Skip to content

AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack)

My feedback

29 results found

  1. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    They are overridable on a per grid:
    https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack/blob/main/ServiceStack.Blazor/src/ServiceStack.Blazor/Components/Tailwind/AutoQueryGrid.razor.cs#L56-L65

    As well as globally:
    BlazorConfig.Instance.AutoQueryGridDefaults

    Note we're no longer using UserVoice, please use GitHub Discussions for any future feature requests:

    https://servicestack.net/ideas

  2. 148 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    To be upfront ServiceStack.Redis will not be implementing Cluster logic inside the library itself (which IMO is architecturally flawed for each client to be implementing themselves). Our H/A solution is to use Sentinel where the UX works as expected with all operations being supported (inc. multi key operations).

    In the next release (that's now available from v5.9.3 on MyGet) we've added Async support, in a future release, once stabilized our intention is to support Redis Cluster Proxy as the future cluster solution:

    https://github.com/RedisLabs/redis-cluster-proxy

    Where all clients share the same Redis Cluster Logic (IMO how it should've been implemented from the outset).

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    Anyone waiting on redis cluster support should check out the redis cluster solutions from Twitter and Netflix which both works with the normal Redis protocol:

    - https://github.com/twitter/twemproxy
    - https://github.com/Netflix/dynomite

  3. 3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    AutoQueryFeature is specifically AutoQuery for OrmLite, it's not possible to decouple the current implementation which is based on OrmLite APIs.

    A completely new implementation would need to be created for AutoQueryDataFeature which is the data agnostic AutoQuery provider although would require much more effort to implement, which is what I'm interpreting this feature request to mean.

  4. 3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    A nice option available now is to use a client SSL certificate with a Dart gRPC client:
    https://todoworld.servicestack.net/#dart

    We also have docs/scripts for creating client SSL certificates at:
    https://docs.servicestack.net/grpc-ssl

  5. 13 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    Yeah it's on our Radar to provide a better Management Admin UI for ServiceStack Apps, please vote for this feature to get notified once its implemented:

    https://servicestack.uservoice.com/forums/176786-feature-requests/suggestions/4459164-management-overview-dashboard

    In the meantime you may want to checkout the feature-authrepo added in the latest v5.6 release which uses the new Auth Repository APIs that lets you search/page through users:

    https://docs.servicestack.net/releases/v5.6#feature-authrepo

  6. 151 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    The way ServiceStack and SignalR will be able to integrate in future will be through .NET Core’s IApplicationBuilder pipeline which by design supports running multiple frameworks within the same App that can now share the same default route namespace.

    From the v4.5.2, ServiceStack now supports running on .NET Core, please see the guide in the full release notes which shows how to register ServiceStack’s AppHost in .NET Core: http://docs.servicestack.net/releases/v4.5.2.html

    SignalR for .NET Core has yet to be released but it’s expected you’ll be able to access SignalR via its dependencies registered in .NET Core’s Startup which will also be injected in your Services like normal IOC dependencies.

    We’ll update this feature request again with an example showing a demo of ServiceStack + SignalR together in the same App once SignalR is available on .NET Core in 2017.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    @Sam You can call ServiceStack Services via the Service Gateway (https://docs.servicestack.net/service-gateway) the same non ServiceStack Services:

    var response = HostContext,AppHost.GetServiceGateway().Send(new MyRequest());

    You would need to use SignalR's client to use SignalR. The C# ServiceClients are only for calling ServiceStack Services, likewise the C# ServerEventsClient is for consuming ServiceStack's Server Events.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    The integrated ServiceStack solution for real-time events is to use Server Events.

    But if preferred you can happily configure SignalR in the same .NET Core App as ServiceStack, neither framework has dependencies or knowledge of each other but they both have access to the same dependencies registered in .NET Core's IServiceCollection.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    Apologies, I meant just SS's JS client bindings. The C# libraries have yet to be developed, I'll look at providing some integration with C# soon.

  7. 68 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    And we have but you haven't noticed because there are thousands of APIs, like I said we've been documenting our newer features like our newest JWT and API Key Auth Providers. OrmLite public APIs also have a lot of API docs.

    You can continue to criticize that we've done nothing, but that isn't true, e.g. we've spent considerable time and effort on documenting the newest ServiceStack Templates feature and continue put a lot of effort in our Release Notes (for many years) to describe each feature.

    You're just not going to notice until the majority of our APIs are documented, a lot of which are self-documenting and adding API docs would be redundant and add unnecessary noise. Our focus is definitely on having a readable, easy to use and self-documenting API which we prefer not to require any API docs as its much better for the source code should be readable and not rely on having its behavior hidden in API docs. It's also impossible to determine what the most commonly used APIs are as there are no metrics we can use to sort by it.

    It's not a matter of just deciding to spend the time to do it, spending time on this always takes away from something else and there's a lot more higher priority tasks we have to work on. It also has very low diminishing returns as we could stop everything and spend months on it and people would still not be satisfied unless their APIs they use most are covered.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    @Anonymous You're greatly underestimating how long it would take to document the thousands of APIs in ServiceStack, this is nowhere near an overnight fix or something that can happen in a single release even if we halt all development and drop all other higher priority requirements we're currently working on.

    Our preference is to use readable API and property names so the APIs are self-documenting, our new features also include more detailed documentation as seen in the flagship feature of the last release http://templates.servicestack.net

    A release dedicated to "Documenting all existing APIs" can only happen after development has stabilized and we've implemented all higher priority features which is something we want to get done as fast as possible but we're still a long ways off.

  8. 5 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) shared this idea  · 
  9. 115 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    You can use https://github.com/ServiceStack/Issues for submitting reproducible issues with our current libraries or the Customer Forums (https://forums.servicestack.net) for any other technical discussions

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    Whilst it's a nice idea I don't trust really tools that try to migrate based on schema of existing types (it's also tough to have different versions of the same type in the same project) - IMO it's too fragile and lacks visibility/control. My preferred approach is to just to run explicit custom DDL statements to migrate from a previous version, that way I'm always in control of what operations are applied to the RDBMS.

    We had a pretty good solution for this whilst I was at StackOverflow, I hope to introduce something similar at some stage - but atm I'm just running migrations manually using a Migration Tasks Tests which I can configure to run against different RDBMS's just before deploying when a migration is required.

  10. 71 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    @James I don't know what your comment is in response to or what it has to do with AngularJS, but if your talking about common protocols, Server Events (which is just HTTP) is a much better more natural fit than WebSockets.

  11. 68 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
  12. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    Can you check that you're not in DebugMode? as when there are no visible operations the operation should already be omitted.

  13. 7 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    I wouldn't accept an implicit cast like this, it's not obvious that there's an implicit transformation and I don't want to encourage using deep C# expressions as only a very limited expression can be translated to SQL and it's not discoverable, so my preferred API would be something like:

    q.Where(x => Sql.Cast<string>(x.IntColumn).Contains("123"))

    But I'd want to add a new API that's pluggable and customizable so others can extend this with their own custom methods, so a composable API might look something like:

    q.Where(x => new[]{ Sql.Cast<string>(x.IntColumn), Sql.Like("123") })

    But I'd have to spend time exploring the different possible API's to work out which is the best approach.

    In the meantime I'd look at different ways you can create a typed API that returns a string, e.g:

    q.Where(x => SqlUtils.Contains(x.IntColumn, "123"))

    Which is just a custom method that returns a Custom SQL like:

    return "CAST({0} as VARCHAR) LIKE '%123%'.Fmt(propName.SqlColumn())

  14. 12 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    Why aren't you able to customize the model directly yourself on startup? i.e with:

    var modelDef = typeof(Poco).GetModelMetadata();
    modelDef..

  15. 8 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    As a general place, I'd be happy with people modifying the public Plugins wiki to add their 3rd party plugins: https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack/wiki/Plugins

    For more specific providers they can also be added on the relevant page, e.g:
    - https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack/wiki/Caching
    - https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack/wiki/Logging
    - https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack/wiki/Authentication-and-authorization

  16. 9 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    It would still retain the message-based paradigm and would offer the highest performance between applications within a Windows host.

    ServiceStack is a message-based services framework which can easily support new transports like this, which is how MQ and SOAP support was possible. There's no risk of becoming a BizTalk as each transport just plugs into the existing ServiceStack request pipeline.

  17. 163 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    I'm interested in feedback for the AspNetWindowsAuthProvider that was just added in v4.0.21

    https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack/blob/master/release-notes.md#windows-auth-provider-for-aspnet

    It should now let you use [RequiredRole] to protect services for users with different roles (which uses the IPrincipal.IsInRole() API under the hood).

    I'm interested in hearing about more specific use-cases that this can be extended to support.

  18. 7 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    Please provide sources where it's "growing", i.e. where are the live examples of services using it? Also please provide the real-world end-user benefits that this would enable?

    Also it looks like ASP.NET Identity should be in a separate feature request.

  19. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    ServiceStack does let you plug in your own request binding per type, a small example is at:

    https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack/wiki/Serialization-deserialization#wiki-create-a-custom-request-dto-binder

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    ServiceStack should work "intuitively" not "magically", binding beyond the Service layer is magic and requires internal knowledge of custom HTML form processing in ServiceStack. Already knowing how you would do this in JavaScript is an example of intuitiveness, i.e. it works as expected.

    With ServiceStack we're aiming to promote an API-First development model, described briefly in: https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack/wiki/Release-Notes#api-first-development
    i.e. structuring and calling services in a way that works for both HTML and non-HTML native service clients. Using JS allows this, which better enables us to provide useful generic utils to automatically bind normal Service responses to HTML pages.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) commented  · 

    Magic binding and auto populating data models is not something we're looking to promote.

    The binding behavior should be clear and intuitive and should only bind to the DTO's (i.e.the external facing service contract). Once populated, the DTO's can then be either saved directly, (i.e. as POCOs with a MicroOrm like OrmLite), or instead mapped it to the data models of the ORM used.

    Complex model binding is much easier and more flexible to achieve with JavaScript where you can send complex objects by with serialized JSON using Ajax, or using the QueryString of FormData by passing with the JSV Format, shown in: https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack/wiki/Serialization-deserialization#passing-complex-objects-in-the-query-string

  20. 36 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    AdminDemis J Bellot (Developer, ServiceStack) shared this idea  · 
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base