ELMAH to work with ASP.NET MVC [HandleError] attribute? but now according to this blog it has changed:
HandleErrorAttribute inside If you tried to use ELMAH in ASP.NET MVC,
you are probably implemented your own HandleErrorAttribute, as it's
shown in this example. You no longer need to apply this custom code
with Elmah.MVC. As soon you installed package, so can safely remove
your HandleError attribute, since it's already included into package.
This now appears to register itself in the Web.Config as a managedHandler so your code does not need to reference Elmah directly.
My current setup is using Ninject for simple IoC, everything goes fine, but I'm not able to resolve one of the classes I need inside my AuthorizeAttribute. I need to access a class that does ClaimsVerification:
Here's my code:
IoC Config:
var kernel = new StandardKernel(); // Ninject IoC
// These registrations are "per instance request".
// See http://blog.bobcravens.com/2010/03/ninject-life-cycle-management-or-scoping/
kernel.Bind<RepositoryFactories>().To<RepositoryFactories>()
.InSingletonScope();
kernel.Bind<IRepositoryProvider>().To<RepositoryProvider>();
kernel.Bind<ISmartDocumentorUow>().To<SmartDocumentorUow>();
kernel.Bind<IClaimsVerification>().To<ClaimsVerification>();
// kernel
//kernel.BindFilter<MyAuthorizeAttribute>(FilterScope.Controller, 0).WhenControllerHas<RequireRolesAttribute>();
// Tell WebApi how to use our Ninject IoC
config.DependencyResolver = new NinjectDependencyResolver(kernel);
MyAuthorizeAttribute:
public class MyAuthorizeAttribute : AuthorizeAttribute
{
[Inject]
IClaimsVerification clamisverify { get; set; }
public MyAuthorizeAttribute()
{
//var x = System.Web.Mvc.DependencyResolver.Current.(typeof(IClaimsVerification));
}
Yap, sorry, the problem was injecting the iClaimsverification that isn't working in web api..
I tryed with the public property and still it didn't work.
the bindfilter is commented out, because it doesn't exist in the core NInject api (dll), it does exists in the MVC dll of ninject but it works for Action filters in the web mvc, and not in the api mvc for what i can tell..
i do solved the issue like this, though i don't like a lot of this fix:
private IClaimsVerification verifier
{
get
{
return (GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.DependencyResolver.GetService(typeof(IClaimsVerification)) as IClaimsVerification);
}
}
The property you have marked with Inject is private - you need to initialize Ninject with a custom configuration to opt into what would be a much less efficient process
(You didnt state the problem in your question. I see you were trying BindFilter, but it's commented out (why?) - this is the correct approach. I recommend reading the Ninject.MVC3 wiki article on BindFilter for an example)
I recently came across this article titled:
Linq to Sql and ASP.NET MVC – DataContext Per Request
at this link:
http://www.jeremyskinner.co.uk/2010/01/31/linq-to-sql-and-asp-net-mvc-datacontext-per-request/
I would like to set this up using ninject rather than structuremap preferably using the new mvc 3 dependency resolver as I'm using mvc 3 rtm.
The relevant part of the article is this:
Firstly, you’ll need to configure StructureMap by calling ObjectFactory.Configure inside your Global.asax passing in a custom Registry instance:
protected void Application_Start() {
RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);
ObjectFactory.Configure(cfg => {
cfg.AddRegistry(new MyRegistry());
});
}
The code for MyRegistry looks like this:
public class MyRegistry : Registry {
public MyRegistry() {
For<BlogDataContext>()
.HttpContextScoped()
.Use(c => new BlogDataContext());
Scan(scan => {
scan.AddAllTypesOf<Controller>();
});
}
}
Here I’m telling StructureMap to create one instance of my BlogDataContext per HTTP Request as well as registering each Controller instance with the container.
Next, we need to tell MVC to use StructureMap to instantiate our controllers. This can be done by creating a custom ControllerFactory:
public class StructureMapControllerFactory : DefaultControllerFactory {
protected override IController GetControllerInstance(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) {
return (IController) ObjectFactory.GetInstance(controllerType);
}
}
We can then replace the DefaultControllerFactory with the StructureMapControllerFactory in our Application_Start:
protected void Application_Start() {
RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);
ObjectFactory.Configure(cfg => {
cfg.AddRegistry(new MyRegistry());
});
ControllerBuilder.Current.SetControllerFactory(
new StructureMapControllerFactory());
}
I would like to do the same thing with ninject 2.0 rather than structure map. I'm building an mvc 3 site with ninject mvc3. I downloaded the ninject mvc 3 package from nuget and I have this file in my solution which handles wiring up ninject.
AppStart_NinjectMVC3.cs
I do not want to use structurmap and I know the same setup can be done with ninject, but I'm unsure how to wire it up.
Thank you.
I'd rather use the official mvc3 extension from the ninject project found at https://github.com/ninject/ninject.web.mvc. It comes with a full example application showing how to wire up an mvc3 application.