I am trying to add a user to a role in VB.net with ASP.NET identity. One idea I had in mind was trying to use the IUserRoleStore but I do not know how to use it properly. I also am not sure if I am on the right path, anyone have a clue if I am or not?
I keep getting 2 errors over and over as seen in my Screenshots, that I have provided as links. One error I get is UserId not found error aka Error 1. Keep in mind in this instance the error is raised when checking IsInRole(). The one thing that catches my eye is when looking at the stack trace I see
Microsoft.AspNet.Identity.UserManagerExtensions.IsInRole(UserManager`2 manager, TKey userId, String role) +140
I believe this could be the key to solving this problem.
And if I am able to get past that error my reworking my code or just simply only trying to AddToRole instead of checking IsInRole I get a lengthy a network-related or instance-specific error that for brevity I'll sum it up as Error 26: Error Locating Server/Instance Specified. This can be seen under Error 2.
If anyone is interested in helping me solve this, please let me know so I can post the code you need to help understand cause it is pretty lengthy.
Related
I am getting an error like All entities must be found while assigning the owner. whle googling I have found the solution from link http://social.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/6878b165-9d8d-405e-b076-b16e67c71095/assign-account-throws-crmexception-all-entities-must-be-found?forum=crmdeployment
This works fine to me but this should not be the solution. i need to do this process whenever this type of error occurs.
does any body know the solution.
do you have any idea why this type of error occurs.
I am trying to develop a standard when I code applications.
I was curious as to what other developers did when it comes to sql errors or general program errors. Do you output the error to the screen, write to a log file, or something else?
It really depends on the severity of the error.
Is it a show stopper?
Can the software automatically retry and get away with no message?
Can it be ignored?
You can log every exception, or just certain ones, or none. I have a custom Exception class which logs every exception created (of that type).
I have an unhandled exception handler which emails me when there is one.
I'd only send a message to the user when it will change the way the application works from the user's point of view.
Your question is a bit subjective and you would get opinion-based answers if the entire community bothered to answer.
If the error is relevant and important to the user (e.g.: invalid username/password) display it to the user using a message box.
If the error is relevant to the developer, or can be used in the debugging process, use a log or a console output.
The trick is to identify which and how the errors should be displayed to the user. You don't want to bombard the user with exceptions and complicated errors on which the user has no idea on how to act upon.
I am suddenly getting the error: "Unable to locate persister for the entity named 'MyLib.Project'."
I did not make any code changes to this project since the last time I published it. The reason I went into the code to look at it is because a user reported that the web page that utilizes this library was giving an error. I have also checked the eager loading of the provider as per (NHibernate - Random occurrences of "Unable to locate persister") but I am already eagerly loading.
Furthermore, I even changed my data provider configuration to:
.Mappings(Function(x) x.FluentMappings.AddFromAssemblyOf(Of Project)())
I stepped through the code and actually saw it find the Project mapping and step through it. There are no exceptions thrown while building the provider, but yet the web app still fails when I try to fetch a Project from the DB.
Update
I have tested this same exact code with a desktop application and it works perfectly fine. It seems to me the problem must be with NHibernate and the Web Application. Does anyone have any ideas about this specifically?
The answer to this, of course, is that I made a mistake.
I had two session factories in use in the same program and I passed a session from the wrong factory to one of my functions. So the error is correct, because the session it was passed was unaware of the Project type. I found this out eventually by looking at the Connection property of the session I was querying through.
Hopefully this helps someone else who may have made the same mistake.
From the tutorial session, While I was performing tutorial no 2 suddenly I face error whole I was trying to modify data formula.
The Error is [08S01] Communication link failure
I am new in scribe so, unable to understand exactly what's going on.
So many times ago I face same problem and,
the problem resolved, I just simply restart scribe, and all done...
But As I am thinking this error may be due to the error in connection to the ODBC data connection.
So, in further try to resolve it with ODBC connection.....
Generally, in software design, which of the options below is preferred when there is a problem or error with a resource such as a database or file?
Show an error message
Do not show an error message and act as though the resource was empty (eg. do not populate a GUI component)]
For example, should the user see an empty DataGrid following which they complain, or should there be an error message? Which is better?
I don't see this as an either/or. Also, we need to consider all "users" of the system.
First consider the UI. Let's consider a contrived general case: you are populating a UI by calling a service which in turn uses a couple of of databases (for example a "current data" and an "historic data") database.
There are at least these possibilities:
It all works, data is retrieved
It all works but as it happens there's no data for this particular query
Can't reach the service
Service is invoked, but one database is down
Service is invoked, but both databases are down
Then also consider your application's semantics. Can your applciation procede in a "degraded" mode if all the data cannot be retrieved? For example, we can't query the history but that doesn't stop us creating a new item.,
Now also consider the roles here. There's the person using the UI, there's also support and maintenance people who need to know about and fix problems.
My general rules:
First Failure Data capture: Whichever component first detects an error should log it in some detail. So, service up, database down the service should log the problem. Service down, the UI should log the problem. This log should be a technical record targeting the support roles.
UIs should be tolerant: if at all possible run in a degraded mode. So if the service is down but (for example) local working is possible put up an empty screen and continue. BUT ...
Always indicate a problem: The "no data for this query" and "databases unavailable" cases may both result in an empty screen. The user needs to know the status of the display, is it showing complete information, partial information (eg. because one DB is down) or is no information available (eg. service or both dbs down). So have a "Status" field somewhere on the screen. Giving messages such as
Historica Data not currently available
or
There are problems retrieveing
information, if these persist please
contact support ...
There are some pitfalls to each of the options
Showing error message
This is specially helpful when your application is in testing stage or public testing. Also when clients meets an error, he or she can copy down the details and forward to you.
However sometimes this error message gets very ugly (call stacks and so on - remember ASP.NET?) and it becomes so large that it becomes difficult for clients to copy down the details.
Do not show error message and act as though nothing happened =)
This is useful when you don't want error messages to cog up your software UI design. But be reminded that it becomes difficult and further error prone when clients can't differentiate between an actual error, or really nothing on the GUI. The error stays there and nothing gets fixed.
My stand
Get the best of both worlds. In fact most modern applications how have a very good error handling process. I'll take the example of Mozilla Firefox 3.
A deadly error occurred and Firefox crashes
Error is captured and stored into a file as a form of error report
Error Reporting Application pops up apologizing to the user
Ask the user if the user want to send the error report to the software dev team
Then ask the user if want to restart the application
Or if the error is a warning or of lesser severity:
Show a simple error code and tell the user that there's the error with that action. Something like: "Error 123 at RequestSalary() Line 2"
The practice I usualy use is:
If the error didn't happen due to user error, then you should try to handle the error quietly.
If the error occurred because of some external problem (such as no internet connection) then you should alert the user.
IMO you should show a message (albeit a user friendly one and not something like "java.io.IOException: Connection timed out".) You could have a message box telling the user that an error occured while getting the data and provide helpful tips like: Trying after some time, check network cable, etc.
Also allow user to report that error to you (error reporting build into the app) that will send you the actual error and stack trace.