I have a model class like so -
public class Request
{
public List<ProductIDs> ProductIDs { get; set; }
public string Pid { get; set; }
}
In Swagger, it shows up like this -
In the picture, I am sending a value of 32a, but I am suppose to send "32a" or something. My issue is that when I make a request, the pid gets to the controller. But ProductIDs is always 0.
I think it is because you are passing down an object "ProductID" instead of a string. If your ProductID class only has one variable, a string, it might just be simpler to use:
public List<string> ProductIDs { get; set; }
Otherwise if ProductID has multiple variables such as ID, Location, Amount etc. you will need to pass down an object instead of a string. Meaning it will look something like this in the actual swagger entry:
{"ID": "32a", "var2": 421112, "Product Available":false}
Swagger can read that as an object and assign the correct fields. If you just pass down a number or letter like 32a it essentially reads it as an empty or incorrectly formed object.
Related
I have a web api core project that if I send just the list parameter than the API receives the values, however if I send both parameters that the controller is looking for then both parameters are seen as null
My contoller:
[HttpPost]
[Route("/jobApi/RunBD")]
public int RunBDReport([FromBody]int month, [FromBody] IEnumerable<ClientModel> clients)
{
billingDetailCycle objBillDetail = new billingDetailCycle();
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
return objBillDetail.Run(clients.ToList(), month);
}
else
{
return 500;
}
}
ClientModel:
public class ClientModel
{
public string BlockOfBus { get; set; }
public string ClientId { get; set; }
public string Location { get; set; }
public string SuppressSsn { get; set; }
}
The request I am sending:
{"month":7,
"ClientModel":[{"blockOfBus":"XXX",
"clientId":"123456",
"location":"",
"suppressSsn":"N"}]}
This causes both parameters to be seen as null by the controller, however if I send my request like this:
[{"blockOfBus":"XXX",
"clientId":"123456",
"location":"",
"suppressSsn":"N"}]
Then the controller is able to see the list object I am sending (however it obviously returns 500 as the model is not valid)
[FromBody] can only be used once since the request body can only be read once.
Don't apply [FromBody] to more than one parameter per action method. Once the request stream is read by an input formatter, it's no longer available to be read again for binding other [FromBody] parameters.
Reference Model Binding in ASP.NET Core
Create a single model that matches the expected data.
public class DbReport {
public int month { get; set; }
public ClientModel[] ClientModel { get; set; }
}
And update the action accordingly
[HttpPost]
[Route("/jobApi/RunBD")]
public int RunBDReport([FromBody]DbReport report) {
billingDetailCycle objBillDetail = new billingDetailCycle();
if (ModelState.IsValid) {
return objBillDetail.Run(report.ClientModel.ToList(), report.month);
} else {
return 500;
}
}
There can be only one parameter modified with [FromBody] attribute. So you need to either modify your method like this :
[Route("/jobApi/RunBD/{month}")]
public int RunBDReport(int month, [FromBody] IEnumerable<ClientModel> clients)
Then make the request like this :
url :/jobApi/RunBD/7
body :
[{"blockOfBus":"XXX",
"clientId":"123456",
"location":"",
"suppressSsn":"N"}]
Or modify both your method and model like this :
public class BdPayload{
public int Month {get; set;}
public IEnumerable<ClientModel> ClientModel {get;set;}
}
[Route("/jobApi/RunBD")]
public int RunBDReport( [FromBody] BdPayload model)
and then you can use the second request's body.
Try:
{"month":7,
"clients":[{"blockOfBus":"XXX",
"clientId":"123456",
"location":"",
"suppressSsn":"N"}]}
It looks like your ClientModel enumerable is mistitled in the payload
Try changing the route to:
[Route("/jobApi/RunBD/{month}")]
public int RunBDReport([FromUri]int month, [FromBody] IEnumerable<ClientModel> clients)
The payload needs to be passed as an array, like in Jonathan's answer.
There are few simple rules that help you get through these kind of issues when trying to pass data to your Web API endpoint. These are the default rules based on which the parameter binding happens. Based on these rules, you need to be applying the attributes like [FromBody] and [FromUri]
GET method call takes both primitive and complex types as a part of the query string
POST method call takes a primitive type parameter by default in the query string and the complex type needs to be passed as a part of the request body.
PUT and PATCH follow similar default rules as that of POST.
DELETE method's default rules are inline with the GET method.
Here by primitive types, I mean types like int and complex types are the classes that we create.
You can tackle the problem that you're dealing with by applying any of the solutions that others have already mentioned -- like moving your complex type into your request body and passing the primitive type through the query string OR wrapping both the primitive and complex types into a single model and deserialize the request body to the model type (which is done as a part of the parameter binding inherently).
Let's say we have a realm results taken with
RealmDb.All<Entry>();
Then I want to do some search over those results using not yet supported techniques, like StartsWith on a function return or on a property which is not mapped in realm etc, so I get a subset
IEnumerable<Entry> subset = bgHaystack;
var results = subset.Where(entry => entry.Content.ToLower().StartsWith(needle));
To get somehow these as part of RealmResults, I extract the entry ids like this:
List<int> Ids = new List<int>();
foreach (Entry entry in entries)
{
Ids.Add(entry.Id);
}
return Ids;
and finally I want to return a subset of RealmResults (not IEnumerable) of only those Entries that contain those ids, how can I do that? IDE says the Contains method is not supported.
Can I use some kind of predicate or a comparer for that?
Entry is my model class
using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations.Schema;
using Realms;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations;
using System;
namespace Data.Models
{
[Table("entry")]
public class Entry : RealmObject
{
public class EntryType
{
public const byte Word = 1;
public const byte Phrase = 2;
public const byte Text = 3;
};
[Key]
[PrimaryKey]
[Column("entry_id")]
public int Id { get; set; }
[Column("user_id")]
public int UserId { get; set; }
[Column("source_id")]
public int SourceId { get; set; }
[Indexed]
[Column("type")]
public byte Type { get; set; }
[Column("rate")]
public int Rate { get; set; }
[Column("created_at")]
public string CreatedAt { get; set; }
[Column("updated_at")]
public string UpdatedAt { get; set; }
[NotMapped]
public Phrase Phrase { get; set; }
[NotMapped]
public Word Word { get; set; }
[NotMapped]
public Text Text { get; set; }
[NotMapped]
public IList<Translation> Translations { get; }
[NotMapped]
public string Content
{
get {
switch (Type)
{
case EntryType.Phrase:
return Phrase?.Content;
case EntryType.Word:
return Word?.Content;
case EntryType.Text:
return Text?.Content;
}
return "";
}
}
}
}
According to the documentation, Realm .NET supports LINQ, so that's promising. In your specific example, you indicate that StartsWith isn't supported, but I see that on the above page, specifically here.
Now, your example makes clear that Entry is a RealmObject, so it's not clear where you'd possibly get a RealmResult from (nor does their documentation on that page mention a RealmResult). Specifically, the home page indicates that you're really only going to ever work with Realm, RealmObject and Transaction, so I'm going to just assume that you meant that you'll need a resulting RealmObject per their examples.
The way you presently have your data object set up, you're rather stuck calling it like you are (though if I could make a recommendation to simplify it a little bit:
var entries = RealmDb.All<Entry>().ToList();
var results = entries.Where(entry => entry.Content.ToLower().StartsWith(needle));
var ids = results.Select(a => a.Id).ToList();
Now, your big issue with just combining the filter predicate in line 2 with the end of line 1: Content itself is marked with a [NotMapped] attribute. Per the documentation again:
As a general rule, you can only create predicates with conditions that
rely on data in Realm. Imagine a class
class Person : RealmObject
{
// Persisted properties
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
// Non-persisted property
public string FullName => FirstName + " " + LastName;
}
Given this class, you can create queries with conditions that apply to
the FirstName and LastName properties but not to the FullName
property. Likewise, properties with the [Ignored] attribute cannot be
used.
Because you're using [NotMapped], I've got to believe that's going to behave similarly to [Ignored] and further, because it's just a computed value, it's not something that Realm is going to be able to process as part of the query - it simply doesn't know it because you didn't map it to the information Realm is storing. Rather, you'll have to compute the Content property when you've actually got the instances of your Entry objects to enumerate through.
Similarly, I expect you'll have issues pulling values from Phrase, Word and Text since they're also not mapped, and thus not stored in the record within Realm (unless you're populating those in code you didn't post before executing your Where filter).
As such, you might instead consider storing separate records as a PhraseEntry, WordEntry, and TextEntry so you can indeed perform exactly that filter and execute it on Realm. What if you instead used the following?
public class Entry : RealmObject
{
[Key]
[PrimaryKey]
[Column("entry_id")]
public int Id { get; set; }
[Column("user_id")]
public int UserId { get; set; }
[Column("source_id")]
public int SourceId { get; set; }
[Column("rate")]
public int Rate { get; set; }
[Column("created_at")]
public string CreatedAt { get; set; }
[Column("updated_at")]
public string UpdatedAt { get; set; }
[Column("content")]
public string Content { get; set; }
[NotMapped]
public IList<Translation> Translations { get; }
}
[Table("wordEntry")]
public class WordEntry : Entry
{
}
[Table("phraseEntry")]
public class PhraseEntry : Entry
{
}
[Table("textEntry")]
public class TextEntry : Entry
{
}
And now, you can offload the filtering to Realm:
var wordEntries = RealmDb.All<WordEntry>.Where(entry =>
entry.Content.StartsWith(needle, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)).ToList();
var phraseEntries = RealmDb.All<PhraseEntry>.Where(entry => entry.Content.StartsWith(needle, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)).ToList();
var textEntries = RealmDb.All<TextEntry>.Where(entry => entry.Content.StartsWith(needle, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)).ToList();
var entries = new List<Entry>();
entries.AddRange(wordEntries);
entries.AddRange(phraseEntries);
entries.AddRange(textEntries);
var ids = entries.Select(entry => entry.Id).ToList();
It's not quite as brief as storing it all in one table, but I'm not immediately seeing any Realm documentation that indicates support for executing the same query against multiple tables simultaneously, so at least this would allow you to leave the filtering to the database and work against a more limited subset of values locally.
Finally, so we have all that and I missed your final question up top. You indicate that you want to return a subset of your entries based on some collection of ids you create. In the logic you provide, you're retrieving all the Id properties in all your results, so there's really no further subset to pull.
That said, let's assume you have a separate list of ids that for whatever complicated reason, you were only able to derive after retrieving the list of Entry types from above (themselves all PhraseEntry, WordEntry or TextEntry objects).
At this point, since you've already pulled all the values from Realm and have them locally, just execute another Where statement against them. Because a List implements IEnumerable, you can thus execute the LINQ locally without any of the Realm restrictions:
var myLimitedIdSet = new List<int>()
{
10, 15, 20, 25 //Really complicated logic to narrow these down locally
};
var resultingEntries = entries.Where(entry => myLimitedIdSet.Contains(entry.Id)).ToList();
And you're set. You'll have only those entries that match the IDs listed in myLimitedIdSet.
Edit to address comment
You see this error because of the detail provided at the top of this page in the documentation. Specifically (and adapting to your code):
The first statement gives you a new instance of Entry of a class that implements IQueryable... This is standard LINQ implementation - you get an object representing the query. The query doesn't do anything until you made a further call that needs to iterate or count the results.
Your error is then derived by taking the result from RealmDb.All<Entry>() and trying to cast it to an IEnumerable<Entry> to operate against it as though you have local data. Until you call ToList() onRealmDb.All` you simply have a LINQ representation of what the call will be, not the data itself. As such, when you further refine your results with a Where statement, you're actually adding that to a narrowed version of the IQueryable statement, which will also fail because you lack the appropriate mapping in the Realm dataset.
To skip the optimization I provided above, the following should resolve your issue here:
var bgHaystack = realm.All<Entry>().ToList(); //Now you have local data
var results = bgHaystack.Where(entry => entry.Content.ToLower().StartsWith(needle));
Unfortunately, given your provided code, I don't expect that you'll see any matches here unless needle is an empty string. Not only is your Content property not part of the Realm data and you thus cannot filter on it within Realm, but neither are your Phrase, Word or Text properties mapped either. As a result, you will only ever see an empty string when getting your Content value.
You can further refine the results variable above to yield only those instances with a provided ID as you see fit with normal LINQ (as again, you'll have pulled the data from Realm in the first line).
var limitedIds = new List<int>{10, 20, 30};
var resultsLimitedById = results.Select(a => limitedIds.Contains(a.Id)).ToList();
I've updated my examples above to reflect the use of ToList() in the appropriate places as well.
In the client-side, I am using AngularJS and in the server-side I am using ASP.NET WebAPI.
I have two view models, ProductCriteriaViewModel and SimpleDisplayFieldViewModel:
public class ProductCriteriaViewModel
{
public int ID { get; set; }
public int? UserSearchID { get; set; }
public bool? Enabled { get; set; }
public SimpleDisplayFieldViewModel Property { get; set; }
public string Operator { get; set; }
public string CriteriaValue { get; set; }
}
public class SimpleDisplayFieldViewModel
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Value { get; set; }
public string PropertyType { get; set; }
}
In Angular, I submit a POST request to a WebAPI controller action with the following signature:
public IList<...> FindProducts(List<ProductCriteriaViewModel> criteriaVM, bool userFiltering)
{
...
}
In testing, I tried to send an array of Product Criterias, and checked Fiddler to see what the array looked like in the body of the POST request when it was being sent to the server. This is what the array looked like:
[
{"Enabled":true,
"Operator":"Less than",
"Property":
{"$id":"2",
"Name":"Copyright Year",
"Value":"Basic",
"PropertyType":null},
"CriteriaValue":"2013",
"IsNew":true},
{"Enabled":true,
"Operator":"Greater Than",
"Property":
{"$id":"2",
"Name":"Copyright Year",
"Value":"Basic",
"PropertyType":null},
"CriteriaValue":"1988",
"IsNew":true}
]
The above array has the correct values, however the result of deserialization on the server-side is incorrect. This is where it gets strange.
After the server deserializes the array and arrives in the controller action, the first element in criteriaVM is correct, all the values are set properly. However the second element is incorrect, CriteriaValue and Property are nulled out:
This issue only occurs whenever I choose the same search property for more than one criteria (i.e. Copyright < 2013 and Copyright > 1988). However, if I choose different properties (i.e. Copyright < 2013 and Price > 20), then all elements in the resulting criteriaVM are correctly initialized.
I do not understand what could be causing this issue. Why are only CriteriaValue and Property set to null in the second element of the List? Why does this issue only occur when I choose multiples of the same search properties?
Json.NET uses the keywords $id and $ref in order to preserve object references, so you are having troubles with your deserialization because your JSON has "$id" in the "Property" object. See this link for more information about object references.
In order to fix your deserialization issues, you can add the following line in the Register method of your WebApiConfig.cs class
config.Formatters.JsonFormatter.SerializerSettings.MetadataPropertyHandling = MetadataPropertyHandling.Ignore;
If your Web Api project does not include a WebApiConfig.cs class, simply add the configuration in your Global.asax:
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.JsonFormatter.SerializerSettings.MetadataPropertyHandling = MetadataPropertyHandling.Ignore;
Now your object in the web api method should look like this:
I have a .net mvc 4 webapi project that I'm trying to pass an array of an object to a method on my controller.
I've found some examples here on SO that talk about needing to set my object's properties with: param1=whatever¶m2=bling¶m3=blah.
But I don't see how I can pass in a collection using that.
Here is my method signature. Notice I've decorated the argument with the [FromUri] attribute.
public List<PhoneResult> GetPhoneNumbersByNumbers([FromUri] PhoneRequest[] id)
{
List<PhoneResult> prs = new List<PhoneResult>();
foreach (PhoneRequest pr in id)
{
prs.Add(PhoneNumberBL.GetSinglePhoneResult(pr.PhoneNumber, pr.RfiDate, pr.FinDate, pr.State));
}
return prs;
}
here is my simple PhoneRequest object:
public class PhoneRequest
{
public string PhoneNumber { get; set; }
public string RfiDate { get; set; }
public string FinDate { get; set; }
public string State { get; set; }
}
and here's a sample of what I'm using to pass in:
http://localhost:3610/api/phonenumber/getphonenumbersbynumbers/
[{"PhoneNumber":"8016667777","RfiDate":"","FinDate":"2012-02-11","State":"UT"},
{"PhoneNumber":"8018889999","RfiDate":"2012-12-01","FinDate":"","State":"UT"}]
using this comes back with "bad request"
I also tried this
http://localhost:3610/api/phonenumber/getphonenumbersbynumbers?
id=[{"PhoneNumber":"8016667777","RfiDate":"","FinDate":"2012-02-11","State":"UT"},
{"PhoneNumber":"8018889999","RfiDate":"2012-12-01","FinDate":"","State":"UT"}]
which does reach the method, but the array is null.
how can I pass in an array of my PhoneRequest object to my Web API method?
Try passing the PhoneRequest[] from the uri in this format:
http://localhost:3610/api/phonenumber/getphonenumbersbynumbers?
id[0][PhoneNumber]=8016667777&id[0][FinDate]=2012-02-11&id[0][State]=UT&
id[1][PhoneNumber]=8018889999&id[1][RfiDate]=2012-12-01&id[1][State]=UT
I suggest you use POST for this.
As you query string grows, you will run into problems with the maximum length of the URL, which is browser dependent.
If you have a lot of parameters to pass, a POST is perfectly acceptable even if you are really only GETting data. What you will lose, however, is the ability for the user to bookmark a particular page with the query string.
I created a custom model binder, the FieldValueModelBinder class, which can effectively pass any object containing nested array or generic list types of data with query strings having field-name pairs without imbedding any JSON and XML structures. The model binder can resolve all issues discussed above. Since this question was extended by the question ID 19302078, you can see details of my answer in that thread.
In ASP.NET MVC 2 (yes, TWO, I'm using MONO for this), I would like to know if it is at all possible to bind multiple Request parameters into an Action method parameter.
Let me give an illustration.
I'm passing 2 parameters (using whatever method I like, GET, POST, etc.):
Name
Guid
Is there a way to bind those parameters to this:
public JsonResult MyMethod(NameClass identifier)
Instead of this:
public JsonResult MyMethod(string name, string guid)
Using this?
public class NameClass
{
public string Guid { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
Absolutely. You simply have to name your fields using dot notation as if you were going to access the property from inside the method. This means that the Guid field is named identifier.Guid and the Name field identifier.Name. It is too bad that you can't take advantage of strongly-typed user controls however ;).