I am getting the error below when I call my WCF service. What am I missing here?
'System.String[]' with data contract name
'ArrayOfstring:http://schemas.microsoft.com/2003/10/Serialization/Arrays'
is not expected. Add any types not known statically to the list of known
types - for example, by using the KnownTypeAttribute attribute or by adding
them to the list of known types passed to DataContractSerializer.'. Please
see InnerException for more details.
{"There was an error while trying to serialize parameter
http://tempuri.org/:myEntity. The InnerException message was
'Type 'System.String[]' with data contract name
'ArrayOfstring:http://schemas.microsoft.com/2003/10/Serialization/Arrays'
is not expected. Add any types not known statically to the list of known
types - for example, by using the KnownTypeAttribute attribute or by adding
them to the list of known types passed to DataContractSerializer.'.
Please see InnerException for more details."}
From what I gather, you have a WCF function that has a parameter named 'myEntity'. I'm assuming that the type of myEntity is a user-defined class and is adorned with the DataContract attribute, as it should be. I'm also assuming that the type of myEntity has a member field that is a string array. Let's assume that all of this is true (again, it'd be really helpful if you could post your code).
Ordinarily, string arrays, i.e., string[], will serialize just fine. But, in some cases (see here and here), you may have to add it to the list of known types in order for WCF to serialize everything correctly.
To do this, add the following:
[DataContract]
[KnownType(typeof(string[]))]
public class YourClassNameHere
{
}
You haven't posted the code, so my answer is based on the assumption that you have a class myEntity which you are trying to serialize. Try using a KnownTypeAttribute for the class
e.g.
[KnownType(typeof(myEntity))]
You can refer to the following MSDN link:
KnownTypeAttribute
Yes. As explained in the previous post, The issue occurs if you pass an array of a Type(which is defined as a DataContract]). you will need to define the array of this class as a seperate type and mark it as data contract.
Wont Work`
[DataContract]
Public class ABC{
}
...
SendData(ABC[])
`
What will work:
Public class Data{ public ABC[] prop{get;set;}}
...
SendData(Data);
In my case, after adding [Serializable] attribute to the MyEntity class. And then the issue came with serialization of the roles string array.
[Serializable]
[KnownType(typeof(string[]))]
public class MyEntity
{
.........
public string roles[]
.........
}
[KnownType(typeof(string[]))] worked like magic!
Related
I have a ServiceContract which returns dynamic type and looks like following:
public dynamic LoginViaOpenId(string openIdUrl)
The dynamic return type could be a DataContract that I have defined, or a string. But since I have not used my DataContract on the service, client does not know anything about it and cannot access it.
My DataContract is something like below:
[DataContract]
public enum OpenIdStatus
{
[EnumMember]
Authenticated,
[EnumMember]
Authenticating,
[EnumMember]
Cancelled,
[EnumMember]
Failed,
[EnumMember]
RedirectToLogon
}
I know if I had hierarchical types I could have used KnownType to conquer this, but am out of idea for this scenario.
Any idea?
A dynamic DataContract is an oxymoron. A DataContract is a predetermined and mutually agreed-upon data structure, and dynamic is an object whose structure is not predetermined and thus cannot be agreed-upon, since it can be anything.
It doesn’t appear you actually need to return a dynamic data type, but rather a varying data type. The difference is that a varying data type is one of a set of fixed data types, whereas a dynamic data type is one which does not have a predetermined structure. Since your return value is one of several knows shapes, there is no need to use the "shapeless" (or "freeform") dynamic type, which isn't supported by WCF.
Instead, you could have the [OperationContract] method return a type with a [DataContract] that will act as a wrapper object that has a single data member of type object, and use [KnownType] on the wrapper object to specify the possible types that may be returned inside the wrapper. Since everything inherits from object, there is already a hierarchy in place.
[DataContract]
[KnownType(typeof(OpenIdStatus))]
[KnownType(typeof(string))]
public class ReturnValue
{
[DataMember]
public object Value { get; set; }
}
I think that WCF is going to have issues serializing / deserializing your dynamic type. I would recommend that you set up a contract for the method return based on a defined interface. Alternatively, you could take responsibility for the serialization yourself and make your service return a string. The client will have to have knowledge of what type to de-serialize the string to. There is a similar question on this here:-
How to return dynamic List from WCF HTTP Service
Here is the Method signature in the WCF service:
APIMessageList<APISimpleContact> GetMembers(string apiKey, APIContactSearchFilter filter);
APIMessageList inherits from IList. Once I have built a proxy against this WCF service the class name is APIMessageListOfAPISimpleContactjHldnYZV.
Why do I not get: APIMessageListOfAPISimpleContact?
It adds random text to the end of every APIMessageList object in the interface (there are several) They all end with the same few chars - jHldnYZV. I have looked online for possible causes, but I can't find any posts of people having this problem.
This is a purely cosmetic issue but this interface is exposed to our external customers so its appearance is important.
Anybody know why I am getting this problem?
Many thanks
Joe
Your solution will be at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms731045.aspx. Basically, since you could have multiple "SimpleContract" classes (in different namespaces), WCF will add a disambiguation hash to the end of the contract name, which is what you have in the 8 chars at the end of the contract name. But you can control that, by using the CollectionDataContract and its Name property:
[CollectionDataContract(Name = "APIMessageListOfSimpleContract")]
public class APIMessageList : IList<SimpleContract> { ... }
We had a similar problem while using Generic types for return values. If we are not specifying a concrete type, the default data contract serializer or the WCF serializer is unable to infer the exact type of the returned entity. Hence it generates a random class name for the returned type.
In our project we overcame this problem by building a data contract which was of specific type and returned the same as a result of a WCF operation call.
My guess is that you are using a generic type and the serializer is unable to infer the type of the returned object.
I suggest you create a Data Transfer Object (DTO) and return the same from the WCF service. That should solve your problem.
In my Google Web Toolkit project, I got the following error:
com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationException: Type ‘your.class.Type’ was not included in the set of types which can be serialized by this SerializationPolicy or its Class object could not be loaded. For security purposes, this type will not be serialized.
What are the possible causes of this error?
GWT keeps track of a set of types which can be serialized and sent to the client. your.class.Type apparently was not on this list. Lists like this are stored in .gwt.rpc files. These lists are generated, so editing these lists is probably useless. How these lists are generated is a bit unclear, but you can try the following things:
Make sure your.class.Type implements java.io.Serializable
Make sure your.class.Type has a public no-args constructor
Make sure the members of your.class.Type do the same
Check if your program does not contain collections of a non-serializable type, e.g. ArrayList<Object>. If such a collection contains your.class.Type and is serialized, this error will occur.
Make your.class.Type implement IsSerializable. This marker interface was specifically meant for classes that should be sent to the client. This didn't work for me, but my class also implemented Serializable, so maybe both interfaces don't work well together.
Another option is to create a dummy class with your.class.Type as a member, and add a method to your RPC interface that gets and returns the dummy. This forces the GWT compiler to add the dummy class and its members to the serialization whitelist.
I'll also add that if you want to use a nested class, use a static member class.
I.e.,
public class Pojo {
public static class Insider {
}
}
Nonstatic member classes get the SerializationException in GWT 2.4
I had the same issue in a RemoteService like this
public List<X> getX(...);
where X is an interface. The only implementation did conform to the rules, i.e. implements Serializable or IsSerializable, has a default constructor, and all its (non-transient and non-final) fields follow those rules as well.
But I kept getting that SerializationException until I changed the result type from List to X[], so
public X[] getX(...);
worked. Interestingly, the only argument being a List, Y being an interface, was no problem at all...
I have run into this problem, and if you per chance are using JPA or Hibernate, this can be a result of trying to return the query object and not creating a new object and copying your relavant fields into that new object. Check the following out, which I saw in a google group.
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
public static List<Article> getForUser(User user)
{
List<Article> articles = null;
PersistenceManager pm = PMF.get().getPersistenceManager();
try
{
Query query = pm.newQuery(Article.class);
query.setFilter("email == emailParam");
query.setOrdering("timeStamp desc");
query.declareParameters("String emailParam");
List<Article> results = (List<Article>) query.execute(user.getEmail
());
articles = new ArrayList<Article>();
for (Article a : results)
{
a.getEmail();
articles.add(a);
}
}
finally
{
pm.close();
}
return articles;
}
this helped me out a lot, hopefully it points others in the right direction.
Looks like this question is very similar to what IsSerializable or not in GWT?, see more links to related documentation there.
When your class has JDO annotations, then this fixed it for me (in addition to the points in bspoel's answer) : https://stackoverflow.com/a/4826778/1099376
I've got several data contract classes like this:
[DataContract]
public class FooData
{
[DataMember]
public string Name;
// ... many more members
public FooData (string name) // again, many more arguments
{
Name = name;
// ...
}
}
Since FooData is always used to transport Foo objects over the wire, I'd like to add an constructor that takes a Foo object and sets all fields accordingly instead of doing it manually (new FooData (myFoo.Name)).
However, this would require the user of FooData to include the Foo type, which is supposed to be internal to the server. Ordinarily, this issue would be solved by making the constructor taking the Foo internal, but in my case FooData is in a different assembly than Foo.
How should I deal with this? My thoughts so far include using an interface instead of a class to transport data as well, or using an "extension constructor". Any better ideas?
Including the Foo type on the constructor should not be a problem as long as you don't expose that type in a public property marked with DataMember. WCF will take care of serializing only the properties marked with DataMember, so you can internally use your server types in the data contract. However, the client will not able to see that constructor that receives the "Foo" type, so it will have to set all the data in the contract manually
Thanks
Pablo.
I'm trying to transfer some user information in the header of the message through message inspectors.
I have created a behavior which adds the inspector to the service (both client and server).
But when I try to communicate with the service I get the following error:
XmlException:
Name cannot begin with the '<' character, hexadecimal value 0x3C.
I have also get exception telling me that DataContracts where unexpected.
Type
'System.DelegateSerializationHolder+DelegateEntry'
with data contract name
'DelegateSerializationHolder.DelegateEntry:http://schemas.datacontract.org/2004/07/System'
is not expected. Consider using a
DataContractResolver or add any types
not known statically to the list of
known types - for example, by using
the KnownTypeAttribute attribute or by
adding them to the list of known types
passed to DataContractSerializer.
The thing is that my object contains other objects which are marked as DataContract and I'm not interested adding the KnownType attribute for those types.
Another problem might be that my object to serialize is very restricted in form of internal class and internal properties etc.
Can anyone guide me in the right direction. What I'm I doing wrong?
Some code:
public virtual object BeforeSendRequest(ref Message request, IClientChannel channel)
{
var header = MessageHeader.CreateHeader("<name>", "<namespace>", object);
request.Headers.Add(header);
return Guid.NewGuid();
}
Don't put the angle brackets into the actual strings. Remember, the serialization format may not even be text based, all you're doing is specifying the name of the element and the namespace. So your code should look more like this:
var header = MessageHeader.CreateHeader("name", "urn:myNamespace", object);
request.Headers.Add(header);
To close this question, I never solved the exception. Instead I implementated ISerializable which worked great for me.