We Keep Coding

Controller accepting different models

I want to accept different model type from body based on query param value.
Example:
[HttpGet]
[Route("GetSystemdetails")]
public string Getdeatils([FromBody] SystemDetail sysdetails, string type)
{
//some code here
string details = getdetails(sysdetails);
}
// abc model
public class abc
{
public int UserID { get; set; }
public string Email { get; set; }
}
//xyz model
public class xyz
{
public int xyzid { get; set; }
public string systemval { get; set; }
public string snum { get; set; }
}
type abc and xyz will have it's own model. So based on type I receive in query param I wanted to pick the model and proceed.
Sample url:
localhost/GetSystemdetails/type=abc
localhost/GetSystemdetails/type=xyz
I thought of creating a new model SystemDetail which holds these two models(xyz and abc) and based on system pick them.
I wanted to know what are possible ways to achieve this kind of requirements without creating multiple methods in controller(I don't want to change the format of the URL).

That's not something that's supported out of the box. Your linked solution is probably the closest you'll get to that.
ASP.NET Core is not supposed to take values of the parameters into account when routing, except for validation.

There are several possible ways to do so
Having multiple model objects
As in the link you provided, you can declare multiple model objects. The site has given the example of
public class PostUserGCM
{
public User User { get; set; }
public GCM GCM { get; set; }
}
but you can use your own examples.
Base model
Your models can inherit from some base model. If you only need a single model at a time and they share some similarities, then you could just create a base model which the other two are inheriting from, be agnostic at implementation time and your use cases will mainly differ on instantiation inside the controller, while some service methods could handle other differences.

REST API Best practice for handling junction data

I am working on a service oriented architecture. I have 3 tables Meeting, Stakeholder and MeetingStakeholder (a junction table).
A simple representation of POCO classes for all 3 tables:
public class Meeting
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public IList<MeetingStakeholder> MeetingStakeholders { get; set; }
}
public class Stakeholder
{
public int Id { get; set; }
}
public class MeetingStakeholder
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int MeetingId { get; set; }
public Meeting Meeting { get; set; }
public int StakeholderId { get; set; }
public Stakeholder Stakeholder { get; set; }
}
A simple representation of Meeting Dto:
public class MeetingDto
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public IList<int> StakeholderIds { get; set; }
}
In PUT action,
PUT: api/meetings/1
First I removes all existing records from MeetingStakeholder (junction table) then prepares new List<MeetingStakeholder> meetingStakeholders using meetingDto.StakeholderIds and create it.
{
List<MeetingStakeholder> existingMeetingStakeholders = _unitOfWork.MeetingStakeholderRepository.Where(x=> x.MeetingId == meetingDto.Id);
_unitOfWork.MeetingStakeholderRepository.RemoveRange(existingMeetingStakeholders);
List<MeetingStakeholder> meetingStakeholders = ... ;
_unitOfWork.MeetingRepository.Update(meeting);
_unitOfWork.MeetingStakeholderRepository.CreateRange(meetingStakeholders);
_unitOfWork.SaveChanges();
return OK(meetingDto);
}
Everything is fine to me. But my architect told me that i am doing wrong thing.
He said, in PUT action (according to SRP) I should not be removing and re-creating MeetingStakeholder records, I should be responsible for updating meeting object only.
According to him, MeetingStakeholderIds (array of integers) should be send in request body to these routes.
For assigning new stakeholders to meeting.
POST: api/meetings/1/stakeholders
For removing existing stakeholders from meeting.
Delete: api/meetings/1/stakeholders
But the problem is, In meeting edit screen my front-end developer uses multi-select for Stakeholders. He will need to maintain two Arrays of integers.
First Array for those stakeholders Ids which end-user unselect from multi-select.
Second Array for new newly selected stakeholders Ids.
Then he will send these two arrays to their respective routes as I mentioned above.
If my architect is right then I have no problem but how should my front-end developer handle stakeholders selection in edit screen?
One thing I want to clarify that my junction table is very simple, it does not contain additional columns other than MeetingId and StakeholderId ( a very basic junction). So in this scenario, does it make sense to create separate POST/DELETE actions on "api/meetings/1/stakeholders" that receives StakeholderIds (list of integers) instead of receiving StakeholderIds directly in MeetingDto??

First of all, if I am not mistaken:
you have a resource: "Meeting";
you want to update the said resource (using HTTP/PUT).
So updating a meeting by requesting a PUT on "/api/meetings/:id" seems fairly simple, concise, direct and clear. All good traits for designing a good interface. And it still respects the Single Responsibility Principle: You are updating a resource"
Nonetheless, I also agree with you architect in providing, in addition to the previous method, POST/Delete actions on "api/meetings/1/stakeholders" if the requisites justify so. We should be pragmatic at some level not to overengineer something that isn't required to.
Now if your architect just said that because of HOW IT IS PERSISTED, then he is wrong. Interfaces should be clear to the end user (frontend today, another service or app tomorrow ...), but most importantly, in this case, ignorant of its persistence or any implementation for that matter.
Your api should focus on your domain and your business rules, not on how you store the information.
This is just my view. If someone does not agree with me I would like to be called out and so both could grow and learn together.
:) Hope I Could be of some help. Cheers

Issue with lambda expressions in c# data retrieval

i'm writing a system to track observation values from sensors (e.g. temperature, wind direction and speed) at different sites. I'm writing it in C# (within VS2015) using a code-first approach. Although i've a reasonable amount of programming experience, I'm relatively new to C# and the code-first approach.
I've defined my classes as below. I've built a REST api to accept observation reading through Post, which has driven my desire to have Sensor keyed by a string rather than an integer - Some sensors have their own unique identifier built in. Otherwise, i'm trying to follow the Microsoft Contoso university example (instructors - courses- enrolments).
What I am trying to achieve is a page for a specific site with a list of the sensors at the site, and their readings. Eventually this page will present the data in graphical form. But for now, i'm just after the raw data.
public class Site
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public ICollection<Sensor> Sensors { get; set; }
}
public class Sensor
{
[Key]
public string SensorName { get; set; }
public int SensorTypeId { get; set; }
public int SiteId { get; set; }
public ICollection<Observation> Observations { get; set; }
}
public class Observation
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string SensorName { get; set; }
public float ObsValue { get; set; }
public DateTime ObsDateTime { get; set; }
}
and I've created a View Model for the page I'm going to use...
public class SiteDataViewModel
{
public Site Site { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<Sensor> Sensors { get; set;}
public IEnumerable<Observation> Observations { get; set; }
}
and then i try to join up the 3 classes into that View Model in the SiteController.cs...
public actionresult Details()
var viewModel.Site = _context.Sites
.Include(i => i.Sensors.select(c => c.Observations));
i used to get an error about "cannot convert lambda expression to type string", but then I included "using System.Data.Entity;" and the error has changed to two errors... on the 'include', I get "cannot resolve method 'include(lambda expression)'...". And on the 'select' i get "Icollection does not include a definition for select..."
There's probably all sorts of nastiness going on, but if someone could explain where the errors are (and more importantly why they are errors), then I'd be extremely grateful.

Simply you can you use like
viewModel.Site = _context.Sites
.Include("Sensors).Include("Sensors.Observations");
Hope this helps.

The way your ViewModel is setup, you're going to have 3 unrelated sets of data. Sites, sensors, and observations. Sites will have no inherent relation to sensors -- you'll have to manually match them on the foreign key. Realistically, your ViewModel should just be a list of Sites. You want to do
#Model.Sites[0].Sensors[0].Observations[0]
not something convoluted like
var site = #Model.Sites[0]; var sensor = #Model.Sensors.Where(s => SiteId == site.Id).Single(); etc...
Try doing
viewModel.Site = _context.Sites.Include("Sensors.Observations").ToList();
Eager-loading multiple levels of EF Relations can be accomplished in just one line.
One of the errors you reported receiving, by the way, is because you're using 'select' instead of 'Select'
And lastly, be aware that eager-loading like this can produce a huge amount of in-memory data. Consider splitting up your calls for each relation, such that you display a list of Sensors, and clicking, say, a dropdown will call an API that retrieves a list of Sites, etc. This is a bit more streamlined, and it prevents you from getting held up because your page is loading so much information.
Update
I've created a sample application for you that you can browse and look through. Data is populated in the Startup.Configure method, and retrieved in the About.cshtml.cs file and the About.cshtml page.. This produces this page, which is what you're looking for I believe.

How do I design a specific super class

I am trying to refactor a solution to bring on board another project.
I have a Core project where common classes across projects reside.
I've tried to simpify my question by using 2 imaginary projects: Holidays and Weather...
I have a file load process setup for the Holidays project which has the following 2 classes:
public class Job
{
public virtual string CreatedBy { get; set; }
public virtual DateTime? CreatedDate { get; set; }
public virtual Security Security { get; set; }
protected IList<File> _files = new List<File>();
public virtual IEnumerable<File> Files
{
get { return _files; }
}
}
public class File
{
public virtual string FileName { get; set; }
public virtual FileType FileType { get; set; }
public virtual FileStatusType FileStatusType { get; set; }
public virtual Job Job { get; set; }
}
The file load process for the Weather project has exactly the same structure as Holidays, except that the Jobs class does not have a Security property.
My question is, is it possible to somehow move both classes into the Core project to allow both projects to use them?
Obviously Weather does not need the Security property, so I was thinking I would have a Core.Job class without Security, and then extend the Core.Job in Holidays.Job.
But once I do that, in the Core.File class, what Job is it referring to? As it sits in the Core project it must be the Core.Job.
So would I then need to have Job and File sit in Holidays, and Weather (and any other future projects) use the Core.Job and Core.File?
I don't want the Core project to have any references to sub projects.
I am using NHibernate, and so have mapping files - adding to the complexity.
Hope this is clear enough
Thanks

You can certainly do this, but I am not sure whether it brings you true benefit:
Does the Core itself work with the base Job in any way? If it does not, implementing Job separately in each project may help you keep coupling loose, even though I'd a little redundant. In code I wrote, I have sometimes introduced unnecessary dependencies by extracting interfaces without adding true benefit. This is why I am a bit precautious.
In case Core does acutal work with it, the part to refactor into the common base Job is perhaps the interface it works with.
You may think of an interface instead of a base class. Security may semantically belong to another interface. Moreover, you hand over a lot of control over your classes to the Core.
Do you ever hand a job from one project to another (or are they mapped to the same DB table via NHibernate?)? If you don't, an internal redundant class may be fine too.

Not very clear why confuse on the soluton offered by you (assuming that I right understood you)
//Core DLL
public class Job
{
public virtual string CreatedBy { get; set; }
public virtual DateTime? CreatedDate { get; set; }
protected IList<File> _files = new List<File>();
public virtual IEnumerable<File> Files
{
get { return _files; }
}
}
in the Hollidays you have
public class HollidayJob : Job
{
public virtual Security Security { get; set; }
}
in Weather simply use a type Job, if it selfsufficient.
In this case you refer CoreDLL from Holliday project and Weather. When you serialize it via NHibernate it for HollidayJob save one field more, but when Weather reads the same table it skips that field, as don't know anything, and don't actually care abotu it.
Hope this helps.

ASP.NET MVC 2 and AutoMapper - dissecting and mapping uploaded file info with AutoMapper

This is the 3rd major edit to this question, so I'm going to write a quick little summary first, then ask the question.
I have an input/edit model I'm planning on using with an EF4-backed MVC 2 site. The model is as follows:
public class AdminGameEditModel
{
[Required]
public int GameID { get; set; }
[Required(ErrorMessage="A game must have a title")]
public string GameTitle { get; set; }
[Required(ErrorMessage="A short URL must be supplied")]
public string ShortURL { get; set; }
[Required(ErrorMessage="A box art image must be supplied")]
public HttpPostedFileBase BoxArt { get; set; }
[Required(ErrorMessage="A large image for the index page is required")]
public HttpPostedFileBase IndexImage { get; set; }
[Required(ErrorMessage="A game must have a review")]
public string ReviewText { get; set; }
[Required(ErrorMessage="A game must have a score")]
public int ReviewScore { get; set; }
[Required(ErrorMessage="A game must have at least one Pro listed")]
public string[] Pros { get; set; }
[Required(ErrorMessage="A game must have at least one Con listed")]
public string[] Cons { get; set; }
[Required(ErrorMessage="A game must belong to a genre")]
public int GenreID { get; set; }
[Required(ErrorMessage="A game must be associated with at least one platform")]
public int[] PlatformIDs { get; set; }
}
I'd like to map it to a Game entity for creation/updating. There's a snag, though - I need to save the images in a particular folder, and then take their paths and save those as properties in my entity. So, an example for clarity's sake: rather than my Game entity having a actual BoxArt image, it would instead have the path to the correct BoxArt image. I hope this makes sense. Let me know if I need to clarify.
Can I do this with AutoMapper? If so, can anyone provide some code guidance?
EDIT:
Part of the problem is that my model is fairly complex, as it contains a many-to-many relationship. The PlatformIDs are ultimately used to build/rebuild (depending whether I'm creating or updating an entity) linked Platform entities in the Game/Platform map. I'm not sure if AutoMapper can do something that complex without needing to go through my repository.
Then there's the problem of the image paths. The paths aren't a property of HttpPostedFileBase, but must be constructed by hand like so:
if (BoxArt.ContentLength > 0) {
var fileName = Path.GetFileName(BoxArt.FileName);
var path = Path.Combine(Server.MapPath("~/Content/Images/BoxArt"), fileName);
BoxArt.SaveAs(path);
}
So, what I'm looking for is more complex than just trying to map simple properties across objects. I'd like to keep a reference to my edit model out of my repository. Separation of concerns, and all that. Because of that, I need to map to an entity before I attempt to pass it to my repo for saving. I'm just not sure how to do it without blending app layers.

If I understand you, all you need to do is update your properties first prior to the call to AutoMapper.
Make sure your object has the correct values prior to calling AutoMapper.
After the call to do the mapping, your destination object will have all the matching properties copied over.
Post some more code if this doesn't answer the questoin.