asp et - Page 51 - Developer IT

Error while updating Database record with Entity Framework on ASP.NET MVC Page

- by Rupa

Hi I have an ASP.NET Page that updates registered User Address Details for a selected record. Below is the Update method that i am calling from Controller. When i am calling ApplyPropertyChanges method, I am getting the below error. Did anyone run into the same error while updating the record with Entity Framework. Appreciate your responses. Error Message: The existing object in the ObjectContext is in the Added state. Changes can only be applied when the existing object is in an unchanged or modified state. My Update Method Code: [HttpPost] public bool UpdateAddressDetail([Bind(Prefix = "RegUser")] AddressDetail regUserAddress, FormCollection formData) { regUserAddress.AD_Id = 3; regUserAddress.LastUpdated = HttpContext.User.Identity.Name; regUserAddress.UpdatedOn = DateTime.Now; regUserAddress.AddressType = ((AddressDetail)Session["CurrentAddress"]).AddressType ?? "Primary"; regUserAddress.Phone = ((AddressDetail)Session["CurrentAddress"]).Phone; regUserAddress.Country = ((AddressDetail)Session["CurrentAddress"]).AddressType ?? "USA"; miEntity.ApplyPropertyChanges(regUserAddress.EntityKey.EntitySetName, regUserAddress); miEntity.SaveChanges(); return true; }

Read the article

Organazing ASP.Net Single Page Application with Nancy

- by OnesimusUnbound

As a personal project, I'm creating a single page, asp.net web application using Nancy to provide RESTful services to the single page. Due to the complexity of the single page, particularly the JavaScripts used, I've think creating a dedicated project for the client side of web development and another for service side will organize and simplify the development. solution | +-- web / client side (single html page, js, css) | - contains asp.net project, and nancy library | to host the modules in application ptoject folder | +-- application / service (nancy modules, bootstrap for other layer) | . . . and other layers (three teir, domain driven, etc) . Is this a good way of organizing a complex single page application? Am I over-engineering the web app, incurring too much complexity?

Read the article

Long running operations (threads) in a web (asp.net) environment

- by rrejc

I have an asp.net (mvc) web site. As the part of the functions I will have to support some long running operations, for example: Initiated from user: User can upload (xml) file to the server. On the server I need to extract file, do some manipulation (insert into the db) etc... This can take from one minute to ten minutes (or even more - depends on file size). Of course I don't want to block the request when the import is running , but I want to redirect user to some progress page where he will have a chance to watch the status, errors or even cancel the import. This operation will not be frequently used, but it may happen that two users at the same time will try to import the data. It would be nice to run the imports in parallel. At the beginning I was thinking to create a new thread in the iis (controller action) and run the import in a new thread. But I am not sure if this is a good idea (to create working threads on a web server). Should I use windows services or any other approach? Initiated from system: - I will have to periodically update lucene index with the new data. - I will have to send mass emails (in the future). Should I implement this as a job in the site and run the job via Quartz.net or should I also create a windows service or something? What are the best practices when it comes to running site "jobs"? Thanks!

Read the article

ASP -response-flush-flushes-partial-data

- by Anshu

I am developing a web app with an ASP server side and I use an iframe for data push. An ASP handler flushes every once in a while some javascript to the iframe: context.Response.Write("<script language='javascript'>top.update('lala');</script>"); context.Response.Flush(); My problem is that sometimes, when I receive the data, I don't get the full text. For example I will receive this : update('lala'); One workaround I have is to have a thread flushing '..........' every 500ms. (Then I will receive script...... which will complete my javascript.) However I am sure there must be a way to have Response.Flush() sending the whole chunk of data. Does someone have an idea on how to use properly Response.Flush() ? Thank you!

Read the article

Generic ASP.NET MVC Route Conflict

- by Donn Felker

I'm working on a Legacy ASP.NET system. I say legacy because there are NO tests around 90% of the system. I'm trying to fix the routes in this project and I'm running into a issue I wish to solve with generic routes. I have the following routes: routes.MapRoute( "DefaultWithPdn", "{controller}/{action}/{pdn}", new { controller = "", action = "Index", pdn = "" }, null ); routes.MapRoute( "DefaultWithClientId", "{controller}/{action}/{clientId}", new { controller = "", action = "index", clientid = "" }, null ); The problem is that the first route is catching all of the traffic for what I need to be routed to the second route. The route is generic (no controller is defined in the constraint in either route definition) because multiple controllers throughout the entire app share this same premise (sometimes we need a "pdn" sometimes we need a "clientId"). How can I map these generic routes so that they go to the proper controller and action, yet not have one be too greedy? Or can I at all? Are these routes too generic (which is what I'm starting to believe is the case). My only option at this point (AFAIK) is one of the following: In the contraints, apply a regex to match the action values like: (foo|bar|biz|bang) and the same for the controller: (home|customer|products) for each controller. However, this has a problem in the fact that I may need to do this: ~/Foo/Home/123 // Should map to "DefaultwithPdn" ~/Foo/Home/abc // Should map to "DefaultWithClientId" Which means that if the Foo Controller has an action that takes a pdn and another action that takes a clientId (which happens all the time in this app), the wrong route is chosen. To hardcode these contstraints into each possible controller/action combo seems like a lot of duplication to me and I have the feeling I've been looking at the problem for too long so I need another pair of eyes to help out. Can I have generic routes to handle this scenario? Or do I need to have custom routes for each controller with constraints applied to the actions on those routes? Thanks

Read the article

ASP.Net forms authentication - multiple providers

- by Chris Klepeis

I have an ASP.Net 4.0 application, and within it is a folder called "Forum", setup as a sub application in IIS 7. This forum package implements a custom provider for .net membership. The forum is running in .net 3.5. I'd like to setup the main site so that when users login, it logs them into both my site and the forum site. Both the main site and the forum have separate .Net membership tables. How can I specify which provider to use with formsauthentication? right now I have FormsAuthentication.SetAuthCookie(...); this, however, just uses my default provider and does nothing with the provider for the forum I tried setting the forum app and my web app to have the same cookie name, as well as setting the machinekey on each: <machineKey validationKey="AutoGenerate" validation="SHA1" /> no dice. I googled and didnt really come up with any example of how to use multiple providers like I want to. I updated my web.config to have both provideers but this is useless if I cannot specify in my code which one to use.

Read the article

How to submit Nothing as a route value to ASP MVC

- by Adam

I have a route with several optional parameters. These are possible search terms in different fields. So, for example, if I have fields key, itemtype and text then I have in global.asax: routes.MapRoute( _ "Search", _ "Admin.aspx/Search/{Key}/{ItemType}/{Text}", _ New With {.controller = "Admin", .action = "Search" .Key = Nothing, .ItemType = Nothing, .Text = Nothing} _ ) My action takes optional parameters: Function Search(Optional ByVal Key As String = Nothing, _ Optional ByVal ItemType As Integer = 0, _ Optional ByVal Text As String = Nothing, _ Optional ByVal OtherText As String = Nothing) It then checks if the Key and Text strings have a non-null (and non-empty) value and adds search terms to the db request as needed. However, is it possible to send in a null value for, for example, Key but still send in a value for Text? If so, what does the URL look like? (Admin.aspx/Search//0/Foo doesn't work :) ) I know I can handle this using a parameter array instead, but wondered if this was possible using the sort of route described? I could of course define some other value as equivalent to null (for example, a space/%20) but is there any way to send a null value in the URL? I'm suspecting not, but thought I'd see if anyone knew of one. I'm using ASP MVC 2 for this project.

Read the article

Classic ASP application-wide initializations and object caching

- by slack3r

In classic ASP (which I am forced to use), I have a few factory functions, that is, functions that return classes. I use JScript. In one include file I use these factory functions to create some classes that are used throughout the application. This include file is included with the #include directive in all pages. These factory functions do some "heavy lifting" and I don't want them to be executed on every page load. So, to make this clear I have something like this: // factory.inc function make_class(arg1, arg2) { function klass() { //... } // ... Some heavy stuff return klass; } // init.inc, included everywhere  // ... MyClass1 = make_class(myarg01, myarg02); MyClass2 = make_class(myarg11, myarg12); //... How can I achieve the same effect without calling make_class on every page load? I know that I can't cache the classes in the Application object I can't use the Application_OnStart hook in Global.asa I could probably create a scripting component, but I really don't want to do that So, is there something else I can do? Maybe some way to achieve caching of these classes, which are really objects in JScript. PS: [further clarification] In the above code "heavy stuff" is not so heavy, but I just want to know if there's a way to avoid it being executed all the time. It reads database meta information, builds a table of the primary keys in the database and another table that resolves strings to classes, etc.

Read the article

ASP.NET MVC Membership, Get new UserID

- by Vishal Bharakhda

I am trying to register a new user and also understand how to get the new userID so i can start creating my own user tables with a userID mapping to the asp.net membership user table. Below is my code: [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult Register(string userName, string email, string position, string password, string confirmPassword) { ViewData["PasswordLength"] = MembershipService.MinPasswordLength; ViewData["position"] = new SelectList(GetDeveloperPositionList()); if (ValidateRegistration(userName, email, position, password, confirmPassword)) { // Attempt to register the user MembershipCreateStatus createStatus = MembershipService.CreateUser(userName, password, email); if (createStatus == MembershipCreateStatus.Success) { FormsAuth.SignIn(userName, false /* createPersistentCookie */); return RedirectToAction("Index", "Home"); } else { ModelState.AddModelError("_FORM", ErrorCodeToString(createStatus)); } } // If we got this far, something failed, redisplay form return View(); } I've done some research and many sites inform me to use Membership.GetUser().ProviderUserKey; but this throws an error as Membership is NULL. I placed this line of code just above "return RedirectToAction("Index", "Home");" within the if statement. Please can someone advise me on this... Thanks in advance

Read the article

Filp route value in asp.net mvc routes

- by Herman

Hi all, I am new to asp.net mvc, so please bear with me. We have the following route dictionary setup. routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{language}/{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { language = "en", controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "" } // Parameter defaults ); for any given page in our app, we to render a link to the a french version of the same page. For example, the page: http://www.example.com/en/home should have link on that page that points to http://www.example.com/fr/home Now I have the following UrlHelper extension method public static string FilpLanguage(this UrlHelper urlHelper) { var data = urlHelper.RequestContext.RouteData; if (System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture == CultureInfo.GetCultureInfoByIetfLanguageTag("en-CA")) data.Values["language"] = "fr"; else data.Values["language"] = "en"; return urlHelper.RouteUrl(data.Values.Where(item => item.Value != null)); } However, calling FilpLanguage on www.example.com/en/home will return the following URL: www.example.com/en/home?current=[,] Am I missing something here? where did the current parameter come from? Thanks in advance.

Read the article

Deploying Asp.net MVC web application [migrated]

- by Pankaj Upadhyay

I have been trying to find a neat tutorial, guide or step by step instructions for deploying an Asp.net MVC3 webapp but have found nothing so far. Everyone talks about his version of the stroy and different type of MVC versions. Right now, I have build a simple Asp.net MVC web application which i need to deploy on my shared hosting account. In a very simple manner, I need to know which files should i copy. Do i upload everything in my webproject directory to the server including the controller directory, views, models, content and bin directory ?. What about the Global.asax, web.config, packages.config, myapp.publish.xml. In short, I have no idea which files should be uploaded and which should be not. I am sure of one thing that i need few(MVC and Razor dlls) following dlls in bin directory. Just treat me as someone who has never deployed any website NOTE:- I don't have VS SP1 installed and it doesn't install either. Basically i need a manual procedure.

Read the article

Visual Studio 2010 / ASP.NET MVC 2 / Publish

- by SevenCentral

I just did a clean install on Windows 7 x64 Professional with the final release of Visual Studio 2010 Premium. In order to duplicate what I'm experiencing do the following in: Create a new ASP.NET MVC 2 Web Application Right click the project and select Properties On the Web tab, select "Use Local IIS Web Server" Click on Create Virtual Directory Save all Unload the project Edit the project file Change MvcBuildViews to true Save all Reload project Right click the project and select Publish Choose the file system publish method Enter a target location Choose Delete all existing files Select Publish Right click the project Select Publish Each time I do the above I get the following errror: "It is an error to use a section registered as allowDefinition='MachineToApplication' beyond application level..." The error originates from obj\debug\package\packagetmp\web.config, relative to the project directory. I can repeat this all day long with any MVC 2 project I've built. In order to fix this problem, I need to set MvcBuildViews to false in the project file. That's not really an option. This wasn't a problem in Visual Studio 2008 and it seems to be an issue with the way the Publish command stages files beneath the project directory. Can anyone else duplicate this error? Is this a bug or by design? Is there a fix, workaround, etc...? Thanks.

Read the article

Why would he say "We don't want to support MVC3"?

- by MadBurn

I work in a small shop at a fairly big company doing intranet web applications. By small, I mean there is 1 other guy in my position... and he graduated with me last December. (we aren't the only IT, but the only ones in our field) We are switching out an old COBOL system and converting it's only used application suite to a Web App. My company has contracted to a Web Application firm to help with this process who has chosen ASP.NET MVC, during one of the important meetings I asked if they will be using MVC2 or MVC3. Their lead developer said: "MVC2, we don't want to support MVC3. haha" My question is, why is this? This was several months ago and I've been doing extensive and self training gearing up for the MVC switch. From everything I am understanding, MVC3 is just like MVC2 if you don't use Razor and it fixes a number of smaller bugs that MVC2 had. So in my eyes, I can't see any reason to NOT use MCV3. There has to be something I'm missing. Since I don't really have any mentors to turn to in the real world, I'm coming here. What problems are there with MVC3 that might possibly lead him to say this that I'm missing?

Read the article

Javascript/Jquery pop-up window in Asp.Net MVC4

- by Mark

Below I have a "button" (just a span with an icon) that creates a pop-up view of a div in my application to allow users to compare information in seperate windows. However, I get and Asp.Net Error as follows: **Server Error in '/' Application. The resource cannot be found. Requested URL: /Home/[object Object]** Does anyone have an Idea of why this is happending? Below is my code: <div class="module_actions"> <div class="actions"> <span class="icon-expand2 pop-out"></span> </div> </div> <script> $(document).ajaxSuccess(function () { var Clone = $(".pop-out").click(function () { $(this).parents(".module").clone().appendTo("#NewWindow"); }); $(".pop-out").click(function popitup(url) { LeftPosition = (screen.width) ? (screen.width - 400) / 1 : 0; TopPosition = (screen.height) ? (screen.height - 700) / 1 : 0; var sheight = (screen.height) * 0.5; var swidth = (screen.width) * 0.5; settings = 'height=' + sheight + ',width=' + swidth + ',top=' + TopPosition + ',left=' + LeftPosition + ',scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,toolbar=no,status=no,menu=no, directories=no,titlebar=no,location=no,addressbar=no' newwindow = window.open(url, '/Index', settings); if (window.focus) { newwindow.focus() } return false; }); });

Read the article

Asynchronous Streaming in ASP.NET WebApi

- by andresv

Hi everyone, if you use the cool MVC4 WebApi you might encounter yourself in a common situation where you need to return a rather large amount of data (most probably from a database) and you want to accomplish two things: Use streaming so the client fetch the data as needed, and that directly correlates to more fetching in the server side (from our database, for example) without consuming large amounts of memory. Leverage the new MVC4 WebApi and .NET 4.5 async/await asynchronous execution model to free ASP.NET Threadpool threads (if possible). So, #1 and #2 are not directly related to each other and we could implement our code fulfilling one or the other, or both. The main point about #1 is that we want our method to immediately return to the caller a stream, and that client side stream be represented by a server side stream that gets written (and its related database fetch) only when needed. In this case we would need some form of "state machine" that keeps running in the server and "knows" what is the next thing to fetch into the output stream when the client ask for more content. This technique is generally called a "continuation" and is nothing new in .NET, in fact using an IEnumerable<> interface and the "yield return" keyword does exactly that, so our first impulse might be to write our WebApi method more or less like this: public IEnumerable<Metadata> Get([FromUri] int accountId) { // Execute the command and get a reader using (var reader = GetMetadataListReader(accountId)) { // Read rows asynchronously, put data into buffer and write asynchronously while (reader.Read()) { yield return MapRecord(reader); } } } While the above method works, unfortunately it doesn't accomplish our objective of returning immediately to the caller, and that's because the MVC WebApi infrastructure doesn't yet recognize our intentions and when it finds an IEnumerable return value, enumerates it before returning to the client its values. To prove my point, I can code a test method that calls this method, for example: [TestMethod] public void StreamedDownload() { var baseUrl = @"http://localhost:57771/api/metadata/1"; var client = new HttpClient(); var sw = Stopwatch.StartNew(); var stream = client.GetStreamAsync(baseUrl).Result; sw.Stop(); Debug.WriteLine("Elapsed time Call: {0}ms", sw.ElapsedMilliseconds); } So, I would expect the line "var stream = client.GetStreamAsync(baseUrl).Result" returns immediately without server-side fetching of all data in the database reader, and this didn't happened. To make the behavior more evident, you could insert a wait time (like Thread.Sleep(1000);) inside the "while" loop, and you will see that the client call (GetStreamAsync) is not going to return control after n seconds (being n == number of reader records being fetched).Ok, we know this doesn't work, and the question would be: is there a way to do it?Fortunately, YES! and is not very difficult although a little more convoluted than our simple IEnumerable return value. Maybe in the future this scenario will be automatically detected and supported in MVC/WebApi.The solution to our needs is to use a very handy class named PushStreamContent and then our method signature needs to change to accommodate this, returning an HttpResponseMessage instead of our previously used IEnumerable<>. The final code will be something like this: public HttpResponseMessage Get([FromUri] int accountId) { HttpResponseMessage response = Request.CreateResponse(); // Create push content with a delegate that will get called when it is time to write out // the response. response.Content = new PushStreamContent( async (outputStream, httpContent, transportContext) => { try { // Execute the command and get a reader using (var reader = GetMetadataListReader(accountId)) { // Read rows asynchronously, put data into buffer and write asynchronously while (await reader.ReadAsync()) { var rec = MapRecord(reader); var str = await JsonConvert.SerializeObjectAsync(rec); var buffer = UTF8Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(str); // Write out data to output stream await outputStream.WriteAsync(buffer, 0, buffer.Length); } } } catch(HttpException ex) { if (ex.ErrorCode == -2147023667) // The remote host closed the connection. { return; } } finally { // Close output stream as we are done outputStream.Close(); } }); return response; } As an extra bonus, all involved classes used already support async/await asynchronous execution model, so taking advantage of that was very easy. Please note that the PushStreamContent class receives in its constructor a lambda (specifically an Action) and we decorated our anonymous method with the async keyword (not a very well known technique but quite handy) so we can await over the I/O intensive calls we execute like reading from the database reader, serializing our entity and finally writing to the output stream. Well, if we execute the test again we will immediately notice that the a line returns immediately and then the rest of the server code is executed only when the client reads through the obtained stream, therefore we get low memory usage and far greater scalability for our beloved application serving big chunks of data.Enjoy!Andrés.

Read the article

Asp.Net MVC EnableClientValidation doesnt work.

- by Farrell

I want as well as Client Side Validation as Server Side Validation. I realized this as the following: Model: ( The model has a DataModel(dbml) which contains the Test class ) namespace MyProject.TestProject { [MetadataType(typeof(TestMetaData))] public partial class Test { } public class TestMetaData { [Required(ErrorMessage="Please enter a name.")] [StringLength(50)] public string Name { get; set; } } } Controller is nothing special. The View: <% Html.EnableClientValidation(); %> <% using (Ajax.BeginForm("Index", "Test", FormMethod.Post, new AjaxOptions {}, new { enctype = "multipart/form-data" })) {%> <%= Html.AntiForgeryToken()%> <fieldset> <legend>Widget Omschrijving</legend> <div> <%= Html.LabelFor(Model => Model.Name) %> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(Model => Model.Name) %> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(Model => Model.Name) %> </div> </fieldset> <div> <input type="submit" value="Save" /> </div> <% } %> To make this all work I added also references to js files: <script src="../../Scripts/MicrosoftAjax.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="../../Scripts/MicrosoftMvcAjax.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="../../Scripts/MicrosoftMvcValidation.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="../../Scripts/jquery-1.4.1.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script> Eventually it has to work, but it doesnt work 100%: It does validates with no page refresh after pressing the button. It also does "half" Client Side Validation. Only when you type some text into the textbox and then backspace the typed text. The Client Side Validation appears. But when I try this by tapping between controls there's no Client Side Validation. Do I miss some reference or something? (I use Asp.Net MVC 2 RTM)

Read the article

ASP.NET MVC ViewModel Pattern

- by Omu

EDIT: I made something much better to fill and read data from a view using ViewModels, called it ValueInjecter. http://valueinjecter.codeplex.com/documentation using the ViewModel to store the mapping logic was not such a good idea because there was repetition and SRP violation, but now with the ValueInjecter I have clean ViewModels and dry mapping code I made a ViewModel pattern for editing stuff in asp.net mvc this pattern is usefull when you have to make a form for editing an entity and you have to put on the form some dropdowns for the user to choose some values public class OrganisationViewModel { //paramterless constructor required, cuz we are gonna get an OrganisationViewModel object from the form in the post save method public OrganisationViewModel() : this(new Organisation()) {} public OrganisationViewModel(Organisation o) { Organisation = o; Country = new SelectList(LookupFacade.Country.GetAll(), "ID", "Description", CountryKey); } //that's the Type for whom i create the viewmodel public Organisation Organisation { get; set; } #region DropDowns //for each dropdown i have a int? Key that stores the selected value public IEnumerable<SelectListItem> Country { get; set; } public int? CountryKey { get { if (Organisation.Country != null) { return Organisation.Country.ID; } return null; } set { if (value.HasValue) { Organisation.Country = LookupFacade.Country.Get(value.Value); } } } #endregion } and that's how i use it public ViewResult Edit(int id) { var model = new OrganisationViewModel(organisationRepository.Get(id)); return View(model); } [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult Edit(OrganisationViewModel model) { organisationRepository.SaveOrUpdate(model.Organisation); return RedirectToAction("Index"); } and the markup <p> <label for="Name"> Name:</label> <%= Html.Hidden("Organisation.ID", Model.Organisation.ID)%> <%= Html.TextBox("Organisation.Name", Model.Organisation.Name)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("Organisation.Name", "*")%> </p> <p> ... <label for="CountryKey"> Country:</label> <%= Html.DropDownList("CountryKey", Model.Country, "please select") %> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("CountryKey", "*") %> </p> so tell me what you think about it

Read the article

ASP.NET MVC 2 actionlink breaking after migration from MVC version 1

- by thermal7

Hi, I am migrating my application from asp.net mvc to mvc version 2 and am having the following issue. I have paging links << < that I include in each page. Like so: <% Html.RenderPartial("PagingControl", Model); %> They exist in an ascx file as follows. <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<BankingDB.Controllers.Utility.IPagedSortedObject>" %> <div class="paging"> <div class="previous-paging"> <!- error!! -><%= Model.HasPreviousPage ? Html.ActionLink("<<", "Index", Model.buildParams(1)) : "<<"%> <%= Model.HasPreviousPage ? Html.ActionLink("<", "Index", Model.buildParams(Model.PreviousPageIndex)) : "<"%> </div> <div class="paging-details"> Showing records <%= Model.BaseRecordIndex %> to <%= Model.MaxRecordIndex %> of <%= Model.TotalRecordCount %> </div> <div class="next-paging"> <%= Model.HasNextPage ? Html.ActionLink(">", "Index", Model.buildParams(Model.NextPageIndex)) : ">"%> <%= Model.HasNextPage ? Html.ActionLink(">>", "Index", Model.buildParams(Model.PageCount)) : ">>"%> </div> </div> When I try to access the page I get the error: CS0173: Type of conditional expression cannot be determined because there is no implicit conversion between 'System.Web.Mvc.MvcHtmlString' and 'string' The error is marked above and appears to be with the action link. Including the controller name doesn't help. Any ideas?

Read the article

ASP.NET MVC, Webform hybrid

- by Greg Ogle

We (me and my team) have a ASP.NET MVC application and we are integrating a page or two that are Web Forms. We are trying to reuse the Master Page from our MVC part of the app in the WebForms part. We have found a way of rendering an MVC partial view in web forms, which works great, until we try and do a postback, which is the reason for using a WebForm. The Error: Validation of viewstate MAC failed. If this application is hosted by a Web Farm or cluster, ensure that configuration specifies the same validationKey and validation algorithm. AutoGenerate cannot be used in a cluster. The Code to render the partial view from a WebForm (credited to "How to include a partial view inside a webform"): public static class WebFormMVCUtil { public static void RenderPartial(string partialName, object model) { //get a wrapper for the legacy WebForm context var httpCtx = new HttpContextWrapper(System.Web.HttpContext.Current); //create a mock route that points to the empty controller var rt = new RouteData(); rt.Values.Add("controller", "WebFormController"); //create a controller context for the route and http context var ctx = new ControllerContext( new RequestContext(httpCtx, rt), new WebFormController()); //find the partial view using the viewengine var view = ViewEngines.Engines.FindPartialView(ctx, partialName).View; //create a view context and assign the model var vctx = new ViewContext(ctx, view, new ViewDataDictionary { Model = model }, new TempDataDictionary()); //ERROR OCCURS ON THIS LINE view.Render(vctx, System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Response.Output); } } My only experience with this error is in context of a web farm, which is not the case. Also, I understand that the machine key is used for decrypting the ViewState. Any information on how to diagnose this issue would be appreciated. A Work-around: So far the work-around is to move the header content to a PartialView, then use an AJAX call to call a page with just the Partial View from the WebForms, and then using the PartialView directly on the MVC Views. Also, we are still able to share non-tech-specific parts of the Master Page, i.e. anything that is not MVC specific. Still yet, this is not an ideal solution, a server-side solution is still desired. Also, this solutino has issues when working with controls that have more sophisticated controls, using JavaScript, particularly dynamically generated script as used by 3rd party controls.

Read the article

ASP MVC 2: Error with dropdownlist on POST

- by wh0emPah

Okay i'm new to asp mvc2 and i'm experiencing some problems with the htmlhelper called Html.dropdownlistfor(); I want to present the user a list of days in the week. And i want the selected item to be bound to my model. I have created this little class to generate a list of days + a short notation which i will use to store it in the database. public static class days { public static List<Day> getDayList() { List<Day> daylist = new List<Day>(); daylist.Add(new Day("Monday", "MO")); daylist.Add(new Day("Tuesday", "TU")); // I left the other days out return daylist; } public class Dag{ public string DayName{ get; set; } public string DayShortName { get; set; } public Dag(string name, string shortname) { this.DayName= name; this.DayShortName = shortname; } } } I really have now idea if this is the correct way to do it Then i putted this in my controller: SelectList _list = new SelectList(Days.getDayList(), "DayShortName", "DayName"); ViewData["days"] = _list; return View(""); I have this line in my model public string ChosenDay { get; set; } And this in my view to display the list: <div class="editor-field"> <%: Html.DropDownListFor(model => model.ChosenDay, ViewData["days"] as SelectList, "--choose Day--")%> </div> Now this all works perfect. On the first visit, But then when i'm doing a [HttpPost] Which looks like the following: [HttpPost] public ActionResult Registreer(EventRegistreerViewModel model) { // I removed some unrelated code here // The code below executes when modelstate.isvalid == false SelectList _list = new SelectList(Days.getDayList(), "DayShortName", "DayName"); ViewData["days"] = _list; return View(model); } Then i will have the following exception thrown: The ViewData item that has the key 'ChosenDay' is of type 'System.String' but must be of type 'IEnumerable<SelectListItem>'. This errors gets thrown at the line in my view where i display the dropdown list. I really have no idea how to solve this and tried several solutions i found online. but none of them really worked. Ty in advance!

Read the article

ASP.NET MVC hosting problem, routing, handlers and modules

- by johnabs

Hi, This is one of them again, hosting with fasthosts. I recently purchased a windows developer package from them. When I tried to deploy my ASP.NET 3.5 MVC project, which was working fine with the same host on a reseller account, it is not working. The reason to move from reseller to a normal Windows Developer package is, the MS-SQL server database is too expensive in a reseller account, strange! I contact them, and they are saying they upgraded the control panel. The technical support said, I need to disable the Modules and Handlers from the web.config file. Also I need to deploy them as .dll files. I am not sure how to do that. The website is partially working now. I think the problem is now with the routing. I have not deployed any .dlls apart from the System.Web.Mvc.dll, System.Web.Routing.dll and System.Web.Abstractions.dll. I have not got a clue on how to deploy the Modules and Handlers. The code that I commented on the web.config file is as follows.  Anybody got any ideas please. Thank you for your time.

Read the article

Creating meaningful routes in wizard style ASP.NET MVC form

- by R0MANARMY

I apologize in advance for a long question, figured better have a bit more information than not enough. I'm working on an application with a fairly complex form (~100 fields on it). In order to make the UI a little more presentable the fields are organized into regions and split across multiple (~10) tabs (not unlike this, but each tab does a submit/redirect to next tab). This large input form can also be in one of 3 views (read only, editable, print friendly). The form represents a large domain object (let's call it Foo). I have a controller for said domain object (FooController). It makes sense to me to have the controller be responsible for all the CRUD related operations. Here are the problems I'm having trouble figuring out. Goals: I'd like to keep to conventions so that Foo/Create creates a new record Foo/Delete deletes a record Foo/Edit/{foo_id} takes you to the first tab of the form ...etc I'd like to be able to not repeat the data access code such that I can have Foo/Edit/{foo_id}/tab1 Foo/View/{foo_id}/tab1 Foo/Print/{foo_id}tab1 ...etc use the same data access code to get the data and just specify which view to use to render it. My current implementation has a massive FooController with Create, Delete, Tab1, Tab2, etc actions. Tab actions are split out into separate files for organization (using partial classes, which may or may not be abuse of partial classes). Problem I'm running into is how to organize my controller(s) and routes to make that happen. I have the default route {controller}/{action}/{id} Which handles goal 1 properly but doesn't quite play nice with goal 2. I tried to address goal 2 by defining extra routes like so: routes.MapRoute( "FooEdit", "Foo/Edit/{id}/{action}", new { controller = "Foo", action = "Tab1", mode = "Edit", id = (string)null } ); routes.MapRoute( "FooView", "Foo/View/{id}/{action}", new { controller = "Foo", action = "Tab1", mode = "View", id = (string)null } ); routes.MapRoute( "FooPrint", "Foo/Print/{id}/{action}", new { controller = "Foo", action = "Tab1", mode = "Print", id = (string)null } ); However defining these extra routes causes the Url.Action to generate routs like Foo/Edit/Create instead of Foo/Create. That leads me to believe I designed something very very wrong, but this is my first attempt an asp.net mvc project and I don't know any better. Any advice with this particular situation would be awesome, but feedback on design in similar projects is welcome.

Read the article

ASP.Net 4.0 - Response required in SiteMap building?

- by Nick Craver

I'm running into an issue upgrading a project to .Net 4.0...and having trouble finding any reason for the issue (or at least, the change causing it). Given the freshness of 4.0, not a lot of blogs out there for issues yet, so I'm hoping someone here has an idea. Preface: this is a Web Forms application, coming from 3.5 SP1 to 4.0. In the Application_Start event we're iterating through the SiteMap and constructing routes based off data there (prettifying URLs mostly with some utility added), that part isn't failing though...or at least isn't not getting that far. It seems that calling the SiteMap.RootNode (inside application_start) causes 4.0 to eat it, since the XmlSiteMapProvider.GetNodeFromXmlNode method has been changed, looking in reflector you can see it's hitting HttpResponse.ApplyAppPathModifier here: str2 = HttpContext.Current.Response.ApplyAppPathModifier(str2); HttpResponse wasn't used at all in this method in the 2.0 CLR, so what we had worked fine, in 4.0 though, that method is called as a result of this stack: [HttpException (0x80004005): Response is not available in this context.] System.Web.XmlSiteMapProvider.GetNodeFromXmlNode(XmlNode xmlNode, Queue queue) System.Web.XmlSiteMapProvider.ConvertFromXmlNode(Queue queue) System.Web.XmlSiteMapProvider.BuildSiteMap() System.Web.XmlSiteMapProvider.get_RootNode() System.Web.SiteMap.get_RootNode() Since Response isn't available here in 4.0, we get an error. To reproduce this, you can narrow the test case down to this in global: protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { var s = SiteMap.RootNode; //Kaboom! //or just var r = Context.Response; //or var r = HttpContext.Current.Response; //all result in the same "not available" error } Question: Am I missing something obvious here? Or, is there another event added in 4.0 that's recommended for anything related to SiteMap on startup? For anyone curious/willing to help, I've created a very minimal project (a default VS 2010 ASP.Net 4.0 site, all the bells & whistles removed and only a blank sitemap and the Application_Start code added). It's a small 10kb zip available here: http://www.ncraver.com/Test/SiteMapTest.zip Update: Not a great solution, but the current work-around is to do the work in Application_BeginRequest, like this: private static bool routesRegistered = false; protected void Application_BeginRequest(object sender, EventArgs e) { if (!routesRegistered) { Application.Lock(); if (!routesRegistered) RouteManager.RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); routesRegistered = true; Application.UnLock(); } } I don't like this particularly, feels like an abuse of the event to bypass the issue. Does anyone have at least a better work-around, since the .Net 4 behavior with SiteMap is not likely to change?

Read the article

Editing a Gridview row with drop-down lists gets too wide - how can I use popup panels instead?

- by David

I have a series of GridViews in a Tab Panel - databound to a generic List of Business Objects. The columns in the Gridview are all similar to the following: <asp:TemplateField HeaderText="Company" SortExpression="Company.ShortName"> <ItemTemplate> <asp:Label ID="lblCompany" runat="server" Text='<%# Bind("Company.ShortName") %>'></asp:Label> </ItemTemplate> <EditItemTemplate> <asp:DropDownList ID="ddlCompany" runat="server"></asp:DropDownList> </EditItemTemplate> </asp:TemplateField> The GridView generates the "Edit" link at the beginning of the row, all the events fire ok. The problem is that the data is getting long. When in 'display mode', it's fine because the GridView control is smart enough to break some text into multiple lines (in particular Project, Title and Worker names can get pretty long). The problem come in editing mode. Drop-down lists DON'T break entries into multiple lines (for obvious reasons). Going into Edit ode on a row in the Gridview can make the Griview expand horizontally to twice the screen size (blowing through the width limits in the Master page and CSS but that's only a related problem). What I need is something like the ModalPopup - but trying to tie it to an ID in an EditItemTemplate gives me errors when the page renders (because the 'ddlXXXX' doesn't exist at the time). In addition I don't know how to dynamically populate the panel so that I can get a response from it (like the ID of the Company they selected). I'm also trying to avoid javascript and would like this to be a 'pure' aspx/code-behind solution (for simplicity's sake among others). All the examples I find are of Modal Popups with the panels pre-defined. Even if it (the popup panel) were something like a list of checkboxes, it could be databound to the SortedList I have ready to go and an OK/Cancel button combination to accept or ignore things. I'm just not sure of what goes where. I'm open to suggestions. Thanks in advance. EDIT: Final solution looks as follows: <asp:TemplateField HeaderText="Company" SortExpression="Company.ShortName"> <ItemTemplate> <asp:Label ID="lblCompany" runat="server" Text='<%# Bind("Company.ShortName") %>'></asp:Label> </ItemTemplate> <EditItemTemplate> <asp:LinkButton ID="lnkCompany" runat="server" Text='<%# Bind("Company.ShortName") %>'></asp:LinkButton> <asp:Panel ID="pnlCompany" runat="server" style="display:none"> <div> <asp:DropDownList ID="ddlCompany" runat="server" ></asp:DropDownList> <br/> <asp:ImageButton ID="btnOKCo" runat="server" ImageUrl="~/Images/greencheck.gif" OnCommand="PopupButton_Command" CommandName="SelectCO" /> <asp:ImageButton ID="btnCxlCo" runat="server" ImageUrl="~/Images/RedX.gif" /> </div> </asp:Panel> <cc1:ModalPopupExtender ID="mpeCompany" runat="server" TargetControlID="lnkCompany" PopupControlID="pnlCompany" BackgroundCssClass="modalBackground" CancelControlID="btnCxlCo" DropShadow="true" PopupDragHandleControlID="pnlCompany" /> </EditItemTemplate> </asp:TemplateField> And in the code-behind, lstIDLabor is the generic List of data lines (of which Company is one of the properties that is also a business object) that is bound to the GridView: Sub PopupButton_Command(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As CommandEventArgs) Dim intRow As Integer Dim intVal As Integer RestoreFromSessionVariables() Select Case e.CommandName Case "SelectCO" intRow = grdIDCostLabor.EditIndex Dim ddlCo As DropDownList = CType(grdIDCost.Rows(intRow).FindControl("ddlCompany"), DropDownList) intVal = ddlCo.SelectedValue lstIDLabor(intRow).CompanyID = intVal lstIDLabor(intRow).Company = Company.Read(intVal) Case Else ' End Select MakeSessionVariables() BindGrids() End Sub

Read the article

Nested partial output caching in asp.net mvc 3

- by Anwar Chandra

Hi All, I am using Razor view engine in ASP.Net MVC 3 RC 2 this is part of my view city.cshtml (drastically simplified for the sake of simple example)  <div class="list"> @foreach(var product in SQL.GetProducts(Model.City) ) { <div class="product"> <div>@product.Name</div> <div class="category"> @foreach(var category in SQL.GetCategories(product.ID) ) { <a href="@category.Url">@category.Name</a> » } </div> </div> } </div> I want to cache this part of my output using OutputCache attribute. so I created an action ProductList with OutputCache attribute enabled  <div class="list"> @Html.Action("ProductList", new { City = Model.City }) </div> and I created the view in ProductList.cshtml as below  @foreach(var product in Model.Products ) { <div class="product"> <div>@product.Name</div> <div class="category"> @foreach(var category in SQL.GetCategories(product.ID) ) { <a href="@category.Url">@category.Name</a> » } </div> </div> } but I still need to cache the category path output on each product. so I created an action CategoryPath with OutputCache attribute enabled  @foreach(var product in Model.Products ){ <div class="product"> <div>@product.Name</div> <div class="category"> @Html.Action("CategoryPath", new { ProductID = product.ID }) </div> </div> } but apparently this is not allowed. I got this error.. OutputCacheAttribute is not allowed on child actions which are children of an already cached child action. I believe they have a good reason why they need to disallow this. but I really want this kind of nested Output Caching Please, any idea for a workaround?

Search Results

Search found 27862 results on 1115 pages for 'asp et'.

Page 51/1115 | < Previous Page | 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 | Next Page >

- by Rupa

- by OnesimusUnbound

- by rrejc

- by Anshu

- by Donn Felker

- by Chris Klepeis

- by Adam

- by slack3r

- by Vishal Bharakhda

- by Herman

- by Pankaj Upadhyay

- by SevenCentral

- by MadBurn

- by Mark

- by andresv

- by Farrell

- by Omu

- by thermal7

- by Greg Ogle

- by wh0emPah

- by johnabs

- by R0MANARMY

- by Nick Craver

- by David

- by Anwar Chandra

< Previous Page | 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 | Next Page >