Search Results

Search found 5793 results on 232 pages for 'requests'.

Page 33/232 | < Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >

  • CloudFront for dynamic content CDN

    - by Elad Lachmi
    I would like to use CF as a CDN for my entire site, including static and dynamic content. I have been using CF for static content for a while and I am very happy with the results. I am now doing POC of putting the web server completely behind CF. For the dynamic content I created a new distribution and set the origin to be my web server. Right now I'm looking to test the solution, so I have the web server on the original domain and the CF distribution on the amazon domain. This works with the exception of HTTPS urls and POST requests. For HTTPS requests, I see the requests are forwarded to the original site domain for now, but how will CF handle them when I move the distribution to the www cname? What configuration changes should I make so that CF forwards HTTPS requests to the origin? For POST requests, I want the post to be made to the origin server. Can I set this up in CF? Finally, the site has membership. Can I configure CF to pull all content from the origin if the user is logged in? Sorry for the long question. I'm a little lost and documentation for dynamic CF is still kind of scarce. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Streamline Active Directory account creation via automated web site

    - by SteveM82
    In my company we have high employee turnover, and hence our helpdesk receives about a dozen requests per week for new Active Directory accounts. Currently, we receive these requests simply via e-mail or voice-mail, and rarely do we have all of the information necessary to create the account. I would like to find a web application that can be used by a manager or supervisor to formalize the requests they make for AD accounts for new employees under their command. Ideally, the application would prompt for all of necessary information, and allow the helpdesk to review the requests and approve or deny each one. If approved, the application would take care of creating the account and send an e-mail to the manager. I have found several application on the Internet that handle self-service account management (i.e., password resets or update contact info), which is also nice to have, but nothing that streamlines the new account request and creation part. Can anyone make suggestions on such an application? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Grizzly server - works with IP, but not with domain name

    - by Hitchhiker
    I'm hosting a grizzly web service on a Windows 7 Pro machine (embedded in a regular Java process), and it is binding to http://my-domain-name. When trying to hit the service from another machine, requests to http://my-domain-name fail (fiddler shows error code 502), but requests to http://my-ip work. When the service runs on a Windows Server 2008 machine, this doesn't happen (both requests succeed). What could be the issue?

    Read the article

  • Ngingx max worker_connections and access log

    - by MotoTribe
    I'm troubleshoot an issue with my site. I'm seeing in the ngingx-error.log that the max worker_connection limit has been reached when the site went down. I'm not seeing an increase of requests during that time in the ngingx-access.log. Does that mean the mysql database had a bottleneck at that time that caused the requests to queue up? Or would it not log any requests that where made after the max worker_connection limit has been reached?

    Read the article

  • How to redirect external web request to localhost's testing server

    - by Ivan Monteiro
    Some web services calls my web application(www.myapplication.com/external_update_handler). I need to test those requests locally, so I'd like to know your opinions about how can I "redirect" those requests to my localhost dev machine(that is outside of my web aplication domain) so I can debug. Probably it's needed a service/server to get those external requests and a desktop application that sends it to localhost:5555/external_update_handler, but I have no idea where to start and simpler options.

    Read the article

  • How to optimally configure memcache running on 16 cores 144G ram server?

    - by Ivko Maksimovic
    Memcache is the only important app running on the server Server has 16 cores and 144G RAM Memcache is given 135G Memcache runs at 32 threads Gigabit network, test shows at least 300Mbit/s availability on network port 600 connections 3000 requests per second Say that memcache (memory) usage is at 50% - it's definitely not full As we increase number of requests towards server, requests slow down (from 8ms to 100ms per request) but server load remains 0.00. We suspect this can be solved by adjusting configuration but we don't understand many of the configuration parameters (besides, maybe, the number of threads). Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • safely remove webserver from nginx backent pool?

    - by Dean Hiller
    We have 4 webservers behind nginx being hit with 262 events/second. I would like to tell nginx to stop sending requests to that server. If I remove the server from the file and reload the file, aren't all requests in process dropped on the floor then as nginx no longer knows that server. What can I add to the config so it slowly drops that server out of the pool and I can wait for current requests to complete.

    Read the article

  • How to make firefox proxy authentication fail silently?

    - by Vincent McNabb
    At work, certain protocols are blocked, and websites that I visit try to access these protocols with Javascript. These sites work fine when these requests fail (except for whatever it's trying to do with the requests), but I have to click cancel on a multitude of proxy authentication dialogs. What I want to do is just have firefox silently ignore this, so I can use the website without having to click cancel 8 times on every action I make (this includes all the stack overflow style sites which is trying to make requests with the ws: protocol).

    Read the article

  • HAProxy overload protection

    - by user2050516
    using the HAProxy, would it be possible to configure an overload protection, to limit the amount of requests sent to the backing http server(s) to a given rate (z.B 100 Request per second ). If the threshold is exceeded requests should be answered with a default response. I am interested in requests per second not connections per second as a connection can have many requests. And yes to improve the servers is not an option here. If yes a configuration example to achieve that would be excellent. Thank you in advance.

    Read the article

  • Apache Bench length failures

    - by Laurens
    I am running Apache Bench against a Ruby on Rails XML-RPC web service that is running on Passenger via mod_passenger. All is fine when I run 1000 requests without concurrency. Bench indicates that all requests successfully complete with no failures. When I run Bench again with a concurrency level of 2, however, requests start to fail due to content length. I am seeing failures rates of 70-80% when using concurrency. This should not happen. The requests I am sending to the web service should always results in the same response. I have used cURL to verify that this is in fact the case. My Rails log is not showing any errors as well so I am curious to see what content Bench actually received and interpreted as a failure. Is there any way to print these failures?

    Read the article

  • NGINX access logging with subdomain

    - by user353877
    We are trying to log requests made through an nginx load balancer. When we make requests to our server on a subdomain (api.blah.com), the request does not show up in the access logs However, requests made directly to blah.com do show up in the access logs. CONFIGURATION INFO We have a DNS record that creates a CNAME for the subdomain 'api' TRIED SO FAR We have tried looking in nginx.conf for exclusions (or anything that would be telling it to not log) We have tried adding server entries with the subdomain specifically and telling those to log but nothing seems to make a difference

    Read the article

  • Why would my VPN connection work better than my direct connection?

    - by tarling
    I have a new Windows 7 64bit laptop, which connects wirelessly to a ASDL router/modem. With my regular connection, page requests often time out - usually with form submissions. When I use the same connection to connect to a VPN (using OpenVPN) the requests seem to work fine. These are not requests to sites that are only available via the VPN - just regular websites I think this is specific to this new laptop (provided and set up by my employer) - other machines work fine. Many thanks for any advice, James

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET 4 Hosting :: ValidateRequest=”false” not working in .Net 4.0 (VS.Net 2010)

    - by mbridge
    When we migrated our project from .NET 3.5 to .NET 4.0, we can get this error: Error: System.Web.HttpRequestValidationException A potentially dangerous Request.Form value was detected from the client (ctl00$CC$txtAnswer=\”… World\r\n\r\nI am doing Testin…\”).”} System.Web.HttpRequestValidationException at System.Web.HttpRequest.ValidateString(String value, String collectionKey, RequestValidationSource requestCollection)    at System.Web.HttpRequest.ValidateNameValueCollection(NameValueCollection nvc, RequestValidationSource requestCollection)    at System.Web.HttpRequest.get_Form()    at System.Web.HttpRequest.get_HasForm()    at System.Web.UI.Page.GetCollectionBasedOnMethod(Boolean dontReturnNull)    at System.Web.UI.Page.DeterminePostBackMode()    at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint)    at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint)    at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest()    at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestWithNoAssert(HttpContext context)    at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest(HttpContext context)    at ASP.displaypost_aspx.ProcessRequest(HttpContext context) in c:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v4.0.30319\Temporary ASP.NET Files\root\a37c2f81\cfc4c927\App_Web_i2rujncl.9.cs:line 0    at System.Web.HttpApplication.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute()    at System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) What is the Cause? In ASP.NET 4, by default, request validation is enabled for all requests, because it is enabled before the BeginRequest phase of an HTTP request. As a result, request validation applies to requests for all ASP.NET resources, not just .aspx page requests. This includes requests such as Web service calls and custom HTTP handlers. Request validation is also active when custom HTTP modules are reading the contents of an HTTP request. Solution: To revert to the behavior of the ASP.NET 2.0 request validation feature, add the following setting in the Web.config file: <system.web>  <httpRuntime requestValidationMode=”2.0? /> </system.web>

    Read the article

  • Does waterfall require code complete before QA steps in?

    - by P.Brian.Mackey
    The process used at a certain company consists of: Create a layout according to some designs made in a web page design tool. (CSS, html) Requirements come in with "functional requirements". These consist of 100's of lines of business directions. E.G. Create a Table on page X. Column1 has numeric data. Column1 is the client code. Column2 is a string...etc. Write code to meet all functional requirements. When all code is checked in, send to QA (which is the BA that wrote the requirements) for inspection, bug finds and change requests. Punt back to developer with a list of X bugs and Y change requests. While bug finds or change requests 0 go to step 4. The agile development environments I have worked in allow, if not demand, early QA inspection and early user acceptance. So, pieces of the program can be refined and redefined before the entire application is in place. Not only that, but the process leaves little room for error or people changing their minds. Instead, those "change requests" come in at the last stage when they do the most damage. And being that a bug-fix's cost increases over time, this is a costly way to write code. I am no waterfall expert. As described, is this waterfall being mishandled in some way? How does waterfall address my concerns?

    Read the article

  • Consolidating Oracle E-Business Suite R12 on Oracle's SPARC SuperCluster

    - by Giri Mandalika
    Oracle Optimized Solution for Oracle E-Business Suite (EBS) R12 12.1.3 is now available on oracle.com. The Oracle Optimized Solution for Oracle E-Business Suite This solution uses the SPARC SuperCluster T4-4, Oracle’s first multi-purpose engineered system.  Download the free business and technical white papers which provide significant relevant information and resources.  What is an Optimized Solution? Oracle Optimized Solutions are fully documented architectures that have been thoroughly tested, tuned and optimized for performance and availability across the entire stack on a target platform. The technical white paper details the deployed application architecture along with various observations from installing the application on target platform to its behavior and performance in highly available and scalable configurations. Oracle E-Business Suite R12 and Oracle Database 11g Multiple Oracle E-Business Suite  application modules were tested in this Oracle Optimized Solution -- Financials (online - Oracle Forms & Web requests), Order Management (online - Oracle Forms & Web requests) and HRMS (online - Web requests & payroll batch). Oracle Solaris Cluster and Oracle Real Application Cluster deliver the the high availability on this solution.  To understand the behavior of the architecture under peak load conditions, determine optimum utilization, verify the scalability of the solution and exercise high availability features, Oracle engineers tested the Oracle E-Business Suite and Oracle Database all running on a SPARC SuperCluster T4-4 engineered system. The test results are documented in the Oracle Optimized Solution white papers to provide general guidance for real world deployments.  Questions & Requests For more information, visit Oracle Optimized Solution for Oracle E-Business Suite page. If you are at a point where you would like to actually test a specific Oracle E-Business Suite application module on SPARC T4 systems or an engineered system such as SPARC SuperCluster, please contact Oracle Solution Center.

    Read the article

  • Building a Redundant / Distrubuted Application

    - by MattW
    This is more of a "point me in the right direction" question. I (and my team of 3) have built a hosted web app that queues and routes customer chat requests to available customer service agents (It does other things as well, but this is enough background to illustrate the issue). The basic dev architecture today is: a single page ajax web UI (ASP.NET MVC) with floating chat windows (think Gmail) a backend Windows service to queue and route the chat requests this service also logs the chats, calculates service levels, etc a Comet server product that routes data between the web frontend and the backend Windows service this also helps us detect which Agents are still connected (online) And our hardware architecture today is: 2 servers to host the web UI portion of the application a load balancer to route requests to the 2 different web app servers a third server to host the SQL Server DB and the backend Windows service responsible for queuing / delivering chats So as it stands today, one of the web app servers could go down and we would be ok. However, if something would happen to the SQL Server / Windows Service server we would be boned. My question - how can I make this backend Windows service logic be able to be spread across multiple machines (distributed)? The Windows service is written to accept requests from the Comet server, check for available Agents, and route the chat to those agents. How can I make this more distributed? How can I make it so that I can distribute the work of the backend Windows service can be spread across multiple machines for redundancy and uptime purposes? Will I need to re-write it with distributed computing in mind? I should also note that I am hosting all of this on Rackspace Cloud instances - so maybe it is something I should be less concerned about? Thanks in advance for any help!

    Read the article

  • How to manage own bots at the server?

    - by Nikolay Kuznetsov
    There is a game server and people can play in game rooms of 2, 3 or 4. When a client connects to server he can send a request specifying a number of people or range he wants to play with. One of this value is valid: {2-4, 2-3, 3-4, 2, 3, 4} So the server maintains 3 separate queues for game room with 2, 3 and 4 people. So we can denote queues as #2, #3 and #4. It work the following way. If a client sends request, 3-4, then two separate request are added to queues #3 and #4. If queue #3 now have 3 requests from different people then game room with 3 players is created, and all other requests from those players are removed from all queues. Right now not many people are online simultaneously, so they apply for a game wait for some time and quit because game does not start in a reasonable time. That's a simple bot for beginning has been developed. So there is a need to patch server code to run a bot, if some one requests a game, but humans are not online. Input: request from human {2-4, 2-3, 3-4, 2, 3, 4} Output: number of bots to run and time to wait for each before connecting, depending on queues state. The problem is that I don't know how to manage bots properly at the server? Example: #3 has 1 request and #4 has 1 request Request from user is {3,4} then server can add one bot to play game with 3 people or two bots to play game of 4. Example: #3 has 1 request and #4 has 2 requests Request from user is {3,4} then in each case just one bot is needed so game with 4 players is more preferrable.

    Read the article

  • Building a Redundant / Distributed Application

    - by MattW
    This is more of a "point me in the right direction" question. My team of three and I have built a hosted web app that queues and routes customer chat requests to available customer service agents (It does other things as well, but this is enough background to illustrate the issue). The basic dev architecture today is: a single page ajax web UI (ASP.NET MVC) with floating chat windows (think Gmail) a backend Windows service to queue and route the chat requests this service also logs the chats, calculates service levels, etc a Comet server product that routes data between the web frontend and the backend Windows service this also helps us detect which Agents are still connected (online) And our hardware architecture today is: 2 servers to host the web UI portion of the application a load balancer to route requests to the 2 different web app servers a third server to host the SQL Server DB and the backend Windows service responsible for queuing / delivering chats So as it stands today, one of the web app servers could go down and we would be ok. However, if something would happen to the SQL Server / Windows Service server we would be boned. My question - how can I make this backend Windows service logic be able to be spread across multiple machines (distributed)? The Windows service is written to accept requests from the Comet server, check for available Agents, and route the chat to those agents. How can I make this more distributed? How can I make it so that I can distribute the work of the backend Windows service can be spread across multiple machines for redundancy and uptime purposes? Will I need to re-write it with distributed computing in mind? I should also note that I am hosting all of this on Rackspace Cloud instances - so maybe it is something I should be less concerned about? Thanks in advance for any help!

    Read the article

  • Release Notes for 6/14/2012

    Here are the notes for this week’s release: Diffs in Pull Requests and Commits We altered the way we display diffs across commits and pull requests to maximize the amount of vertical real estate devoted to the diff. Before, the viewport for diffs was always snapped to the height of the browser, which meant that on lower resolutions, the amount of space for viewing diffs could become very tiny. Now, the majority of the browser vertical space is devoted to viewing the diffs. Let us know what you think! Bug Fixes Fixed an issue where returning to the list of files changed from a diff would sometimes not show the list of files. Fixed the dialogs for approving and denying requests to join projects. Fixed various issues around validation of project details when publishing a project. Fixed an issue that caused the formatting of our tabs in pull requests to not display properly. Fixed an issue where users browsing Unicode files in a Git project would see error pages. Fixed various issues where the option to subscribe to notifications would not appear properly. Have ideas on how to improve CodePlex? Visit our ideas page! Vote for your favorite ideas or submit a new one. Got Twitter? Follow us and keep apprised of the latest releases and service status at @codeplex.

    Read the article

  • Release Notes for 5/18/2012

    Here are the notes for this week’s release: Pull Requests We’ve added the ability to see the snippets of code where a user commented inline in the discussion of pull requests. You can also add another line comment directly from the discussion area, rather than navigating to the code diff viewer. Note that there’s currently a known issue where the line associated with the comment isn’t being properly differentiated for existing pull requests (the line in the middle of each diff preview should be bolded). Apologies for the inconvenience! As part of this work, we also took some time to clean up our diff viewer UI to remove the dots and introduce a new color scheme where green is used for added lines. Bug Fixes Fixed an issue affecting the ability to assign pull requests. Fixed an issue where managing various team resources for a project was not working in Chrome or Firefox. Fixed an issue where a project’s RSS subscribe dialog popped up in the wrong place. Fixed an issue where editing wiki anchor links would insert extra characters, resulting in broken links. Fixed an issue where project logos did not display correctly when browsing the site with https in Chrome or Firefox. Fixed an issue where users could encounter errors when deleting remote Git branches. Fixed an issue affecting the ability of fork collaborators to push changes to the fork. Fixed an issue where the advanced work item filters would not persist when navigating through result pages. Fixed an issue where the issue tracker notifications link was not clickable in Chrome. Fixed an issue where pull request comments with line breaks would not be formatted properly when viewing the pull request. Other We upgraded our Git servers to version 1.7.10.1. Have ideas on how to improve CodePlex? Visit our ideas page! Vote for your favorite ideas or submit a new one. Got Twitter? Follow us and keep apprised of the latest releases and service status at @codeplex.

    Read the article

  • Release Notes for 6/21/2012

    Here are the notes for this week’s release on CodePlex: Pull Requests We now support the ability to conduct pull requests in Git and Mercurial across arbitrary branches in your project. No forks necessary! If you’re on a small team of contributors, this is a great way to conduct code reviews for changes to your project. We now support e-mail notifications to be delivered whenever a comment is added to a pull request or line of code pertaining to a pull request. A checkbox for subscribing now appears at the bottom of all pull requests. You can manage your subscriptions by editing your profile. Bug Fixes Updated the various change subscription details page to reflect our newer UI theme. Changed the placement of horizontal scrollbar when viewing diffs of pull requests and commits to be inline with the code. Fixed various issues around interacting with the new diff viewer that we introduced last week. Do let us know if you have any feedback on the new diff viewer. Have ideas on how to improve CodePlex? Visit our ideas page! Vote for your favorite ideas or submit a new one. Got Twitter? Follow us and keep apprised of the latest releases and service status at @codeplex.

    Read the article

  • Anti-Forgery Request Helpers for ASP.NET MVC and jQuery AJAX

    - by Dixin
    Background To secure websites from cross-site request forgery (CSRF, or XSRF) attack, ASP.NET MVC provides an excellent mechanism: The server prints tokens to cookie and inside the form; When the form is submitted to server, token in cookie and token inside the form are sent in the HTTP request; Server validates the tokens. To print tokens to browser, just invoke HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken():<% using (Html.BeginForm()) { %> <%: this.Html.AntiForgeryToken(Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)%> <%-- Other fields. --%> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> <% } %> This invocation generates a token then writes inside the form:<form action="..." method="post"> <input name="__RequestVerificationToken" type="hidden" value="J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP" /> <!-- Other fields. --> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> </form> and also writes into the cookie: __RequestVerificationToken_Lw__= J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP When the above form is submitted, they are both sent to server. In the server side, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute is used to specify the controllers or actions to validate them:[HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult Action(/* ... */) { // ... } This is very productive for form scenarios. But recently, when resolving security vulnerabilities for Web products, some problems are encountered. Specify validation on controller (not on each action) The server side problem is, It is expected to declare [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] on controller, but actually it has be to declared on each POST actions. Because POST actions are usually much more then controllers, this is a little crazy Problem Usually a controller contains actions for HTTP GET and actions for HTTP POST requests, and usually validations are expected for HTTP POST requests. So, if the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] is declared on the controller, the HTTP GET requests become invalid:[ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller // One [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute. { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Index() cannot work. { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } If browser sends an HTTP GET request by clicking a link: http://Site/Some/Index, validation definitely fails, because no token is provided. So the result is, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute must be distributed to each POST action:public class SomeController : Controller // Many [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes. { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Works. { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } This is a little bit crazy, because one application can have a lot of POST actions. Solution To avoid a large number of [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes (one for each POST action), the following ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute wrapper class can be helpful, where HTTP verbs can be specified:[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter { private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs) : this(verbs, null) { } public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = salt }; } public void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext) { string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride(); if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext); } } } When this attribute is declared on controller, only HTTP requests with the specified verbs are validated:[ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper(HttpVerbs.Post, Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller { // GET actions are not affected. // Only HTTP POST requests are validated. } Now one single attribute on controller turns on validation for all POST actions. Maybe it would be nice if HTTP verbs can be specified on the built-in [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute, which is easy to implemented. Submit token via AJAX The browser side problem is, if server side turns on anti-forgery validation for POST, then AJAX POST requests will fail be default. Problem For AJAX scenarios, when request is sent by jQuery instead of form:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 // Token is not posted. }, callback); This kind of AJAX POST requests will always be invalid, because server side code cannot see the token in the posted data. Solution The tokens are printed to browser then sent back to server. So first of all, HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() must be called somewhere. Now the browser has token in HTML and cookie. Then jQuery must find the printed token in the HTML, and append token to the data before sending:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1, __RequestVerificationToken: getToken() // Token is posted. }, callback); To be reusable, this can be encapsulated into a tiny jQuery plugin:/// <reference path="jquery-1.4.2.js" /> (function ($) { $.getAntiForgeryToken = function (tokenWindow, appPath) { // HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() must be invoked to print the token. tokenWindow = tokenWindow && typeof tokenWindow === typeof window ? tokenWindow : window; appPath = appPath && typeof appPath === "string" ? "_" + appPath.toString() : ""; // The name attribute is either __RequestVerificationToken, // or __RequestVerificationToken_{appPath}. tokenName = "__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath; // Finds the <input type="hidden" name={tokenName} value="..." /> from the specified. // var inputElements = $("input[type='hidden'][name='__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath + "']"); var inputElements = tokenWindow.document.getElementsByTagName("input"); for (var i = 0; i < inputElements.length; i++) { var inputElement = inputElements[i]; if (inputElement.type === "hidden" && inputElement.name === tokenName) { return { name: tokenName, value: inputElement.value }; } } return null; }; $.appendAntiForgeryToken = function (data, token) { // Converts data if not already a string. if (data && typeof data !== "string") { data = $.param(data); } // Gets token from current window by default. token = token ? token : $.getAntiForgeryToken(); // $.getAntiForgeryToken(window). data = data ? data + "&" : ""; // If token exists, appends {token.name}={token.value} to data. return token ? data + encodeURIComponent(token.name) + "=" + encodeURIComponent(token.value) : data; }; // Wraps $.post(url, data, callback, type). $.postAntiForgery = function (url, data, callback, type) { return $.post(url, $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data), callback, type); }; // Wraps $.ajax(settings). $.ajaxAntiForgery = function (settings) { settings.data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(settings.data); return $.ajax(settings); }; })(jQuery); In most of the scenarios, it is Ok to just replace $.post() invocation with $.postAntiForgery(), and replace $.ajax() with $.ajaxAntiForgery():$.postAntiForgery(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 }, callback); // Token is posted. There might be some scenarios of custom token. Here $.appendAntiForgeryToken() is provided:data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, token); // Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery(). $.post(url, data, callback); And there are scenarios that the token is not in the current window. For example, an HTTP POST request can be sent by iframe, while the token is in the parent window. Here window can be specified for $.getAntiForgeryToken():data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, $.getAntiForgeryToken(window.parent)); // Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery(). $.post(url, data, callback); If you have better solution, please do tell me.

    Read the article

  • Google is blocking our requests due to "automated queries"; what's the best way to find out why?

    - by Ryan Detzel
    This started a few weeks ago and we thought it was a virus so we checked every computer and all though 50%(Yeah, that's right) were infected once they were cleaned the problem didn't go away. It's really frustrating so I want to figure it out so I need suggestions on how to find the culprit. I think the router has logging but it logs everyone so it's hard to tell and I might be able to setup a proxy but again it's hard to tell when and what to monitor. What are your suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Creating STA COM compatible ASP.NET Applications

    - by Rick Strahl
    When building ASP.NET applications that interface with old school COM objects like those created with VB6 or Visual FoxPro (MTDLL), it's extremely important that the threads that are serving requests use Single Threaded Apartment Threading. STA is a COM built-in technology that allows essentially single threaded components to operate reliably in a multi-threaded environment. STA's guarantee that COM objects instantiated on a specific thread stay on that specific thread and any access to a COM object from another thread automatically marshals that thread to the STA thread. The end effect is that you can have multiple threads, but a COM object instance lives on a fixed never changing thread. ASP.NET by default uses MTA (multi-threaded apartment) threads which are truly free spinning threads that pay no heed to COM object marshaling. This is vastly more efficient than STA threading which has a bit of overhead in determining whether it's OK to run code on a given thread or whether some sort of thread/COM marshaling needs to occur. MTA COM components can be very efficient, but STA COM components in a multi-threaded environment always tend to have a fair amount of overhead. It's amazing how much COM Interop I still see today so while it seems really old school to be talking about this topic, it's actually quite apropos for me as I have many customers using legacy COM systems that need to interface with other .NET applications. In this post I'm consolidating some of the hacks I've used to integrate with various ASP.NET technologies when using STA COM Components. STA in ASP.NET Support for STA threading in the ASP.NET framework is fairly limited. Specifically only the original ASP.NET WebForms technology supports STA threading directly via its STA Page Handler implementation or what you might know as ASPCOMPAT mode. For WebForms running STA components is as easy as specifying the ASPCOMPAT attribute in the @Page tag:<%@ Page Language="C#" AspCompat="true" %> which runs the page in STA mode. Removing it runs in MTA mode. Simple. Unfortunately all other ASP.NET technologies built on top of the core ASP.NET engine do not support STA natively. So if you want to use STA COM components in MVC or with class ASMX Web Services, there's no automatic way like the ASPCOMPAT keyword available. So what happens when you run an STA COM component in an MTA application? In low volume environments - nothing much will happen. The COM objects will appear to work just fine as there are no simultaneous thread interactions and the COM component will happily run on a single thread or multiple single threads one at a time. So for testing running components in MTA environments may appear to work just fine. However as load increases and threads get re-used by ASP.NET COM objects will end up getting created on multiple different threads. This can result in crashes or hangs, or data corruption in the STA components which store their state in thread local storage on the STA thread. If threads overlap this global store can easily get corrupted which in turn causes problems. STA ensures that any COM object instance loaded always stays on the same thread it was instantiated on. What about COM+? COM+ is supposed to address the problem of STA in MTA applications by providing an abstraction with it's own thread pool manager for COM objects. It steps in to the COM instantiation pipeline and hands out COM instances from its own internally maintained STA Thread pool. This guarantees that the COM instantiation threads are STA threads if using STA components. COM+ works, but in my experience the technology is very, very slow for STA components. It adds a ton of overhead and reduces COM performance noticably in load tests in IIS. COM+ can make sense in some situations but for Web apps with STA components it falls short. In addition there's also the need to ensure that COM+ is set up and configured on the target machine and the fact that components have to be registered in COM+. COM+ also keeps components up at all times, so if a component needs to be replaced the COM+ package needs to be unloaded (same is true for IIS hosted components but it's more common to manage that). COM+ is an option for well established components, but native STA support tends to provide better performance and more consistent usability, IMHO. STA for non supporting ASP.NET Technologies As mentioned above only WebForms supports STA natively. However, by utilizing the WebForms ASP.NET Page handler internally it's actually possible to trick various other ASP.NET technologies and let them work with STA components. This is ugly but I've used each of these in various applications and I've had minimal problems making them work with FoxPro STA COM components which is about as dififcult as it gets for COM Interop in .NET. In this post I summarize several STA workarounds that enable you to use STA threading with these ASP.NET Technologies: ASMX Web Services ASP.NET MVC WCF Web Services ASP.NET Web API ASMX Web Services I start with classic ASP.NET ASMX Web Services because it's the easiest mechanism that allows for STA modification. It also clearly demonstrates how the WebForms STA Page Handler is the key technology to enable the various other solutions to create STA components. Essentially the way this works is to override the WebForms Page class and hijack it's init functionality for processing requests. Here's what this looks like for Web Services:namespace FoxProAspNet { public class WebServiceStaHandler : System.Web.UI.Page, IHttpAsyncHandler { protected override void OnInit(EventArgs e) { IHttpHandler handler = new WebServiceHandlerFactory().GetHandler( this.Context, this.Context.Request.HttpMethod, this.Context.Request.FilePath, this.Context.Request.PhysicalPath); handler.ProcessRequest(this.Context); this.Context.ApplicationInstance.CompleteRequest(); } public IAsyncResult BeginProcessRequest( HttpContext context, AsyncCallback cb, object extraData) { return this.AspCompatBeginProcessRequest(context, cb, extraData); } public void EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) { this.AspCompatEndProcessRequest(result); } } public class AspCompatWebServiceStaHandlerWithSessionState : WebServiceStaHandler, IRequiresSessionState { } } This class overrides the ASP.NET WebForms Page class which has a little known AspCompatBeginProcessRequest() and AspCompatEndProcessRequest() method that is responsible for providing the WebForms ASPCOMPAT functionality. These methods handle routing requests to STA threads. Note there are two classes - one that includes session state and one that does not. If you plan on using ASP.NET Session state use the latter class, otherwise stick to the former. This maps to the EnableSessionState page setting in WebForms. This class simply hooks into this functionality by overriding the BeginProcessRequest and EndProcessRequest methods and always forcing it into the AspCompat methods. The way this works is that BeginProcessRequest() fires first to set up the threads and starts intializing the handler. As part of that process the OnInit() method is fired which is now already running on an STA thread. The code then creates an instance of the actual WebService handler factory and calls its ProcessRequest method to start executing which generates the Web Service result. Immediately after ProcessRequest the request is stopped with Application.CompletRequest() which ensures that the rest of the Page handler logic doesn't fire. This means that even though the fairly heavy Page class is overridden here, it doesn't end up executing any of its internal processing which makes this code fairly efficient. In a nutshell, we're highjacking the Page HttpHandler and forcing it to process the WebService process handler in the context of the AspCompat handler behavior. Hooking up the Handler Because the above is an HttpHandler implementation you need to hook up the custom handler and replace the standard ASMX handler. To do this you need to modify the web.config file (here for IIS 7 and IIS Express): <configuration> <system.webServer> <handlers> <remove name="WebServiceHandlerFactory-Integrated-4.0" /> <add name="Asmx STA Web Service Handler" path="*.asmx" verb="*" type="FoxProAspNet.WebServiceStaHandler" precondition="integrated"/> </handlers> </system.webServer> </configuration> (Note: The name for the WebServiceHandlerFactory-Integrated-4.0 might be slightly different depending on your server version. Check the IIS Handler configuration in the IIS Management Console for the exact name or simply remove the handler from the list there which will propagate to your web.config). For IIS 5 & 6 (Windows XP/2003) or the Visual Studio Web Server use:<configuration> <system.web> <httpHandlers> <remove path="*.asmx" verb="*" /> <add path="*.asmx" verb="*" type="FoxProAspNet.WebServiceStaHandler" /> </httpHandlers> </system.web></configuration> To test, create a new ASMX Web Service and create a method like this: [WebService(Namespace = "http://foxaspnet.org/")] [WebServiceBinding(ConformsTo = WsiProfiles.BasicProfile1_1)] public class FoxWebService : System.Web.Services.WebService { [WebMethod] public string HelloWorld() { return "Hello World. Threading mode is: " + System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState(); } } Run this before you put in the web.config configuration changes and you should get: Hello World. Threading mode is: MTA Then put the handler mapping into Web.config and you should see: Hello World. Threading mode is: STA And you're on your way to using STA COM components. It's a hack but it works well! I've used this with several high volume Web Service installations with various customers and it's been fast and reliable. ASP.NET MVC ASP.NET MVC has quickly become the most popular ASP.NET technology, replacing WebForms for creating HTML output. MVC is more complex to get started with, but once you understand the basic structure of how requests flow through the MVC pipeline it's easy to use and amazingly flexible in manipulating HTML requests. In addition, MVC has great support for non-HTML output sources like JSON and XML, making it an excellent choice for AJAX requests without any additional tools. Unlike WebForms ASP.NET MVC doesn't support STA threads natively and so some trickery is needed to make it work with STA threads as well. MVC gets its handler implementation through custom route handlers using ASP.NET's built in routing semantics. To work in an STA handler requires working in the Page Handler as part of the Route Handler implementation. As with the Web Service handler the first step is to create a custom HttpHandler that can instantiate an MVC request pipeline properly:public class MvcStaThreadHttpAsyncHandler : Page, IHttpAsyncHandler, IRequiresSessionState { private RequestContext _requestContext; public MvcStaThreadHttpAsyncHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { if (requestContext == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("requestContext"); _requestContext = requestContext; } public IAsyncResult BeginProcessRequest(HttpContext context, AsyncCallback cb, object extraData) { return this.AspCompatBeginProcessRequest(context, cb, extraData); } protected override void OnInit(EventArgs e) { var controllerName = _requestContext.RouteData.GetRequiredString("controller"); var controllerFactory = ControllerBuilder.Current.GetControllerFactory(); var controller = controllerFactory.CreateController(_requestContext, controllerName); if (controller == null) throw new InvalidOperationException("Could not find controller: " + controllerName); try { controller.Execute(_requestContext); } finally { controllerFactory.ReleaseController(controller); } this.Context.ApplicationInstance.CompleteRequest(); } public void EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) { this.AspCompatEndProcessRequest(result); } public override void ProcessRequest(HttpContext httpContext) { throw new NotSupportedException("STAThreadRouteHandler does not support ProcessRequest called (only BeginProcessRequest)"); } } This handler code figures out which controller to load and then executes the controller. MVC internally provides the information needed to route to the appropriate method and pass the right parameters. Like the Web Service handler the logic occurs in the OnInit() and performs all the processing in that part of the request. Next, we need a RouteHandler that can actually pick up this handler. Unlike the Web Service handler where we simply registered the handler, MVC requires a RouteHandler to pick up the handler. RouteHandlers look at the URL's path and based on that decide on what handler to invoke. The route handler is pretty simple - all it does is load our custom handler: public class MvcStaThreadRouteHandler : IRouteHandler { public IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { if (requestContext == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("requestContext"); return new MvcStaThreadHttpAsyncHandler(requestContext); } } At this point you can instantiate this route handler and force STA requests to MVC by specifying a route. The following sets up the ASP.NET Default Route:Route mvcRoute = new Route("{controller}/{action}/{id}", new RouteValueDictionary( new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }), new MvcStaThreadRouteHandler()); RouteTable.Routes.Add(mvcRoute);   To make this code a little easier to work with and mimic the behavior of the routes.MapRoute() functionality extension method that MVC provides, here is an extension method for MapMvcStaRoute(): public static class RouteCollectionExtensions { public static void MapMvcStaRoute(this RouteCollection routeTable, string name, string url, object defaults = null) { Route mvcRoute = new Route(url, new RouteValueDictionary(defaults), new MvcStaThreadRouteHandler()); RouteTable.Routes.Add(mvcRoute); } } With this the syntax to add  route becomes a little easier and matches the MapRoute() method:RouteTable.Routes.MapMvcStaRoute( name: "Default", url: "{controller}/{action}/{id}", defaults: new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional } ); The nice thing about this route handler, STA Handler and extension method is that it's fully self contained. You can put all three into a single class file and stick it into your Web app, and then simply call MapMvcStaRoute() and it just works. Easy! To see whether this works create an MVC controller like this: public class ThreadTestController : Controller { public string ThreadingMode() { return Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState().ToString(); } } Try this test both with only the MapRoute() hookup in the RouteConfiguration in which case you should get MTA as the value. Then change the MapRoute() call to MapMvcStaRoute() leaving all the parameters the same and re-run the request. You now should see STA as the result. You're on your way using STA COM components reliably in ASP.NET MVC. WCF Web Services running through IIS WCF Web Services provide a more robust and wider range of services for Web Services. You can use WCF over HTTP, TCP, and Pipes, and WCF services support WS* secure services. There are many features in WCF that go way beyond what ASMX can do. But it's also a bit more complex than ASMX. As a basic rule if you need to serve straight SOAP Services over HTTP I 'd recommend sticking with the simpler ASMX services especially if COM is involved. If you need WS* support or want to serve data over non-HTTP protocols then WCF makes more sense. WCF is not my forte but I found a solution from Scott Seely on his blog that describes the progress and that seems to work well. I'm copying his code below so this STA information is all in one place and quickly explain. Scott's code basically works by creating a custom OperationBehavior which can be specified via an [STAOperation] attribute on every method. Using his attribute you end up with a class (or Interface if you separate the contract and class) that looks like this: [ServiceContract] public class WcfService { [OperationContract] public string HelloWorldMta() { return Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState().ToString(); } // Make sure you use this custom STAOperationBehavior // attribute to force STA operation of service methods [STAOperationBehavior] [OperationContract] public string HelloWorldSta() { return Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState().ToString(); } } Pretty straight forward. The latter method returns STA while the former returns MTA. To make STA work every method needs to be marked up. The implementation consists of the attribute and OperationInvoker implementation. Here are the two classes required to make this work from Scott's post:public class STAOperationBehaviorAttribute : Attribute, IOperationBehavior { public void AddBindingParameters(OperationDescription operationDescription, System.ServiceModel.Channels.BindingParameterCollection bindingParameters) { } public void ApplyClientBehavior(OperationDescription operationDescription, System.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.ClientOperation clientOperation) { // If this is applied on the client, well, it just doesn’t make sense. // Don’t throw in case this attribute was applied on the contract // instead of the implementation. } public void ApplyDispatchBehavior(OperationDescription operationDescription, System.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.DispatchOperation dispatchOperation) { // Change the IOperationInvoker for this operation. dispatchOperation.Invoker = new STAOperationInvoker(dispatchOperation.Invoker); } public void Validate(OperationDescription operationDescription) { if (operationDescription.SyncMethod == null) { throw new InvalidOperationException("The STAOperationBehaviorAttribute " + "only works for synchronous method invocations."); } } } public class STAOperationInvoker : IOperationInvoker { IOperationInvoker _innerInvoker; public STAOperationInvoker(IOperationInvoker invoker) { _innerInvoker = invoker; } public object[] AllocateInputs() { return _innerInvoker.AllocateInputs(); } public object Invoke(object instance, object[] inputs, out object[] outputs) { // Create a new, STA thread object[] staOutputs = null; object retval = null; Thread thread = new Thread( delegate() { retval = _innerInvoker.Invoke(instance, inputs, out staOutputs); }); thread.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.STA); thread.Start(); thread.Join(); outputs = staOutputs; return retval; } public IAsyncResult InvokeBegin(object instance, object[] inputs, AsyncCallback callback, object state) { // We don’t handle async… throw new NotImplementedException(); } public object InvokeEnd(object instance, out object[] outputs, IAsyncResult result) { // We don’t handle async… throw new NotImplementedException(); } public bool IsSynchronous { get { return true; } } } The key in this setup is the Invoker and the Invoke method which creates a new thread and then fires the request on this new thread. Because this approach creates a new thread for every request it's not super efficient. There's a bunch of overhead involved in creating the thread and throwing it away after each thread, but it'll work for low volume requests and insure each thread runs in STA mode. If better performance is required it would be useful to create a custom thread manager that can pool a number of STA threads and hand off threads as needed rather than creating new threads on every request. If your Web Service needs are simple and you need only to serve standard SOAP 1.x requests, I would recommend sticking with ASMX services. It's easier to set up and work with and for STA component use it'll be significantly better performing since ASP.NET manages the STA thread pool for you rather than firing new threads for each request. One nice thing about Scotts code is though that it works in any WCF environment including self hosting. It has no dependency on ASP.NET or WebForms for that matter. STA - If you must STA components are a  pain in the ass and thankfully there isn't too much stuff out there anymore that requires it. But when you need it and you need to access STA functionality from .NET at least there are a few options available to make it happen. Each of these solutions is a bit hacky, but they work - I've used all of them in production with good results with FoxPro components. I hope compiling all of these in one place here makes it STA consumption a little bit easier. I feel your pain :-) Resources Download STA Handler Code Examples Scott Seely's original STA WCF OperationBehavior Article© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in FoxPro   ASP.NET  .NET  COM   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • New .NET Library for Accessing the Survey Monkey API

    - by Ben Emmett
    I’ve used Survey Monkey’s API for a while, and though it’s pretty powerful, there’s a lot of boilerplate each time it’s used in a new project, and the json it returns needs a bunch of processing to be able to use the raw information. So I’ve finally got around to releasing a .NET library you can use to consume the API more easily. The main advantages are: Only ever deal with strongly-typed .NET objects, making everything much more robust and a lot faster to get going Automatically handles things like rate-limiting and paging through results Uses combinations of endpoints to get all relevant data for you, and processes raw response data to map responses to questions To start, either install it using NuGet with PM> Install-Package SurveyMonkeyApi (easier option), or grab the source from https://github.com/bcemmett/SurveyMonkeyApi if you prefer to build it yourself. You’ll also need to have signed up for a developer account with Survey Monkey, and have both your API key and an OAuth token. A simple usage would be something like: string apiKey = "KEY"; string token = "TOKEN"; var sm = new SurveyMonkeyApi(apiKey, token); List<Survey> surveys = sm.GetSurveyList(); The surveys object is now a list of surveys with all the information available from the /surveys/get_survey_list API endpoint, including the title, id, date it was created and last modified, language, number of questions / responses, and relevant urls. If there are more than 1000 surveys in your account, the library pages through the results for you, making multiple requests to get a complete list of surveys. All the filtering available in the API can be controlled using .NET objects. For example you might only want surveys created in the last year and containing “pineapple” in the title: var settings = new GetSurveyListSettings { Title = "pineapple", StartDate = DateTime.Now.AddYears(-1) }; List<Survey> surveys = sm.GetSurveyList(settings); By default, whenever optional fields can be requested with a response, they will all be fetched for you. You can change this behaviour if for some reason you explicitly don’t want the information, using var settings = new GetSurveyListSettings { OptionalData = new GetSurveyListSettingsOptionalData { DateCreated = false, AnalysisUrl = false } }; Survey Monkey’s 7 read-only endpoints are supported, and the other 4 which make modifications to data might be supported in the future. The endpoints are: Endpoint Method Object returned /surveys/get_survey_list GetSurveyList() List<Survey> /surveys/get_survey_details GetSurveyDetails() Survey /surveys/get_collector_list GetCollectorList() List<Collector> /surveys/get_respondent_list GetRespondentList() List<Respondent> /surveys/get_responses GetResponses() List<Response> /surveys/get_response_counts GetResponseCounts() Collector /user/get_user_details GetUserDetails() UserDetails /batch/create_flow Not supported Not supported /batch/send_flow Not supported Not supported /templates/get_template_list Not supported Not supported /collectors/create_collector Not supported Not supported The hierarchy of objects the library can return is Survey List<Page> List<Question> QuestionType List<Answer> List<Item> List<Collector> List<Response> Respondent List<ResponseQuestion> List<ResponseAnswer> Each of these classes has properties which map directly to the names of properties returned by the API itself (though using PascalCasing which is more natural for .NET, rather than the snake_casing used by SurveyMonkey). For most users, Survey Monkey imposes a rate limit of 2 requests per second, so by default the library leaves at least 500ms between requests. You can request higher limits from them, so if you want to change the delay between requests just use a different constructor: var sm = new SurveyMonkeyApi(apiKey, token, 200); //200ms delay = 5 reqs per sec There’s a separate cap of 1000 requests per day for each API key, which the library doesn’t currently enforce, so if you think you’ll be in danger of exceeding that you’ll need to handle it yourself for now.  To help, you can see how many requests the current instance of the SurveyMonkeyApi object has made by reading its RequestsMade property. If the library encounters any errors, including communicating with the API, it will throw a SurveyMonkeyException, so be sure to handle that sensibly any time you use it to make calls. Finally, if you have a survey (or list of surveys) obtained using GetSurveyList(), the library can automatically fill in all available information using sm.FillMissingSurveyInformation(surveys); For each survey in the list, it uses the other endpoints to fill in the missing information about the survey’s question structure, respondents, and responses. This results in at least 5 API calls being made per survey, so be careful before passing it a large list. It also joins up the raw response information to the survey’s question structure, so that for each question in a respondent’s set of replies, you can access a ProcessedAnswer object. For example, a response to a dropdown question (from the /surveys/get_responses endpoint) might be represented in json as { "answers": [ { "row": "9384627365", } ], "question_id": "615487516" } Separately, the question’s structure (from the /surveys/get_survey_details endpoint) might have several possible answers, one of which might look like { "text": "Fourth item in dropdown list", "visible": true, "position": 4, "type": "row", "answer_id": "9384627365" } The library understands how this mapping works, and uses that to give you the following ProcessedAnswer object, which first describes the family and type of question, and secondly gives you the respondent’s answers as they relate to the question. Survey Monkey has many different question types, with 11 distinct data structures, each of which are supported by the library. If you have suggestions or spot any bugs, let me know in the comments, or even better submit a pull request .

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >