Is it possible to have more than one custom user profile and if it is how to set up web config file and how to manage custom profiles for two website under the same sitecore instance (same VS solution)?
We had one custom user profile and new requirement came about new website under the same sitecore instance but with the new custom user for the second website.
During development of second website we created second custom user profile and everything went fine, we change "inherits" attribute of system.web/profile node in the web.config file to point to second custom use profile and during development it was OK.
The problem now is that only one user profile can log in to the webistes:
if we set inherits attribute to "Namespace.Website.NamespaceA.CustomProfileA, Namespace.Website" only profileA will be able to log in to their domain and if we set it to "Namespace.Website.NamespaceB.CustomProfileB, Namespace.Website" only profileB will be able to login to its domain because the switcher will use this one.
All articles in the web describe how to set custom user profile, switcher and switchingProviders for just one custom user profile but there are no examples for my case.
Thanks,
Srdjan
Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a clean way to have multiple user profile classes created for you by the API. Typically, you will get the user profile via Sitecore.Context.User.Profile. The Context class is static and the methods that initialize the Profile property are private, so there's nowhere to insert your extra logic.
You could, however, create wrapper classes for the Profile. Start with a base class like this:
public abstract class CustomProfileBase
{
public CustomProfileBase(Sitecore.Security.UserProfile innerProfile)
{
Assert.ArgumentNotNull(innerProfile, nameof(innerProfile));
InnerProfile = innerProfile;
}
public Sitecore.Security.UserProfile InnerProfile { get; protected set; }
public virtual string GetCustomProperty(string propertyName)
{
return InnerProfile.GetCustomProperty(propertyName);
}
public virtual void SetCustomProperty(string propertyName, string value)
{
InnerProfile.SetCustomProperty(propertyName, value);
}
public virtual void Save()
{
InnerProfile.Save();
}
public virtual string Email
{
get { return InnerProfile.Email; }
set { InnerProfile.Email = value; }
}
// Other members omitted for brevity
}
This CustomProfileBase class would have a member that wraps each of the public members of Sitecore.Security.UserProfile. Then, you would create your site specific profile like this:
public class SiteOneProfile : CustomProfileBase
{
public SiteOneProfile(UserProfile innerProfile) : base(innerProfile)
{
}
public string CustomPropertyOne
{
get { return GetCustomProperty("CustomPropertyOne"); }
set { SetCustomProperty("CustomPropertyOne", value); }
}
}
Then you would use it from a controller or elsewhere like so:
var profile = new SiteOneProfile(Sitecore.Context.User.Profile);
model.property = profile.CustomPropertyOne;
Update
When using this approach, you would just leave the inherits attribute in the config with its default value. Also, the profile should not have an effect on the ability to login. If you are still having issues with that, please update your question with details of the error you get when logging in.
Related
I'm using ML.NET in an ASP.NET Core application, and I am using the following code in Startup:
var builder = services.AddPredictionEnginePool<Foo, Bar>();
if (File.Exists("model.zip"))
{
builder.FromFile(String.Empty, "model.zip", true);
}
If model.zip doesn't exist, I create it later in the middleware. How do I add it to the PredictionEnginePool that is injected?
There are no options to load a model via PredictionEnginePool, and instantiating or injecting a PredictionEnginePoolBuilder isn't an option as it requires IServiceCollection (so must be configured during Startup.ConfigureServices).
The only option I can see at the moment is to set a flag if the file doesn't exist at startup, and then restart the service after model.zip is created in the middleware later on (using IApplicationLifetime.StopApplication), but I really don't like this as an option.
PredictionEnginePool is designed in such a way that you can write your own ModelLoader implementation. Out of the box, Microsoft.Extensions.ML has 2 loaders, File and Uri. When those don't meet your needs, you can drop down and write your own.
See https://github.com/dotnet/machinelearning-samples/pull/560 which changes one of the dotnet/machine-learning samples to use an "in-memory" model loader, it doesn't get the model from a file or a Uri. You can follow the same pattern and write whatever code you need to get your model.
public class InMemoryModelLoader : ModelLoader
{
private readonly ITransformer _model;
public InMemoryModelLoader(ITransformer model)
{
_model = model;
}
public override ITransformer GetModel() => _model;
public override IChangeToken GetReloadToken() =>
// This IChangeToken will never notify a change.
new CancellationChangeToken(CancellationToken.None);
}
And then in Startup.cs
services.AddPredictionEnginePool<ImageInputData, ImageLabelPredictions>();
services.AddOptions<PredictionEnginePoolOptions<ImageInputData, ImageLabelPredictions>>()
.Configure(options =>
{
options.ModelLoader = new InMemoryModelLoader(_mlnetModel);
});
I have a ServiceStack self-hosted webservice, using the AppSelfHostBase.
WHen the Configure method is executed, I have this:
public override void Configure(Container container)
{
Config.RouteNamingConventions = new List<RouteNamingConventionDelegate> {
RouteNamingConvention.WithRequestDtoName,
RouteNamingConvention.WithMatchingAttributes,
RouteNamingConvention.WithMatchingPropertyNames,
};
Routes.AddFromAssembly(typeof(ServiceStackHost).Assembly);
and I expected the following service to be executed under /StartBankIdAuthentication path, but it resides under /json/reply/StartBankIdAuthentication instead.
public class StartBankIdAuthentication : IReturn<StartBankIdAuthenticationResponse>
{
public string IdNbr { get; set; }
}
Also, is there an automatic way to make the properties in the DTO to be under "sub-paths", like /StartBankIdAuthentication/1234 instead of the /StartBankIdAuthentication?IdNbr=1234?
I know I can manually add the Route attribute, but it seems cumbersome and also messy in many ways (not Typed, error-prone etc).
I expected the following service to be executed under /StartBankIdAuthentication path, but it resides under /json/reply/StartBankIdAuthentication instead.
The /json/reply/StartBankIdAuthentication is a pre-defined route that's always available by default, they have no relation to Auto Generated Routes.
The default Route generation strategies you've listed are already registered by default and are what's applied when you use Routes.AddFromAssembly(). You should only override with route strategies you want in addition to the defaults, and you should use SetConfig() for any configuration in ServiceStack, e.g:
SetConfig(new HostConfig {
RouteNamingConventions = { MyCustomRouteStrategy }
});
The implementation for the different Route Strategies available in ServiceStack are in RouteNamingConvention.cs, you'll need to register your own strategy for anything additional Route strategies you want.
By default additional routes are generated for any Id or IDs property, the routing docs shows examples of how they can be customized:
The existing rules can be further customized by modifying the related static properties, e.g:
RouteNamingConvention.PropertyNamesToMatch.Add("UniqueId");
RouteNamingConvention.AttributeNamesToMatch.Add("DefaultIdAttribute");
Which will make these request DTOs:
class MyRequest1
{
public UniqueId { get; set;}
}
class MyRequest2
{
[DefaultId]
public CustomId { get; set;}
}
Generate the following routes:
/myrequest1
/myrequest1/{UniqueId}
/myrequest2
/myrequest2/{CustomId}
I know I can manually add the Route attribute, but it seems cumbersome and also messy in many ways (not Typed, error-prone etc).
If you really want you can use nameof() for Typed Routes:
[Route("/" + nameof(StartBankAuthentication) +"/"+ nameof(StartBankAuthentication.IdNbr))]
I'm not sure if Mythz will maybe come up with a different of better solution, but I managed to achieve what I wanted by overriding the GetRouteAttributes, and by using reflection, I could create what I wanted. It looks like this:
public override RouteAttribute[] GetRouteAttributes(Type requestType)
{
string fullname = requestType.FullName.Replace("AlfaOnlineServiceModel.Api.", "");
string path = "/" + fullname.ToLower().Replace(".", "/");
RouteAttribute[] routes = base.GetRouteAttributes(requestType);
if (routes.Length == 0)
{
routes = new RouteAttribute[1];
PropertyInfo[] pInfos = requestType.GetProperties(System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Public | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Instance | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.DeclaredOnly);
foreach(PropertyInfo pi in pInfos)
{
path += "/{" + pi.Name + "}";
}
routes[0] = new RouteAttribute(path);
}
return routes;
}
Which will give for example:
MyMethodResult
The following routes are available for this service:
All Verbs /myCoolPath/mySubPath/myMethod/{MyProperty}
I am storing cropping information on my Sitecore Media Library images in a field that was added to the /sitecore/templates/System/Media/Unversioned/Image template.
I would like to access this field along with all of the other properties that exist in the Glass.Mapper.Sc.Fields.Image complex field type so that I can continue to use GlassHtml.RenderImage() in my views.
My initial attempts to inherit from the class were unsuccessful - it appears to break the mapping behavior - so I am wondering if there is another way to extend this class with additional properties?
Here's what I've tried:
[SitecoreType(AutoMap = true)]
public class MyImage : Glass.Mapper.Sc.Fields.Image
{
public virtual string CropInfo { get; set; }
}
You will need to implement a custom data handler to map the additional field.
I would create a data handler that inherits from the standard Image data handler:
https://github.com/mikeedwards83/Glass.Mapper/blob/master/Source/Glass.Mapper.Sc/DataMappers/SitecoreFieldImageMapper.cs
Then customise GetField and SetField.
Once you have created the custom data handler you need to register it with the Windsor container. See tutorial 19 for how to do this:
http://glass.lu/docs/tutorial/sitecore/tutorial19/tutorial19.html
The important part:
public static void CastleConfig(IWindsorContainer container){
var config = new Config();
container.Register(
Component.For < AbstractDataMapper>().ImplementedBy<TweetsDataHandler>().LifeStyle.Transient
);
container.Install(new SitecoreInstaller(config));
}
I'm creating a sort of a social networking site, like Facebook, as a university project. Users can upload photos, but I'm somehow unable to retrieve the list of photos for a particular user.
Here's how I'm doing it right now:
#Entity
#Table(name = "users")
public class User implements Serializable {
#Id
private String emailAddress;
private String password;
private String firstName;
private String lastName;
(...)
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "owner", fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
private List<Photo> photos;
public User() {
}
(...)
public void addPhoto( Photo photo){
photos.add(photo);
}
public List<Photo> getPhotos() {
return photos;
}
}
And here's the Photo entity:
#Entity
public class Photo implements Serializable {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private Long id;
private String url;
private String label;
#ManyToOne
private User owner;
public Photo() {
}
(...)
public User getOwner() {
return owner;
}
}
Each photo is uploaded by creating a post that contains it. Here's the EJB that does it:
#Stateless
public class PublicPost implements PublicPostRemote {
#PersistenceContext
EntityManager em;
#Override
public void createPost(LoginUserRemote loginUserBean, String targetEmail, final String content, final String photoURL) {
if (loginUserBean.isLoggedIn()) {
final User author = loginUserBean.getLoggedUser();
System.out.println(targetEmail);
final User target = em.find(User.class, targetEmail);
if (author != null && target != null) {
//See if there's a photo to post as well
Photo photo = null;
if (photoURL != null) {
photo = new Photo(photoURL, author, content);
em.persist(photo);
}
MessageBoard publicMessageBoard = target.getPublicMessageBoard();
Post post = new Post(author, content);
post.setMessageBoard(publicMessageBoard);
if (photo != null) {
post.setPostPhoto(photo);
}
em.persist(post);
em.refresh(publicMessageBoard);
//Send an e-mail to the target (if the author and the target are different)
if (!author.getEmailAddress().equals(target.getEmailAddress())) {
final String subject = "[PhaseBook] " + author.getEmailAddress() + " has posted on your public message board.";
Thread mailThread = new Thread() {
#Override
public void run() {
try {
GMailSender.sendMessage(target.getEmailAddress(), subject, content);
} catch (MessagingException ex) {
Logger.getLogger(PublicPost.class.getName()).log(Level.SEVERE, null, ex);
}
}
};
mailThread.start();
}
}
}
}
}
So what happens is: I create a new post that contains a photo, yet later, when I use this, on the web tier...
LoginUserRemote lur = (LoginUserRemote)session.getAttribute("loginUserBean");
User user = lur.getLoggedUser();
List<Photo> photos = user.getPhotos();
System.out.println();
System.out.println("This user has this many photos: " + photos.size());
...it always tells me that the user has 0 photos. Why is this? Am I defining the relationship between user and photo incorrectly? Am I forgetting to persist/refresh anything? Or does the problem lie somewhere else?
If you store a detached User object (the logged in user) in the HTTP session, and then create and persists photos having this detached user as owner, JPA won't automatically add the photo to the detached user. For the entity manager, this detached user doesn't exist: it's not under its responsibility anymore.
Even if User was still attached, it's your responsibility to maintain the coherence of the object graph. If you modify one side of the association (by setting the user as owner of the photo), you should also modify the other side (by adding the photo to the list of photos of the owner).
I'm not absolutely sure this is the cause of the problem, because you haven't shown us what the loginUserBean was and did to get the logged in user, but it might be the answer.
There is a series of issues here:
Are photos actually stored in the database? Maybe you don't have a transaction open?
You are not updating both sides of the association.
Theoretically you only need to update the owning side, but better be safe than sorry:
photo = new Photo(photoURL, author, content);
em.persist(photo);
author.addPhoto(photo);
You are fetching the user from a session and then retrieving associated collection of photos. Do you really know what this means? If the user has hundreds of photos, do you really want to store them in HTTP session along with the user all the time? This is not how Facebook works ;-).
I think refreshing your entity (with em.refresh(lur.getLoggedUser())) might work, but only at university, not in real life. Loading all the user photos at once into memory is an overkill. Personally I would even remove photos association from user to avoid this. Load one page at a time and only on demand.
Even if you know what you are doing or such a behaviour is acceptable, objects stored in HTTP session are so called detached from persistence context, meaning your persistence provider does no longer keep track of them. So adding a photo does not mean that the photos collection will be magically updated in every object. I think about carefully, this would be even worse.
Last but not least, your createPost() really needs some code review. It does at least 4 things at once, System.out, one time threads created on demand, silently doing nothing when preconditions are not met (like user not being logged in, missing parameters), mixing concerns on different level of abstraction. Don't want to be too meticulous, but your grade might be influenced by the quality of code.
I'm currently working on a multi-tenant application that employs Shared DB/Shared Schema approach. IOW, we enforce tenant data segregation by defining a TenantID column on all tables. By convention, all SQL reads/writes must include a Where TenantID = '?' clause. Not an ideal solution, but hindsight is 20/20.
Anyway, since virtually every page/workflow in our app must display tenant specific data, I made the (poor) decision at the project's outset to employ a Singleton to encapsulate the current user credentials (i.e. TenantID and UserID). My thinking at the time was that I didn't want to add a TenantID parameter to each and every method signature in my Data layer.
Here's what the basic pseudo-code looks like:
public class UserIdentity
{
public UserIdentity(int tenantID, int userID)
{
TenantID = tenantID;
UserID = userID;
}
public int TenantID { get; private set; }
public int UserID { get; private set; }
}
public class AuthenticationModule : IHttpModule
{
public void Init(HttpApplication context)
{
context.AuthenticateRequest +=
new EventHandler(context_AuthenticateRequest);
}
private void context_AuthenticateRequest(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var userIdentity = _authenticationService.AuthenticateUser(sender);
if (userIdentity == null)
{
//authentication failed, so redirect to login page, etc
}
else
{
//put the userIdentity into the HttpContext object so that
//its only valid for the lifetime of a single request
HttpContext.Current.Items["UserIdentity"] = userIdentity;
}
}
}
public static class CurrentUser
{
public static UserIdentity Instance
{
get { return HttpContext.Current.Items["UserIdentity"]; }
}
}
public class WidgetRepository: IWidgetRepository{
public IEnumerable<Widget> ListWidgets(){
var tenantId = CurrentUser.Instance.TenantID;
//call sproc with tenantId parameter
}
}
As you can see, there are several code smells here. This is a singleton, so it's already not unit test friendly. On top of that you have a very tight-coupling between CurrentUser and the HttpContext object. By extension, this also means that I have a reference to System.Web in my Data layer (shudder).
I want to pay down some technical debt this sprint by getting rid of this singleton for the reasons mentioned above. I have a few thoughts on what a better implementation might be, but if anyone has any guidance or lessons learned they could share, I would be much obliged.
CurrentUser isn't quite a singleton. I'm not exactly sure what you'd call it. (A singleton by definition can only exist one at a time, and any number of UserIdentity instances can be created at will by outside code and coexist without any issues.)
Personally, i'd take CurrentUser.Instance and either move it to UserIdentity.CurrentUser, or put it together with whatever similar "get the global instance" methods and properties you have. Gets rid of the CurrentUser class, at least. While you're at it, make the property settable at the same place -- it's already settable, just in an way that (1) would look like magic if the two classes weren't shown right next to each other, and (2) makes changing how the current user identity is set later harder.
Doesn't get rid of the global, but you're not really gonna get around that without passing the UserIdentity to every function that needs it.