how to stream upload that isn't multipart in sailsjs - file-upload

I've just read through the documentation of sails-skipper. Looks like a good way of handling multipart file uploads.
However, what if I want to stream an upload of something that isn't a multipart payload? -- in my current case its a simple "text/csv" upload.
I've tried simply using request.pipe ... but this doesn't seem to work.

And the answer is ... skipper isn't going to help here. Rather, (just as in a generic express app) use middleware before skipper which sets req._body = true to fool upstream bodyParser (which is skipper by default for sails).
In my case, in config/http.js:
var typeIs = require('type-is');
module.exports.http = {
middleware: {
order: [
...
'dontParseCSV',
...
'bodyParser',
...
],
dontParseCSV: function (req, res, next) {
if(typeIs(req, 'csv')) {
// fool body parser into thinking already parsed
// so we can stream csv
req._body = true;
}
next();
},
...
}
};
The router comes after bodyParser, so it might be a bit inconvenient to do
this for just a particular route (at least if you want the router to recognize
the route and not just hack in a regexp :)). In my case, all my other routes accept only json, so it isn't a problem.

Related

Protect api routes with middleware in nextJS?

I'm new to next.js and I wanted to know if I could protect a whole API route via middleware. So for example if i wanted to protect /api/users Could I create /api/users/_middleware.ts and handle authentication in the middleware and not have to worry about authentication in the actual api endpoints? If so, how would I go about doing that? The library i'm using right now is #auth0\nextjs-auth0 so I guess it would look something like this? (Also please forgive me if I code this wrong, I am doing this in the stackoverflow editor)
export default authMiddleware(req,res)=>{
const {user,error,isLoading} = whateverTheNameOfTheAuth0HookIs()
if(user)
{
// Allow the request to the api route
}
else
{
// Deny the request with HTTP 401
}
}
Do I have the general idea correct?
next-auth v4 introduced middleware for this purpose. The basic use case is pretty simple.
You can add a middleware.js file with the following:
export { default } from "next-auth/middleware"
export const config = { matcher: ["/dashboard"] }
Other use cases can be found in the documentation
You can use middleware for that, something similar to this example from the documentation.
For a sub-directory inside pages, you can create a _middleware.ts file. It will run for all pages in this directory. It looks something like this:
import { NextRequest, NextResponse } from 'next/server'
export function middleware(req: NextRequest) {
const basicAuth = req.headers.get('authorization')
if (basicAuth) {
// do whatever checks you need here
const hasAccess = ...
if (hasAccess) {
// will render the specified page
return NextResponse.next()
}
}
// will not allow access
return new Response('No access', {
status: 401,
headers: {
'WWW-Authenticate': 'Basic realm="Secure Area"',
},
})
}
You can find more info in the documentation.

Set content-type to XHTML in static files

I want to have a route for my static files:
// server.js
app.use('/', require('./routes/ui/templates'));
The thing is that I cannot change the content-type from html->xhtml. Here's my route:
const express = require('express');
const router = express.Router();
// Path configs
const pathRoot = __dirname
const pathPublic = pathRoot + "/../../public/"
router.use('/', express.static(pathPublic));
router.get('/', (req, res) => {
console.log(pathPublic)
res.sendFile('index.html', {root: pathRoot});
})
router.use((req, res, next) => {
res.type('application/xhtml+xml');
next();
})
module.exports = router;
Note that for some reason, if I don't add the router.use(...)
my index file is not served at all. From what I understand, the middleware I've
written should be last as I am trying to capture the response and modify it.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
If you want to manage the Content-Type for specific types of files sent by express.static(), you can use the setHeaders option like this:
app.use(express.static(path.join(__dirname, "public"), {
setHeaders: function(res, path, stat) {
// if file is a .xml file, then set content-type
if (path.endsWith(".xml")) {
res.setHeader("Content-Type", "application/xhtml+xml");
}
}
}));
Some other things you may also be asking about:
Once your express.static() route matches a file, no further routing is done. The response is sent and none of the route handlers that follow will be called. So, you can't impact the content-type elsewhere with later routes.
If the request route path is /, then express.static() will look for an index.html file in the pathPublic you're passing it. If it finds it, it will send that and no further routing will happen.
res.type() does not do what you seem to be trying to use it for. You pass it a file extension and it sets the content-type according to a mime lookup for that file extension. As you can see in my code example above, you can set the content type yourself with res.setHeader("Content-Type", "application/xhtml+xml").
Try res.setHeader('content-type', 'application/xhtml+xml');

vue server side rendering and data population

Im currently refactoring an app and converting all my base code into vue. One of my requirements is to do server side rendering.
I have been follow vue ssr example along with hacker news example to help me understand ssr.
I do have however a question for which I cant find any good answer, and before further development, I want to make sure we are doing the right thing.
I want to know if its a good practice to have some actions in a vue store calling an api for server side rendering.
All the examples I have found deal with a real external endpoint they connect and perform request. But that is not the setup we have.
We do have a "normal" express app with its own endpoints; so, for example, express router looks a bit like this:
// This is our post model, it lives on the same app, so its not a external API
app.get('/posts', (req, res) => Posts.getPosts());
// Resolve request for SSR rendering, pretty much the same as in [vue ssr example](https://ssr.vuejs.org/guide/routing.html#routing-with-vue-router)
app.get(
const context = { url: req.url }
createApp(context).then(app => {
renderer.renderToString(app, (err, html) => {
if (err) {
if (err.code === 404) {
res.status(404).end('Page not found')
} else {
res.status(500).end('Internal Server Error')
}
} else {
res.end(html)
}
})
})
);
This part works fine on both client and server. If you request something to /posts you get your response back.
To have a more modular code, we are using vuex stores; being one of the actions called fetchPosts and this action is the responsible of fetching the current posts in the view.
...
actions: {
fetchPosts({ commit }) {
return $axios.get('/posts').then((response) => {
commit('setPosts', {
posts: response.data
});
});
}
},
...
I believe for client side this is good, but when rendering on the server, this is probably not optimal.
Reason being axios performing an actual http request, which will also have to implement auth mechanism, and in general, really poor performant.
My question is: is this the recommended and standard way of doing this ?
What are other possibilities that works in server and client ?
Do people actually creates separated apps for api and rendering app ?
Thanks !
I know this is an old question, but for future visitors:
The recommended way is to leverage webpack module aliases to load a server side api for the server and a client side api for the browser. You have to share the same call signature which allows the api to be "swapped".
This of course greatly improves performance as the server side api can do direct db queries instead fetching data over http.
In essence your webpack.server.config.js should have:
resolve: {
alias: {
'create-api': './create-api-server.js'
}
}
In your webpack.client.config.js:
resolve: {
alias: {
'create-api': './create-api-client.js'
}
}
Importing create-api will now load the required api.
Have a look at https://github.com/vuejs/vue-hackernews-2.0 to see a full example.

What is the difference between get/post/... and use

All:
I am new to Express 4 router.
When I tried some login/signup example, I got one question about the .use and .get/.post function:
I saw sometimes it uses:
var express = require('express');
var router = express.Router();
router.get('/hello', function(req, res, next) {
res.send("Welcome");
});
and in main app, we use it like:
app.use("/", router);
While some other time, it uses:
var express = require('express');
var router = express.Router();
//here the router uses .use() function rather than .get/.post
router.use('/hello', function(req, res, next) {
res.send("Welcome");
});
and in main app, we use it like:
app.use("/", router);
So I am wondering what is the difference between them, does the .use() just a general name for all of get/post/put/... together?
I find this post: Difference between app.use and app.get in express.js
But still not feel easy to understand this....
Thanks
In addition to what Jonathan Lonowski said in the posted link, it might help to not compare use to get and post, but to compare it to all because both all and use work regardless of the HTTP verb used while that's obviously not true for get. Everything I'm about to say applies if you replace "all" with "get", it'll just narrow that handler down to a specific HTTP verb.
So, what's the difference between all and use?
app.all will handle incoming requests at the specified URL path regardless of the HTTP verb, just as app.use does. However, how it compares the requested URL to the handler is different. For example:
var r = express.Router();
r.use('/foo', function (...) { ... }); // Route A
r.all('/bar', function (...) { ... }); // Route B
If you make a request to /foo/123 Route A will be run.
If you make a request, however, to /bar/123 Route B will NOT be run.
This is because with HTTP verbs express compares the full path, but with 'use' it only cares about the beginning of the url. Because the URL /foo/123 begins with /foo Route A will run, but because /bar/123 does not match the FULL URL, Route B will not be. Note: You could make .all behave in the same way: r.all('/bar/*', ...), but use is easier and more appropriate for this.
So, what you would tend to mount with one vs the other is different. For example:
var app = express();
var router1 = express.Router();
var router2 = express.Router();
router2.all('*', function (req, res) { ... }); // Must specify a path!
router1.use('/secondary-routes', router2); // Can't do this with all.
app.use(router1); // Look Ma, no path!
Here I've used all to handle a request coming in, where I've used use to mount an entire router. Also, note that the usage of router.METHOD functions require a URL string as the first parameter, while use does not.
At the end of the day, if you:
Want all requests that come in under a given path (or even every request) to use the specified middleware, or
Want to mount an entire sub router/application, or
Want to include a plugin into your application
... Then use is probably what you want.
If you:
Are handling a specific request at a specific URL path (i.e. probably not doing a * match in the URL)
Generally won't be calling next and will instead actually be handling the request
... Then an HTTP verb method (like get, post or all) is probably what you want.
.use is used in 2 cases, middlewares and "modular mountable route handlers".
In your example
router.use('/hello', function(req, res, next) {
res.send("Welcome");
});
This means that any requests sent to /hello will be terminated with "Welcome" and the actual .get attached to /hello will not be called.
So, in short, call use when you need to apply some general middlewares or want to do modular architecture with routers. use can be "used" as request handlers, but you shouldn't because it is not designed for that purpose

res.render for routes on page reload?

(Using MEAN with UI Router)
The following code sends a json response for the route defined. This works fine when the template is rendered with UI Router; however, if I reload the page, because the response only contains json, I am left with an empty page rendering no html, only the json response.
router.get('/posts/:post', function(req, res, next) {
req.post.populate('comments', function(err, post) {
if (err) { return next(err); }
res.json(post);
});
});
Assuming this is a standard issue, how can I best allow this page to res.render('index') when the page is reloaded and respond with the json response? Should I,
Create a separate route for the json response which is called as a post promise with UI Router
Have the /posts/:post route simply respond with res.render('index')?
Thank you for any responses, not sure what the usual practise is for such issues!
It took me a while to find a working solution to this due to many of the examples online having different directory structures. I placed a catch all at the end of my routes so that url requests to any UI Router states would not be met with a 404, but instead always return the index.html file.
app.all('/*', function(req, res, next) {
// Just send the index.html for other files to support HTML5Mode
res.sendFile('index.html', { root: __dirname });
});
Then I added prefixes to my express routes, e.g. /api/posts/:post etc. Apparently express routes should not clash with any of the angular defined routes. Thanks to NormySan on reddit for informing me about this.