I'm trying to figure out how to use the recommended approach from Microsoft and use the Installation Model to handle registrations.
I want to be able to get some information about the installations that should have been saved and I see that there are two methods that could be useful
GetInstallation(string installationId) and GetInstallationAsync(string installationId)
Problem is that when making at call to any of them I never get a response back. I can't figure out what I might be doing wrong.
Here's the answer from a similar question (that still holds true as of Nov 2016):
... there's no way to get all installations for a hub. In the future, the
product team is planning to add this feature to the installations
model, but it will work in a different way. Instead of making it a
runtime operation, you'll provide your storage [account] connection string and
you'll get a blob with everything associated with the hub.
Related
I'm releasing an app for a client soon, and I'm concerned about supporting the product over time, and I'd like to get some ways of logging exceptions and general info during operation.
I'm thinking of using the F_Logs package https://pub.dev/packages/f_logs to store data on the device until I get a call about a problem. Then, I'll have the user (There are about 30 or so) press a button to upload the file to an endpoint on my server to read what they have.
Is this commonly used? Are there better options or best practices out there?
Well there are several options, some of the common ones are Crashlytics and Sentry.
I prefer https://sentry.io/ because you can host it yourself, alternatively you can use their free package to get started. If you use firebase anyways then you can just use Crashlytics.
With both you can send crash reports but also simple events with messages.
There are other options but I have not used them, you can check the web for alternatives but keep in mind that you need a Flutter client library for these kinds of services.
The company I work for uses SharePoint Online. We have a requirement that on most site collections, whenever a user creates a new document library that the document library is configured with the "document" content type being removed, and replaced with some of our own corporate content types.
Previously I've managed this by using a coded sandbox solution installed on relevant site collections which had an event handler that fired on "list added". It's obviously now time to move away from that solution.
I'm really struggling to get to grips with the alternative, conceptually. I'm aiming to replace the old solution with a Remote Event Receiver solution.
The way I think I'd like to achieve this:
1) Create a single remote event receiver hosted in Azure which receives details of a new list being added in a site which it then configures appropriately.
2) Use CSOM to provision the site and as part of that provisioning, hook up the event receiver.
I've spent a lot of time on this, getting nowhere. I initially thought the answer lied in using an App which I could install in the App Catalog and then push out to particular site collections but that doesn't seem to be right.
Is the solution above possible? All examples on the web I've come across of setting up remote event receivers seem to use a SharePoint app which I don't really want to do.
Thanks.
For info I found the answer. You can indeed create a remote event receiver without a SharePoint app/add-in.
The answer was written up here
I thought I needed a SharePoint Provider Hosted App for that part 1
But you should bear in mind that as per Remove event receivers on host web clientContext you will not have the client Context passed through, so
TokenHelper.CreateRemoteEventReceiverClientContext(properties)
...will come through as empty. If you want to interact with SharePoint then you'll need to find another way than this approach, or use a different set of credentials.
When I append a new subscription in ORION, it automatically evaluates the condition and it invoques the designed end-point for that. I want that the new subscription affects only entities appended later.
Is there any way to avoid it or I have to control this at end-point level?
Related to this, is there any batch option to create several subscriptions at same time for a initial load of the platform?
Orion Version: 1.2.0
Regarding initial notification:
No, it isn't.
We understand that for some uses cases this is not convenient. However, behaving in the opossite way ruins another uses cases which need to know the "inicial state" before starting getting notifications corresponding to actual changes. The best solution to make everybody happy is to make this configurable, so each client can chose what it prefers. This feature is currently in our roadmap (see this issue in github.com).
While this gets implemented in Orion, in your case maybe a possible workaround is just ignore the first received nofitication belonging to a subscription (you can identify the subscription to which one notification belongs by the subscriptionId field in the notification payload). All the following notifications beloning to that subscription will correspond to actual changes.
Regarding batch option to create several subscriptions
No, there isn't any operation like that.
EDIT: the posibility of avoiding initial notification has been finally implemented at Orion. Details are at this section of the documentation. It is now in the master branch (so if you use fiware/orion:latest docker you will get it) and will be include in next Orion version (2.2.0).
I wanted to transfer resources (web apps) from an old subscription that had been disabled onto my new active subscription. I created a support request and they changed the disabled subscription into a Pay-As-You-Go -type and now using PowerShell I should be able to transfer my work over.
However I am still unable to access the old resource group in PS, for example when using Get-AzureRMResourceGroup only the new group I created comes up. I am also unable to do absolutely anything with my old work, even though the sub should now be active. I believe this is the reason I am unable to make the transfer. The title poses the actual dilemma that I believe is the root of my problems so, does anyone know a way to change this? Also I am happy to be corrected if I'm way off, or just be suggested an alternative approach.
Here's a silly picture to show the inconsistency I'm speaking of.
I'm writing a mock of a third-party web service to allow us to develop and test our application.
I have a requirement to emulate functionality that allows the user to submit data, and then at some point in the future retrieve the results of processing on the service. What I need to do is persist the submitted data somewhere, and retrieve it later (not in the same session). What I'd like to do is persist the data to a database (simplest solution), but the environment that will host the mock service doesn't allow for that.
I tried using IsolatedStorage (application-scoped), but this doesn't seem to work in my instance. (I'm using the following to get the store...
IsolatedStorageFile.GetStore(IsolatedStorageScope.Application |
IsolatedStorageScope.Assembly, null, null);
I guess my question is (bearing in mind the fact that I understand the limitations of IsolatedStorage) how would I go about getting this to work? If there is no consistent way to do it, I guess I'll have to fall back to persisting to a specific file location on the filesystem, and all the pain of permission setting that entails in our environment.
Self-answer.
For the pruposes of dev and test, I realised it would be easiest to limit the lifetime of the persisted objects, and use
HttpRuntime.Cache
to store the objects. This has just enough flexibility to cope with my situation.