I'm using WCF custom Validator with HTTPS (.NET 4.5). Validate on success returns Customer object which I would like to use later. Currently I'm able to do it with Static variables which I like to avoid if possible. I tried to use HttpContext which becomes null in main thread. My understanding Validate runs under different thread. Is there any way I could share session info without involving DB or File share. See related threads here and here.
In Authentication.cs
public class CustomValidator : UserNamePasswordValidator
{
public override void Validate(string userName, string password)
{
//If User Valid then set Customer object
}
}
In Service.cs
public class Service
{
public string SaveData(string XML)
{
//Need Customer object here. Without it cannot save XML.
//HttpContext null here.
}
}
I can suggest you an alternative approach. Assuming that the WCF service is running in ASP.Net compatibility mode and you are saving the customer object to session storage. Create a class such as AppContext
The code would look something like this
public class AppContext {
public Customer CurrentCustomer {
get {
Customer cachedCustomerDetails = HttpContext.Current.Session[CUSTOMERSESSIONKEY] as Customer;
if (cachedCustomerDetails != null)
{
return cachedCustomerDetails;
}
else
{
lock (lockObject)
{
if (HttpContext.Current.Session[CUSTOMERSESSIONKEY] != null) //Thread double entry safeguard
{
return HttpContext.Current.Session[CUSTOMERSESSIONKEY] as Customer;
}
Customer CustomerDetails = ;//Load customer details based on Logged in user using HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name
if (CustomerDetails != null)
{
HttpContext.Current.Session[CUSTOMERSESSIONKEY] = CustomerDetails;
}
return CustomerDetails;
}
}
}
}
The basic idea here is to do lazy loading of data, when both WCF and ASP.Net pipelines have executed and HTTPContext is available.
Hope it helps.
Alright this should have been easier. Since the way UserNamePasswordValidator works, I needed to use custom Authorization to pass UserName/Password to the main thread and get customer info again from the database. This is an additional DB call but acceptable workaround for now. Please download code from Rory Primrose's genius blog entry.
Related
I am quite new to ASP .NET core, so please help. I would like to avoid database round trip for ASP .NET core application. I have functionality to dynamically add columns in datagrid. Columns settings (visibility, enable, width, caption) are stored in DB.
So I would like to store List<,PersonColumns> on server only for actual session. But I am not able to do this. I already use JsonConvert methods to serialize and deserialize objects to/from session. This works for List<,Int32> or objects with simple properties, but not for complex object with nested properties.
My object I want to store to session looks like this:
[Serializable]
public class PersonColumns
{
public Int64 PersonId { get; set; }
List<ViewPersonColumns> PersonCols { get; set; }
public PersonColumns(Int64 personId)
{
this.PersonId = personId;
}
public void LoadPersonColumns(dbContext dbContext)
{
LoadPersonColumns(dbContext, null);
}
public void LoadPersonColumns(dbContext dbContext, string code)
{
PersonCols = ViewPersonColumns.GetPersonColumns(dbContext, code, PersonId);
}
public static List<ViewPersonColumns> GetFormViewColumns(SatisDbContext dbContext, string code, Int64 formId, string viewName, Int64 personId)
{
var columns = ViewPersonColumns.GetPersonColumns(dbContext, code, personId);
return columns.Where(p => p.FormId == formId && p.ObjectName == viewName).ToList();
}
}
I would like to ask also if my approach is not bad to save the list of 600 records to session? Is it better to access DB and load columns each time user wants to display the grid?
Any advice appreciated
Thanks
EDIT: I have tested to store in session List<,ViewPersonColumns> and it is correctly saved. When I save object where the List<,ViewPersonColumns> is property, then only built-in types are saved, List property is null.
The object I want to save in session
[Serializable]
public class UserManagement
{
public String PersonUserName { get; set; }
public Int64 PersonId { get; set; }
public List<ViewPersonColumns> PersonColumns { get; set; } //not saved to session??
public UserManagement() { }
public UserManagement(DbContext dbContext, string userName)
{
var person = dbContext.Person.Single(p => p.UserName == userName);
PersonUserName = person.UserName;
PersonId = person.Id;
}
/*public void PrepareUserData(DbContext dbContext)
{
LoadPersonColumns(dbContext);
}*/
public void LoadPersonColumns(DbContext dbContext)
{
LoadPersonColumns(dbContext, null);
}
public void LoadPersonColumns(DbContext dbContext, string code)
{
PersonColumns = ViewPersonColumns.GetPersonColumns(dbContext, code, PersonId);
}
public List<ViewPersonColumns> GetFormViewColumns(Int64 formId, string viewName)
{
if (PersonColumns == null)
return null;
return PersonColumns.Where(p => p.FormId == formId && p.ObjectName == viewName).ToList();
}
}
Save columns to the session
UserManagement userManagement = new UserManagement(_context, user.UserName);
userManagement.LoadPersonColumns(_context);
HttpContext.Session.SetObject("ActualPersonContext", userManagement);
HttpContext.Session.SetObject("ActualPersonColumns", userManagement.PersonColumns);
Load columns from the session
//userManagement build-in types are set. The PersonColumns is null - not correct
UserManagement userManagement = session.GetObject<UserManagement>("ActualPersonContext");
//The cols is filled from session with 600 records - correct
List<ViewPersonColumns> cols = session.GetObject<List<ViewPersonColumns>>("ActualPersonColumns");
Use list for each column is better than use database.
you can't create and store sessions in .net core like .net framework 4.0
Try Like this
Startup.cs
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
//services.AddDbContext<GeneralDBContext>(options => options.UseSqlServer(Configuration.GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection")));
services.AddMvc().AddSessionStateTempDataProvider();
services.AddSession();
}
Common/SessionExtensions.cs
sing Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http;
using Newtonsoft.Json;
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace IMAPApplication.Common
{
public static class SessionExtensions
{
public static T GetComplexData<T>(this ISession session, string key)
{
var data = session.GetString(key);
if (data == null)
{
return default(T);
}
return JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<T>(data);
}
public static void SetComplexData(this ISession session, string key, object value)
{
session.SetString(key, JsonConvert.SerializeObject(value));
}
}
}
Usage
==> Create Session*
public IActionResult Login([FromBody]LoginViewModel model)
{
LoggedUserVM user = GetUserDataById(model.userId);
//Create Session with complex object
HttpContext.Session.SetComplexData("loggerUser", user);
return Json(new { status = result.Status, message = result.Message });
}
==> Get Session data*
public IActionResult Index()
{
//Get Session data
LoggedUserVM loggedUser = HttpContext.Session.GetComplexData<LoggedUserVM>("loggerUser");
}
Hope this is helpful. Good luck.
This is an evergreen post, and even though Microsoft has recommended serialisation to store the object in session - it is not a correct solution unless your object is readonly, I have a blog explaining all scenario here and i have even pointed out the issues in GitHub of Asp.Net Core in issue id 18159
Synopsis of the problems are here:
A. Serialisation isn't same as object, true it will help in distributed server scenario but it comes with a caveat that Microsoft have failed to highlight - that it will work without any unpredictable failures only when the object is meant to be read and not to be written back.
B. If you were looking for a read-write object in the session, everytime you change the object that is read from the session after deserialisation - it needs to be written back to the session again by calling serialisation - and this alone can lead to multiple complexities as you will need to either keep track of the changes - or keep writing back to session after each change in any property. In one request to the server, you will have scenarios where the object is written back multiple times till the response is sent back.
C. For a read-write object in the session, even on a single server it will fail, as the actions of the user can trigger multiple rapid requests to the server and not more than often system will find itself in a situation where the object is being serialised or deserialised by one thread and being edited and then written back by another, the result is you will end up with overwriting the object state by threads - and even locks won't help you much since the object is not a real object but a temporary object created by deserialisation.
D. There are issues with serialising complex objects - it is not just a performance hit, it may even fail in certain scenario - especially if you have deeply nested objects that sometimes refer back to itself.
The synopsis of the solution is here, full implementation along with code is in the blog link:
First implement this as a Cache object, create one item in IMemoryCache for each unique session.
Keep the cache in sliding expiration mode, so that each time it is read it revives the expiry time - thereby keeping the objects in cache as long as the session is active.
Second point alone is not enough, you will need to implement heartbeat technique - triggering the call to session every T minus 1 min or so from the javascript. (This we anyways used to do even to keep the session alive till the user is working on the browser, so it won't be any different
Additional Recommendations
A. Make an object called SessionManager - so that all your code related to session read / write sits in one place.
B. Do not keep very high value for session time out - If you are implementing heartbeat technique, even 3 mins of session time out will be enough.
I am trying to make a web app in Sencha Touch with Springboot as my back-end. My app is going to have users and each one of them is going to have their own separate activity. How do I make my app "know" what user is logged in so it can display their specific details? I am a newbie and don't know exactly how this needs to be done, especially on the server side (Springboot). If somebody could throw some light, that would be awesome! Thanks!
Assuming you are planning to use Spring Security, the current-user data can be obtained through its principal. There are a few ways to get the principal. One way is to have a principal parameter in the controller method, and Spring will inject it. Like this:
#RequestMapping(value = "/user", method = RequestMethod.GET)
#ResponseBody
public String currentUserName(Principal principal) {
return principal;
}
Another way would be to have a utility method like this:
public static User getUser() {
Authentication auth = SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication();
if (auth != null) {
Object principal = auth.getPrincipal();
if (principal instanceof User) {
return (U) principal;
}
}
return null;
}
This can then be called from the controller method.
We have WCF services (web hosted in IIS) separatd by domains. We added some claim based security by adding ClaimsAuthorizationManager and overriding the CheckAccess method. Basicaly, we check if the ClaimsPrincipal have the permission needed to execute the method.
Inside the service method :
public DemandePaeDto ObtenirInfoDemandePAE(int idPreDemande, int numeroSequencePreDemande)
{
if (!ClaimsPrincipal.Current.CheckAccess(Management, "DoSomething"))
return null;
Inside the ClaimsAuthorizationManager :
public class FacadeClaimsAuthorizationManager : ClaimsAuthorizationManager
{
public override bool CheckAccess(AuthorizationContext context)
{
var user = context.Principal;
var resource = context.Resource.First().Value;
foreach (var action in context.Action)
{
switch (resource)
{
case "Management":
case "Sales":
case "Product":
if (user.HasClaim(OurOwnCustomClaimTypes.Permission, action.Value))
{
return true;
}
break;
//Pour les cas non gérés
default:
return false;
}
}
return false;
}
}
The problem is when we need to test the services functionalities with WCF Storm of other test tool, we don't have the claims because we set the security mode to false. So we would like to add a custom parameter to all calls. That way we'd be able to bypass by returning true in the CheckAccess method. I've think about MessageInpectors, but still am wondering if it's the right approach. I wouldn't like to add the param to the contracts, because I'd have to modify every call in the application.
Do you have a suggestion ?
You will need to use a different ClaimsAuthorizationManager for your tests. Just derive a different version and use that in your testing environment. It could return true on all call for example.
I'm running two instances of my application. In one instance, I save one of my entities. When I check the RavenDB (http://localhost:8080/raven), I can see the change. Then, in my other client, I do this (below), but I don't see the changes from the other application. What do I need to do in order to get the most recent data in the DB?
public IEnumerable<CustomVariableGroup> GetAll()
{
return Session
.Query<CustomVariableGroup>()
.Customize(x => x.WaitForNonStaleResults());
}
Edit: The code above works if I try to make a change and get a concurrency exception. After that, when I call refresh (which invokes the above code), it works.
Here is the code that does the save:
public void Save<T>(T objectToSave)
{
Guid eTag = (Guid)Session.Advanced.GetEtagFor(objectToSave);
Session.Store(objectToSave, eTag);
Session.SaveChanges();
}
And here is the class that contains the Database and Session:
public abstract class DataAccessLayerBase
{
/// <summary>
/// Gets the database.
/// </summary>
protected static DocumentStore Database { get; private set; }
/// <summary>
/// Gets the session.
/// </summary>
protected static IDocumentSession Session { get; private set; }
static DataAccessLayerBase()
{
if (Database != null) { return; }
Database = GetDatabase();
Session = GetSession();
}
private static DocumentStore GetDatabase()
{
string databaseUrl = ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["databaseUrl"];
DocumentStore documentStore = new DocumentStore();
try
{
//documentStore.ConnectionStringName = "RavenDb"; // See app.config for why this is commented.
documentStore.Url = databaseUrl;
documentStore.Initialize();
}
catch
{
documentStore.Dispose();
throw;
}
return documentStore;
}
private static IDocumentSession GetSession()
{
IDocumentSession session = Database.OpenSession();
session.Advanced.UseOptimisticConcurrency = true;
return session;
}
}
Lacking more detailed information and some code, I can only guess...
Please make sure that you call .SaveChanges() on your session. Without explicitly specifiying an ITransaction your IDocumentSession will be isolated and transactional between it's opening and the call to .SaveChanges. Either all operations succeed or none. But if you don't call it all your previous .Store calls will be lost.
If I was wrong, please post more details about your code.
EDIT: Second answer (after additional information):
Your problem has to do with the way RavenDB caches on the client-side. RavenDB by default caches every GET request throughout a DocumentSession. Plain queries are just GET queries (and no, it has nothing to do wheter your index in dynamic or manually defined upfront) and therefore they will be cached. The solution in your application is to dispose the session and open a new one.
I suggest you rethink your Session lifecycle. It seems that your sessions live too long, otherwise this concurrency wouldn't be an issue. If you're building a web-application I recommend to open and close the session with the beginning and the end of your request. Have a look at RaccoonBlog to see it implemented elegantly.
Bob,
It looks like you have but a single session in the application, which isn't right. The following article talks about NHibernate, but the session management parts applies to RavenDB as well:
http://archive.msdn.microsoft.com/mag200912NHibernate
This code is meaningless:
Guid eTag = (Guid)Session.Advanced.GetEtagFor(objectToSave);
Session.Store(objectToSave, eTag);
It basically a no op, but one that looks important. You seems to be trying to work with a model where you have to manually manage all the saves, don't do that. You only need to manage things yourself when you create a new item, that is all.
As for the reason you get this problem, here is a sample:
var session = documentStore.OpenSession();
var post1 = session.Load<Post>(1);
// change the post by another client
post2 = session.Load<Post>(1); // will NOT go to the server, will give the same instance as post1
Assert.ReferenceEquals(post1,post2);
Sessions are short lived, and typically used in the scope of a single form / request.
Greetings one and all!
I'm new to WF 4.0 and WWF in general so forgive me if this seems like a newbie type of question, but believe me I've scoured the depths of the Internet for a solution to this problem, but to no avail.
I have created a sample WF application with a custom CodeActivity that requires an extension be provided, as per below:
public sealed class PreparePizza : CodeActivity
{
public InArgument<Order> Order { get; set; }
protected override void CacheMetadata(CodeActivityMetadata metadata)
{
base.CacheMetadata(metadata);
if (this.Order == null)
metadata.AddValidationError("You must supply an Order.");
metadata.RequireExtension<IPreparePizzaExtension>();
}
// If your activity returns a value, derive from CodeActivity<TResult>
// and return the value from the Execute method.
protected override void Execute(CodeActivityContext context)
{
// Obtain the runtime value of the Text input argument
Order order = context.GetValue(this.Order);
var extension = context.GetExtension<IPreparePizzaExtension>();
extension.Prepare(order);
}
}
public interface IPreparePizzaExtension
{
void Prepare(Order order);
}
I then slot this activity into a workflow service and attempt to consume via my web app by adding a service reference. However, when I add the reference I get:
System.Activities.ValidationException: An extension of type 'PizzaMan.ActivityLibrary.IPreparePizzaExtension' must be configured in order to run this workflow.
Fair enough - of course my activity requires that I pass it an implementation of IPreparePizzaExtension - after all, I've told it to!
So my question is, how on earth do I pass this to the service? I can manage this easily enough in a console app scenario, using the WorkflowInvoker, but I cannot see any obvious way to do this via the service approach. I would assume that obviously a programmatic approach to adding the reference is what's needed, but again I'm at a loss as to precisely how to go about this.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards
Ian
The WorkflowServiceHost has a WorkflowExtensions property where you can add the workflow extenstion. There are several ways you can do that. If you are self hosting this is easy as you create the WorkflowServiceHost. If you are usign IIS you need to create a ServiceHostFactory to configure you WorkflowServiceHost. Finally there is an option to add the workflow extension in the CacheMetadata of your activity using the metadata.AddDefaultExtensionProvider() function.
Solved it as follows, self-hosting style:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Workflow1 workflow = new Workflow1();
// Provide some default values; note: these will be overriden once method on the service is called.
workflow.productID = -1;
Uri address = new Uri("http://localhost:1234/WorkflowService1");
WorkflowServiceHost host = new WorkflowServiceHost(workflow, address);
// Behaviours
host.Description.Behaviors.Add(new ServiceMetadataBehavior { HttpGetEnabled = true });
host.Description.Behaviors.Remove(typeof(ServiceDebugBehavior));
host.Description.Behaviors.Add(new ServiceDebugBehavior { IncludeExceptionDetailInFaults = true });
// Persistence
var connStr = #"";
var behavior = new SqlWorkflowInstanceStoreBehavior(connStr);
behavior.InstanceCompletionAction = InstanceCompletionAction.DeleteNothing;
behavior.InstanceLockedExceptionAction = InstanceLockedExceptionAction.AggressiveRetry;
behavior.InstanceEncodingOption = InstanceEncodingOption.None;
host.Description.Behaviors.Add(behavior);
// Add extension implementations
if (!TEST_MODE)
{
host.WorkflowExtensions.Add(new MyExtension());
}
else
{
host.WorkflowExtensions.Add(new MyExtensionTest());
}
host.Faulted += new EventHandler(host_Faulted);
host.Open();
foreach (System.ServiceModel.Description.ServiceEndpoint endpoint in host.Description.Endpoints)
{
Console.WriteLine(endpoint.Address);
}
Console.WriteLine("Listening...");
Console.ReadLine();
host.Close();
}
My toolkit has configuration support for this. See http://neovolve.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=Neovolve.Toolkit.Workflow.dll%20-%201.1
There is also this method of doing things:
http://wf.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=How%20do%20I%20add%20an%20extension%20to%20a%20WCF%20Workflow%20Service?