We Keep Coding

Response status is 500 for swagger appears once HttpGet for a specific object is implemented

I am learning how to create a WebApi utilizing C# to expand my code knowledge from just Java. I have created one with a List so far but I am attempting to use a Dictionary now. I have implemented a HttpGet with no problems
[HttpGet]
public IEnumerable<Projections.Order> GetOrders()
{
var data = repository.GetOrders().Values.Select( o => new Projections.Order(o));
return data;
}
However once I have tried adding another HttpGet to search for a specific Order via an Id then I get the following message "response status is 500 /swagger/v1/swagger.json" The code I that causes the problem is:
[HttpGet("{id}")]
public Order GetOrder(Guid id)
{
var data = repository.GetOrder(id);
return data;
}
Additional information I can provide is my Dictionary and the two methods I am using to implement my HttpGets
public readonly Dictionary<int, Order> Data = new Dictionary<int, Order>()
{
{0, new Order
{
CustomerName = "Trey",
OrderId = Guid.NewGuid(),
OrderType = OrderType.Standard,
CreatedDate = new DateTime(2022, 4, 5),
CreatedByUserName = "Matt"
}
}
};
public Dictionary<int, Order> GetOrders()
{
return Data;
}
public Order GetOrder(Guid id)
{
Order order = null;
foreach( var pair in Data )
{
if(pair.Value.OrderId == id)
{
order = pair.Value;
break;
}
}
return order;
}
I am assuming it has something to do with the return. If I make the code look like this:
[HttpGet("{id}")]
public void GetOrder(Guid id)
{
var data = repository.GetOrder(id);
//return data;
}
Then the error message won't appear.

I have found the answer. Thank you to those that pushed me to look closer at the Debug Window. Although I saw no traditional "error color" message there was a message hidden in there telling me that what CS file I was referencing was ambiguous. I rewrote the code to reference either specifically "API.Models.Order" or "API.Projections.Order".

Force DBContext refresh after Create/Edit ASP.NET MVC EF 6.1

I have a website that is using ASP.NET MVC 5 with EF6.1 and I'm having a problem with it showing the old data after an Edit procedure. The data is saved to the database properly, but when redirecting to the Index view it still shows old data.
If I go back to the Edit view, it still shows the old data also. The DBContext does not seem to be refreshing the data.
I have a base controller that holds the DBContext if that matters.
Here's the code for the Edit views in my controller:
public ActionResult FeaturedItemEdit(int? id)
{
if (id == null)
{
return new HttpStatusCodeResult(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest);
}
using (nfmContext localContext = new nfmContext())
{
List<FeaturedItem> fi = localContext.FeaturedItems.AsNoTracking().ToList();
FeaturedItem featuredItem = fi.Find(x => x.ID.Equals(id));
if (featuredItem == null)
{
return HttpNotFound();
}
return View(featuredItem);
}
}
[HttpPost]
[ValidateAntiForgeryToken]
public ActionResult FeaturedItemEditPost(int? id)
{
if (id == null)
{
return new HttpStatusCodeResult(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest);
}
using (nfmContext db = new nfmContext())
{
var item = db.FeaturedItems.Find(id);
if (TryUpdateModel(item, "", new string[] { "ID", "Title", "ImageAlt", "ImagePath", "Link", "Visible", "Content" }))
{
try
{
item.TimeStamp = DateTime.Now;
db.Entry(item).State = EntityState.Modified;
db.SaveChanges();
return RedirectToAction("FeaturedItems");
}
catch (DataException ex)
{
Elmah.ErrorSignal.FromCurrentContext().Raise(ex);
}
}
return View(item);
}
}
Once the edit is done, it goes back to the Featured Items view which just loads a list of items:
public ActionResult FeaturedItems()
{
using (nfmContext localContext = new nfmContext())
{
return View(localContext.FeaturedItems.OrderBy(x => x.Visible).ThenBy(x => x.Title).AsNoTracking().ToList());
}
}
Nothing fancy there. At first I thought it was because the calls were all async but in changing it back to non-asynchronous it didn't make much of a difference. I haven't posted the code to create an item, however it has the same issue.
I've even decorated my controller with [OutputCache(Location = System.Web.UI.OutputCacheLocation.None)] to make sure it wasn't a client side caching issue.
So, am I doing something wrong or is there a way to force the DBContext to pull fresh records from the database?
UPDATE 1:
Here's the line that initializes my DBContext in the base controller:
<strike>protected nfmContext db = new nfmContext();</strike>
This is no longer used - see update 2
And here's my context setup:
public class nfmContext : DbContext
{
public nfmContext() : base("connectionStringHere")
{
}
public DbSet<FeaturedItem> FeaturedItems { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<OneToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<ManyToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
}
}
UPDATE 2: I've switched the DBContect to now be local to each method. The code above reflects the changes and I've removed the DBContect property from the base controller.

Always use your dbContext only as long as required. Usually use a using statement within a method.
Reopening a connection to the database doesn't take long due to connection pooling.

Found out the issue after digging through and searching the project for various caching implementations.
At some point, EntityFramework.Cache was setup in the project (or EFCache as it's referred). That was causing the caching issue even though it was set up based on their documentation.
SaveChanges is supposed to be done in a transaction (which I assume is the case) and EFCache is supposed to watch for transactions and refresh the cache. Somewhere with the two there is a break down where the cache is not getting expired.
For reference, here's what I was using to implement the Secondary caching for the framework:
public class Configuration : DbConfiguration
{
public Configuration()
{
var transactionHandler = new CacheTransactionHandler(new InMemoryCache());
AddInterceptor(transactionHandler);
var cachingPolicy = new CachingPolicy();
Loaded +=
(sender, args) => args.ReplaceService<DbProviderServices>(
(s, _) => new CachingProviderServices(s, transactionHandler,
cachingPolicy));
}
}
Once I've removed this code from the project, the system worked perfectly as expected, but that also removed the feature of having extra caching.
In order to get it to work and give me the ability to purge the DbSet on demand, I switched the declaration of the CacheTransactionHandler to use a static InMemoryCache. Then, once it was set that way, I could use InvalidateDbSets to remove the item from the Memory Cache.
Here's what I did specifically:
Added this to my DbContext:
public static readonly EFCache.InMemoryCache Cache = new EFCache.InMemoryCache();
Changed the transactionHandler declaration in the Configuration sub to:
var transactionHandler = new CacheTransactionHandler(nfmContext.Cache);
After any .SaveChanges calls, I added:
nfmContext.Cache.InvalidateSets(new List<string>() { "[insert entity name here]" });
Everything works now and it uses the cache whenever needed. After any time I make a change, I clear that cache item and it reloads the next time in. Works great.

User is null when Function not called from UI

In my database table I have a column in which the values are manipulated before saving into the database. The logic for the manipulation was added at a later stage of development, after a lot of values were inserted to the table. Now I want to edit the contents of the table to manipulate the values of the existing contents.
My approach
To call the edit function for all the items in the table as the manipulation logic is added in the EDIT action method as well.
When I call the edit function while looping through the contents in the database, I get a null reference exception which is not there when I use the edit function from the UI.
EDIT Action method
public ActionResult Edit([Bind(Include = "SetValueID,Value,Status,TcSetID,OptionValueID,CreatedOn,CreatedBy,ModifiedOn,ModifiedBy")] SetValue setValue)
{
//Many lines removed for simplicity. all the variables used in the code are assigned.
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
// Valuestring from another function
setValue.Value = valuestring;
var original = db.SetValue.Find(setValue.SetValueID);
bool modified = original.Value != setValue.Value;
if (modified)
{
var rev = new RevisionHistory();
rev.CreatedOn = original.ModifiedOn;
rev.ModifiedBy = User.Identity.Name; //If modified exception on this line
db.Entry(original).CurrentValues.SetValues(setValue);
db.RevisionHistory.Add(rev);
}
original.ModifiedOn = DateTime.Now;
original.ModifiedBy = User.Identity.Name; //if not modified exception on this line
db.Entry(original).State = EntityState.Modified;
db.SaveChanges();
}
}
The call to this function was made from the HomeController. I commented all the return statements in the EDIT method while calling it from the HomeController.
Exception
Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
Question
Why does the edit work while called from the UI without any Exception , but not from HomeController?
Why is the user null even when I call the function from a different controller? Using windows authentication. How do I get the user name if the user has already been authenticated?
EDIT - Added how the Edit function is called
//Home controller (But I have also tried calling the function from a different controller where the call to the method is from the UI
public ActionResult Index()
{
test();
return View();
}
public void test()
{
foreach(var item in db.SetValue.ToList())
{
var setvalcon = new SetValuesController();
setvalcon.Edit(item);
}
}
Update - General Overview of the problem
The question can be generalized so as to find an answer how the User property is defined when using Windows Authentication.
Is it that the controller gets access to the Windows user property only when it is called from the UI?
Is it not possible to access the User Property in a function that is not called via UI?
And the best thing as far as I know about the issue is that, the User is defined in the Controller where the testmethod is called but not in the Edit in another controller.

You are partially correct when you are saying you can only access the User property only accessing from the UI. The correct answer is -
When accessing the Edit method through the UI, it is actually going through the ASP.Net controller initializer pipeline and that environment takes care of the current browser session and assigns the User variable. HttpContext is available at this time.
But when you are creating the controller variable like this -
var setvalcon = new SetValuesController();
setvalcon.Edit(item);
You are bypassing all those initialization codes. No HttpContext and this is just another normal object and thus it does not have the User property populated.
ANSWER TO QUESTIONS:
Is it that the controller gets access to the Windows user property only when it is called from the UI?
=> Yes, absolutely right, because you are going through the ASP.Net pipeline. But it is not only for Windows user, it is all those things that re in a HttpContext.
Is it not possible to access the User Property in a function that is not called via UI?
=> Only if, you manually assign it otherwise NO.
MORE INSIGHT:
Basically, what you are trying to achieve is a very poor design. Nowhere, remember nowhere, you are supposed to call a controller from inside a controller unless it is a subclass to base method call. The only way you can call another controller from inside another controller is redirecting the execution by using "Redirect" methods. No one will stop you from calling controller like this, but this shows poor design principle..
The best way to solve your situation is like this -
public class ModelService {
public void Edit(IPrincipal user, SetValue setValue){
setValue.Value = valuestring;
var original = db.SetValue.Find(setValue.SetValueID);
bool modified = original.Value != setValue.Value;
if (modified)
{
var rev = new RevisionHistory();
rev.CreatedOn = original.ModifiedOn;
rev.ModifiedBy = User.Identity.Name; //If modified exception on this line
db.Entry(original).CurrentValues.SetValues(setValue);
db.RevisionHistory.Add(rev);
}
original.ModifiedOn = DateTime.Now;
original.ModifiedBy = User.Identity.Name; //if not modified exception on this line
db.Entry(original).State = EntityState.Modified;
db.SaveChanges();
}
}
Then in both the controllers constructors -
public class ControllerOne : Controller {
private readonly ModelService _modelService
//constructor
public ControllerOne(){
_modelService= new ModelService ();
}
public ActionResult Edit([Bind(Include = "SetValueID,Value,Status,TcSetID,OptionValueID,CreatedOn,CreatedBy,ModifiedOn,ModifiedBy")] SetValue setValue)
{
//Many lines removed for simplicity. all the variables used in the code are assigned.
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
_modelService.Edit(User, Setvalue);
}
}
//controller 2
public class HomeController: Controller {
private readonly ModelService _modelService
//constructor
public ControllerOne(){
_modelService= new ModelService ();
}
public ActionResult Index()
{
foreach(var item in db.SetValue.ToList())
{
_modelService.Edit(User, item);
}
}
}
You can take help from IoC Container for dependency injection, that is even better approach.

Invoking a Controller from within another Controller is probably getting some data (as the User) to be missing. I wouldn't be making much effort understanding why (unless curious), since doing it this way might be considered as bad design. (I bet some other info would be missing as well, maybe cookies and such). the better thing you can do is to separate the logic from your Controllers into some service layer and call the methods with the IPrincipal User as parameter. If you are forced to do it the way you described, then send the user as a parameter to the other controller.
public ActionResult Index()
{
test(User);
return View();
}
public void test(IPrincipal user)
{
foreach(var item in db.SetValue.ToList())
{
var setvalcon = new SetValuesController();
setvalcon.Edit(item, user);
}
}
And the oter controller
public ActionResult Edit([Bind(Include = "SetValueID,Value,Status,TcSetID,OptionValueID,CreatedOn,CreatedBy,ModifiedOn,ModifiedBy")] SetValue setValue, IPrincipal user = null)
{
var currentUser = User == null? user : User;//or somthing like that
}
Didn't check this code. but it should give you something to work with.

Can I manually hard code a JSON object to be returned by ASP.NET web API?

I'm used to doing this in Django (similar to Ruby on Rails) where in some cases I need to hard code a JSON response object for the client to be able to interpret, but I've been searching everywhere online on figuring out how to do this with ASP.NET web API and I can't find anything on this, ASP.NET web API seems to be forcing me to create a class to represent a JSON response for every URI controller.
For example, here's the only way I know for manually creating a JSON response:
1.) I first need to create the class to represent the response object
public class XYZ_JSON
{
public string PropertyName { get; set; }
public string PropertyValue { get; set; }
}
2.) Then I need to properly write up the URI controller that'll return an "XYZ_JSON" that I've just defined above:
// GET: api/ReturnJSON
public XYZ_JSON Get()
{
XYZ_JSON test = new XYZ_JSON { PropertyName = "Romulus", PropertyValue = "123123" };
return test;
}
Will result with an http response of something like:
200 OK
{"PropertyName":"Romulus", "PropertyValue":"123123"}
This whole class to JSON design pattern is cool and all, but it's not helpful and actually makes things much worse when trying to return a class as a JSON object with many classes within it such as:
public class XYZ_JSON
{
public string PropertyName { get; set; }
public string PropertyValue { get; set; }
public List<ComplexObject> objects { get; set; } // <- do not want
}
The JSON response object above isn't that complex, but for what I'm trying to accomplish I'll have to put a list of classes within a list of classes within a list of classes, and I can't develop it in this awkward way unless I spend a week on it which is just ridiculous.
I need to be able to return a JSON response in this kind of fashion:
// GET: api/ReturnJSON
public JSON_Response Get(string id)
{
// do some SQL querying here to grab the model or what have you.
if (somethingGoesWrong = true)
return {"result":"fail"}
else
return {"result":"success","value":"some value goes here"}
}
The design pattern above is what I'm trying to accomplish with ASP.NET web API, a very simply way to return a semi-hard coded JSON response object which would allow me to return very unique and dynamic responses from a single URI. There's going to be many use cases where a list of up to 8 completely unique Class objects will be returned.
Also, If what I'm trying to accomplish is the backwards way of doing things than that's fine. I've released a very successful and stable iOS application with a flawless Django backend server handling things this way perfectly without any issues.
Can someone explain to me how I can return a simple hard coded JSON response using the ASP.NET web API?
Thanks!

You can create anonymous types in C#, so you can use one of these to produce your hard-coded result. For example:
return new JsonResult
{
Data = new
{
result = "success",
value = "some value"
}
};
To clarify, the above code is for ASP.NET MVC. If you're using Web API, then you can just return the data object, or use an IHttpActionResult. The anonymous type part (the new {}) stays the same.

Use an anonymous object.
public object Get(string id)
{
// do some SQL querying here to grab the model or what have you.
if (somethingGoesWrong = true)
return new {result = "fail"}
else
return new {result = "success", value= "some value goes here"}
}

You can use a generic JObject to return your values without constructing a complete class structure as shown below
public JObject Get(int id)
{
return JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<JObject>(#"{""result"":""success"",""value"":""some value goes here""}");
}

For hard coded response, why not just do something like below. The JSON content will be returned without being surrounded by quotation marks.
public HttpResponseMessage Get()
{
string content = "Your JSON content";
return BuildResponseWithoutQuotationMarks(content);
}
private HttpResponseMessage BuildResponseWithoutQuotationMarks(string content)
{
var response = Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.OK);
response.Content = new StringContent(content);
return response;
}
private HttpResponseMessage BuildResponseWithQuotationMarks(string content)
{
var response = Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.OK, content);
return response;
}

// GET: api/ReturnJSON
public JsonResult Get()
{
return Json(new { Property1 = "Value1", Property2 = "Value2" });
}
You can return json using JsonResult class. and the Json() method takes anonymous object so you don't need to create a class.

A circular reference was detected while serializing an object of type 'SubSonic.Schema .DatabaseColumn'.

I am trying to do a simple JSON return but I am having issues I have the following below.
public JsonResult GetEventData()
{
var data = Event.Find(x => x.ID != 0);
return Json(data);
}
I get a HTTP 500 with the exception as shown in the title of this question. I also tried
var data = Event.All().ToList()
That gave the same problem.
Is this a bug or my implementation?

It seems that there are circular references in your object hierarchy which is not supported by the JSON serializer. Do you need all the columns? You could pick up only the properties you need in the view:
return Json(new
{
PropertyINeed1 = data.PropertyINeed1,
PropertyINeed2 = data.PropertyINeed2
});
This will make your JSON object lighter and easier to understand. If you have many properties, AutoMapper could be used to automatically map between DTO objects and View objects.

I had the same problem and solved by using Newtonsoft.Json;
var list = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(model,
Formatting.None,
new JsonSerializerSettings() {
ReferenceLoopHandling = Newtonsoft.Json.ReferenceLoopHandling.Ignore
});
return Content(list, "application/json");

This actually happens because the complex objects are what makes the resulting json object fails.
And it fails because when the object is mapped it maps the children, which maps their parents, making a circular reference to occur. Json would take infinite time to serialize it, so it prevents the problem with the exception.
Entity Framework mapping also produces the same behavior, and the solution is to discard all unwanted properties.
Just expliciting the final answer, the whole code would be:
public JsonResult getJson()
{
DataContext db = new DataContext ();
return this.Json(
new {
Result = (from obj in db.Things select new {Id = obj.Id, Name = obj.Name})
}
, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet
);
}
It could also be the following in case you don't want the objects inside a Result property:
public JsonResult getJson()
{
DataContext db = new DataContext ();
return this.Json(
(from obj in db.Things select new {Id = obj.Id, Name = obj.Name})
, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet
);
}

To sum things up, there are 4 solutions to this:
Solution 1: turn off ProxyCreation for the DBContext and restore it in the end.
private DBEntities db = new DBEntities();//dbcontext
public ActionResult Index()
{
bool proxyCreation = db.Configuration.ProxyCreationEnabled;
try
{
//set ProxyCreation to false
db.Configuration.ProxyCreationEnabled = false;
var data = db.Products.ToList();
return Json(data, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Response.StatusCode = (int)HttpStatusCode.BadRequest;
return Json(ex.Message);
}
finally
{
//restore ProxyCreation to its original state
db.Configuration.ProxyCreationEnabled = proxyCreation;
}
}
Solution 2: Using JsonConvert by Setting ReferenceLoopHandling to ignore on the serializer settings.
//using using Newtonsoft.Json;
private DBEntities db = new DBEntities();//dbcontext
public ActionResult Index()
{
try
{
var data = db.Products.ToList();
JsonSerializerSettings jss = new JsonSerializerSettings { ReferenceLoopHandling = ReferenceLoopHandling.Ignore };
var result = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(data, Formatting.Indented, jss);
return Json(result, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Response.StatusCode = (int)HttpStatusCode.BadRequest;
return Json(ex.Message);
}
}
Following two solutions are the same, but using a model is better because it's strong typed.
Solution 3: return a Model which includes the needed properties only.
private DBEntities db = new DBEntities();//dbcontext
public class ProductModel
{
public int Product_ID { get; set;}
public string Product_Name { get; set;}
public double Product_Price { get; set;}
}
public ActionResult Index()
{
try
{
var data = db.Products.Select(p => new ProductModel
{
Product_ID = p.Product_ID,
Product_Name = p.Product_Name,
Product_Price = p.Product_Price
}).ToList();
return Json(data, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Response.StatusCode = (int)HttpStatusCode.BadRequest;
return Json(ex.Message);
}
}
Solution 4: return a new dynamic object which includes the needed properties only.
private DBEntities db = new DBEntities();//dbcontext
public ActionResult Index()
{
try
{
var data = db.Products.Select(p => new
{
Product_ID = p.Product_ID,
Product_Name = p.Product_Name,
Product_Price = p.Product_Price
}).ToList();
return Json(data, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Response.StatusCode = (int)HttpStatusCode.BadRequest;
return Json(ex.Message);
}
}

JSON, like xml and various other formats, is a tree-based serialization format. It won't love you if you have circular references in your objects, as the "tree" would be:
root B => child A => parent B => child A => parent B => ...
There are often ways of disabling navigation along a certain path; for example, with XmlSerializer you might mark the parent property as XmlIgnore. I don't know if this is possible with the json serializer in question, nor whether DatabaseColumn has suitable markers (very unlikely, as it would need to reference every serialization API)

add [JsonIgnore] to virtuals properties in your model.

Using Newtonsoft.Json: In your Global.asax Application_Start method add this line:
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.JsonFormatter.SerializerSettings.ReferenceLoopHandling = Newtonsoft.Json.ReferenceLoopHandling.Ignore;

Its because of the new DbContext T4 template that is used for generating the EntityFramework entities. In order to be able to perform the change tracking, this templates uses the Proxy pattern, by wrapping your nice POCOs with them. This then causes the issues when serializing with the JavaScriptSerializer.
So then the 2 solutions are:
Either you just serialize and return the properties you need on the client
You may switch off the automatic generation of proxies by setting it on the context's configuration
context.Configuration.ProxyCreationEnabled = false;
Very well explained in the below article.
http://juristr.com/blog/2011/08/javascriptserializer-circular-reference/

Provided answers are good, but I think they can be improved by adding an "architectural" perspective.
Investigation
MVC's Controller.Json function is doing the job, but it is very poor at providing a relevant error in this case. By using Newtonsoft.Json.JsonConvert.SerializeObject, the error specifies exactly what is the property that is triggering the circular reference. This is particularly useful when serializing more complex object hierarchies.
Proper architecture
One should never try to serialize data models (e.g. EF models), as ORM's navigation properties is the road to perdition when it comes to serialization. Data flow should be the following:
Database -> data models -> service models -> JSON string
Service models can be obtained from data models using auto mappers (e.g. Automapper). While this does not guarantee lack of circular references, proper design should do it: service models should contain exactly what the service consumer requires (i.e. the properties).
In those rare cases, when the client requests a hierarchy involving the same object type on different levels, the service can create a linear structure with parent->child relationship (using just identifiers, not references).
Modern applications tend to avoid loading complex data structures at once and service models should be slim. E.g.:
access an event - only header data (identifier, name, date etc.) is loaded -> service model (JSON) containing only header data
managed attendees list - access a popup and lazy load the list -> service model (JSON) containing only the list of attendees

Avoid converting the table object directly. If relations are set between other tables, it might throw this error.
Rather, you can create a model class, assign values to the class object and then serialize it.

I'm Using the fix, Because Using Knockout in MVC5 views.
On action
return Json(ModelHelper.GetJsonModel<Core_User>(viewModel));
function
public static TEntity GetJsonModel<TEntity>(TEntity Entity) where TEntity : class
{
TEntity Entity_ = Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(TEntity)) as TEntity;
foreach (var item in Entity.GetType().GetProperties())
{
if (item.PropertyType.ToString().IndexOf("Generic.ICollection") == -1 && item.PropertyType.ToString().IndexOf("SaymenCore.DAL.") == -1)
item.SetValue(Entity_, Entity.GetPropValue(item.Name));
}
return Entity_;
}

You can notice the properties that cause the circular reference. Then you can do something like:
private Object DeCircular(Object object)
{
// Set properties that cause the circular reference to null
return object
}

//first: Create a class as your view model
public class EventViewModel
{
public int Id{get;set}
public string Property1{get;set;}
public string Property2{get;set;}
}
//then from your method
[HttpGet]
public async Task<ActionResult> GetEvent()
{
var events = await db.Event.Find(x => x.ID != 0);
List<EventViewModel> model = events.Select(event => new EventViewModel(){
Id = event.Id,
Property1 = event.Property1,
Property1 = event.Property2
}).ToList();
return Json(new{ data = model }, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}

An easier alternative to solve this problem is to return an string, and format that string to json with JavaScriptSerializer.
public string GetEntityInJson()
{
JavaScriptSerializer j = new JavaScriptSerializer();
var entityList = dataContext.Entitites.Select(x => new { ID = x.ID, AnotherAttribute = x.AnotherAttribute });
return j.Serialize(entityList );
}
It is important the "Select" part, which choose the properties you want in your view. Some object have a reference for the parent. If you do not choose the attributes, the circular reference may appear, if you just take the tables as a whole.
Do not do this:
public string GetEntityInJson()
{
JavaScriptSerializer j = new JavaScriptSerializer();
var entityList = dataContext.Entitites.toList();
return j.Serialize(entityList );
}
Do this instead if you don't want the whole table:
public string GetEntityInJson()
{
JavaScriptSerializer j = new JavaScriptSerializer();
var entityList = dataContext.Entitites.Select(x => new { ID = x.ID, AnotherAttribute = x.AnotherAttribute });
return j.Serialize(entityList );
}
This helps render a view with less data, just with the attributes you need, and makes your web run faster.