I am working on plugins for a web platform.
I have one Core plugin(core library which is required to be installed and enabled) and one functional plugin.
I want when Core plugin is installed but not enabled then the functional plugin not to work. I've always check whether the Core is enabled and want to return it for all kind of requests - json, xml, html, ...
I want to return to the client response with good error code but not sure which one is the best.
I am thinking about 403 or as most people do 500.
Any suggestions?
Regards,
Boris
The returned code you should use really depends on semantics of the resource state. The answers to these questions should determine appropriate status code:
Why the Core is disabled? Is it an error state (something unexpected, that should not happen under normal conditions) or normal state?
Is the service disabled for all clients or some authorized users could perform the calls?
Should the client treat current state as temporary or permanent?
Here are some suitable error codes (under certain conditions):
403 Forbidden
You should use this code only if some of the users still could call the service successfully.
500 Internal Server Error
This generic error code is far too overloaded. Choose it only if you can't select more specific error code.
503 Service Unavailable
It's a good candidate if current state is temporary and should be fixed soon.
Related
Almost all of my graphql objects require that the user is authenticated to access them. If the user is not logged in, or their credentials are invalid, the server returns an error with a flag requireLogin set to true.
How can I intercept errors wherever they occur in Relay, capture this specific error, and then use it to update my state in redux (which will then show a message and a login box)?
The ideal place seems to be the NetworkLayer, but before I implement my own custom NetworkLayer is there a better existing solution (some sort of Relay-wide onError handler for example)?
You're likely looking for the renderFailure prop on your Relay Root Container. This gives you a place to handle errors that occur while fetching your data. If you're looking for errors directly relating to Relay Mutations, you can provider success and error handlers to Relay.Store.commitUpdate. I think those two should be capable of handling most scenarios.
You did mention using Redux along with Relay. I've not done any research into OSS projects combining these two tools, but Relay itself handles a lot of what Redux also handles and more. While Redux is great, I do think Relay is a more custom fit for GraphQL itself, and React, and I've not felt the need to find a spot for Redux in this stack, yet. It might complicate things.
Hey I'm developing an iOS application which communicates with an external web service in order to make various kinds of requests.
I'm aware of Murphy's Law "Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong" and that made me think about timeouts. Currently my application does not handle the situation when a request get completed and times out simultaneously. How should I handle such situations?
Without cooperation from the service provider there's not a lot you can do. If your app sees a timeout it cannot from that deduce whether the request actually completed or not. Could be it worked and something in the infrastructure failed to deliver the response, could be that it failed and hence you saw no timely response.
You have some actions you can take that will help the user. I assume that you have available to you the details of the request you attempted to send, your app should keep that locally. You are now in a position to do some useful things:
Some service authors allow you to safely submit the same request twice. So just resubmit, if it previously worked the service will just say "yep, already done that, here's the details|, if not it will just do the work as normal.
Some service authors allow you to query the status of previous request, so you can determine what has been done and what has not.
In some cases there is no IT system way to deal with the problem, the user will need to contact a help desk or call centre. Here having the details of what was previously attempted can be very useful.
When I make API calls to the server, I'm getting 404 errors for various data -- grades, role IDs, terms -- that I won't get on the next time I call it. The data's there on the server, viewable by the same user, and is often returned successfully, but not every time. The same user context will return data successfully for other calls.
Any ideas what could be causing this?
I'm using the Valence API with the Python client library and our 9.4.1 SP18 instance of Desire2Learn in a non-interactive script.
more detail: the text it returns on the bad 404s is " ErrorThe system cannot find the path specified."
It would help enormously to gather data about your case: packet traces that can show successful calls from your client alongside unsuccessful calls, in particular, would be very useful to see. If you are quite certain (and I see no reason you shouldn't be from your description) that you're forming the calls in the right way each time you make them, then the kind of behaviour you're noticing would seem to speak to some wider network or configuration issue: sometimes your calls are properly getting through the web service layer, and sometimes they are not -- this would seem therefore not to be down to the way you're using the API but in the way the service is able to receive that request.
I would encourage you, especially if you can gather data to provide showing this behaviour, to open a support incident with Desire2Learn's help desk in conjunction with your Approved Support Contact, or your Partner Manager (depending on whether you're a D2L client or a D2L partner).
I have a web application which i need to be load tested using LoadRunner. When I record the website using vugen it works good and there is no any application bug. But when I tried to replay the script, script failed after login and while navigating to next page, say, Transaction. At the end of log, I receive error:
Action.c(252): Error -26612: HTTP Status-Code=500 (Internal Server Error)
for "http://rob.com/common/transaction
Please help me to resolve this error.
LoadRunner generates HTTP request just as your browser does, this error is the same error you would get if you would go to that URL using your browser. Error code 500 is a generic server error that is returned when there is no better (more specific error to return).
Most likely the login process requires some form of authentication which is protected against a replay attack by using some form of token. It is up to you to capture this token using Correlations in LoadRunner and replay it as the server expects. The Correlation Studio in VuGen should detect and identify the token for you but since authentication methods vary it is sometimes impossible to do this automatically and you will have to create manual correlation. Please consult the product documentation for more details on how to do it. If your website is publicly available online then post its URL and I will try to record the script on my machine.
Thanks,
Boris.
Most common reasons
You are not checking each request for a valid result being returned and using a 200 HTTP status as an assumed correct step without examining the content of what is being returned. As a result when data being returned is incorrect you are not branching the code to handle the exception. Go one to two steps beyond where your business process has come off the rails with an assumptive success and you will have a 500 status message for an out of context action occurring 100% of the time.
Missed dynamic element. Record three times. Compare the code. Address the changing components.
I am developing some SOAP web services using Ruby on Rails and considering how to handle generic failures. These generic errors are applicable to all the methods within the service and include the following :-
Missing Request element
Missing Authentication element (Custom)
Invalid Authentication details
I can intercept these errors within my controller before calling the relevant method and respond appropriately. My question is which implementation is easiest to manage from a Client perspective. My options for handling these errors seem to be as follows.
Raise an exception and let the SOAP service generate a SoapFault. This would be fine except I have little (no) control over the structure of the message contained within the SOAP fault.
Return an Http 400 response with an agreed data structure to indicate the error message. This structure would not be defined within the WSDL though.
Include a Status element in all responses, whether successful or not and have that status element include a code and an array of error data (Including error messages).
Option three seems like the best solution but is also the most error prone to implement as the implementation of web services in ROR precludes me from implementing this in a generic way and each method becomes responsible for checking the result of the checks and rendering an appropriate response. Admittedly this would be a single function call and return on failure but it is relying on the developer to remember to do this as we add more options.
I appreciate that most ROR developers will say that this should be implemented as a REST service and I agree, in fact we already have REST services to do this but the spread of SOAP in the corporate world, and its impressive tooling support means that we have to provide SOAP services to remain competitive.
In your experience what would be the easiest implementation for clients to handle and does this differ dependant upon the libraries/language of the client process.
A SoapFault would be the preferred way to signify errors. SoapFaults can contain additional information in their <detail> element.
The advantage of a SoapFault over some status element is that the caller can use standard exception handling, instead of checking for some status field.