Im very new to Google App Engine development. When integrating GAE with android, is it a good practice to place the code that initializes the endpoints in the Application class ? Meaning, initialize the endpoints once when the app is starting and then refer to those endpoints instances when doing some action with the backend ? My current practice is to create an endpoint instance each time i want to call the backend, but i feel its a little bit heavy and maybe unnecessary.
By "initializing the endpoints" i mean the following code :
Myendpoint.Builder endpointBuilder = new Myendpoint.Builder(
AndroidHttp.newCompatibleTransport(),
new JacksonFactory(),
new HttpRequestInitializer() {
public void initialize(HttpRequest httpRequest) { }
});
Myendpoint endpoint = CloudEndpointUtils.updateBuilder(endpointBuilder).build();
I usually create method that creates/gets it if created:
public YourEndpoint getEndpoint() {
if (endpoint == null) { // initialize .... };
return endpoint;
}
then have a resetEndpoint() that sets it back to null if you use cookies and you just wanna drop that session.
Related
I am attempting to create a real-time communication capability for a Phonegap/Cordova app. I am using SignalR 2 to handle the communication.
The thing I am struggling with is getting a message to a particular user. Every single example out there shows saving Context.User.Identity.Name, which is useless to me because the remote site's User.Identity context is not shared by my phonegap app.
In essence, I am not authenticating a user in the traditional sense, so I need another way of linking the SignalR connectionID with the username I pass along.
Taken from the official ASP.NET signalr Examples, I have the following code which overrides the OnConnected event. Unfortunately it takes no parameters and expects User.Identity to be not null:
public override Task OnConnected()
{
using (var db = new UserContext())
{
// Retrieve user.
var user = db.Users
.Include(u => u.Rooms)
.SingleOrDefault(u => u.UserName == Context.User.Identity.Name);
// If user does not exist in database, must add.
if (user == null)
{
user = new User()
{
UserName = Context.User.Identity.Name
};
db.Users.Add(user);
db.SaveChanges();
}
else
{
// Add to each assigned group.
foreach (var item in user.Rooms)
{
Groups.Add(Context.ConnectionId, item.RoomName);
}
}
}
return base.OnConnected();
}
Now, maybe what I'd need is to have a version of this method that takes a string as a parameter and then I'd use that as my user identifier.
But how to go about that?
You need to create a new IUserIdProvider for the user and use dependency injection to register your provider and use it.
public interface IUserIdProvider
{
string GetUserId(IRequest request);
}
Register your provider with Global Host
GlobalHost.DependencyResolver.Register(typeof(IUserIdProvider), () => new MyIdProvider());
Usage:
public class MyHub : Hub
{
public void Send(string userId, string message)
{
Clients.User(userId).send(message);
}
}
Taken from: http://www.asp.net/signalr/overview/guide-to-the-api/mapping-users-to-connections#IUserIdProvider
Where is the documentation/sample for all overloads of invokeApi function for Azure Mobile Service client SDK for Android?
I found this article and tried following code, which does not work. There are no compile time or run time errors, invokeApi gets called, but it does not come back to onSuccess or onFailure. If I call invokeApi without order object, everything works as expected
PizzaOrder order = new PizzaOrder();
order.Size = "Large";
order.Flavor = "Four cheeses";
order.UserPhone = "555-555-1234";
ListenableFuture<PizzaOrderResponse> testresult = mClient.invokeApi("bookservice", order, PizzaOrderResponse.class);
Futures.addCallback(testresult, new FutureCallback<PizzaOrderResponse>() {
#Override
public void onFailure(Throwable exc) {
// failure handling code here
}
#Override
public void onSuccess(PizzaOrderResponse testresult) {
// success handling code here
}
});
One of the properties in the data object being returned by the custom API had incorrect data type. I am still not sure where the good documentation is and why custom API call did not fail but at least it is working now.
I am using RoboSpice for Rest Api calls in android and i want to add connection timeout for 30 secs in calls how i will do ?
here is my code
public class AddBrandsService extends
SpringAndroidSpiceRequest<AddBrands.Response> {
public final AddBrands.Response loadDataFromNetwork(){
return getRestTemplate().postForObject(url,
request, AddBrands.Response.class);
}
}
this service is called here
private SpiceManager contentManager = new SpiceManager(
JacksonSpringAndroidSpiceService.class);
contentManager.execute(service, lastRequestCacheKey,
DurationInMillis.ONE_SECOND, new AddBrandsListner());
thanks in advance...
Here is the code. Basically, you have to take care of the version of android as spring android switch between two different implementations to avoid a known bug in network stack. Unfortunately both implementations don't share a common interface whith respect to timeouts.
private void manageTimeOuts(RestTemplate restTemplate) {
// set timeout for requests
ClientHttpRequestFactory factory = restTemplate.getRequestFactory();
if (factory instanceof HttpComponentsClientHttpRequestFactory) {
HttpComponentsClientHttpRequestFactory advancedFactory = (HttpComponentsClientHttpRequestFactory) factory;
advancedFactory.setConnectTimeout(WEBSERVICES_TIMEOUT);
advancedFactory.setReadTimeout(WEBSERVICES_TIMEOUT);
} else if (factory instanceof SimpleClientHttpRequestFactory) {
SimpleClientHttpRequestFactory advancedFactory = (SimpleClientHttpRequestFactory) factory;
advancedFactory.setConnectTimeout(WEBSERVICES_TIMEOUT);
advancedFactory.setReadTimeout(WEBSERVICES_TIMEOUT);
}
}
I'm developing an Android app using Gigya to allow people to register using Facebook and Twitter; in parallel another developer is doing the same thing in iOS. We want to implement custom login UI.
The standard method uses Gigya's own UI and is documented here:
http://developers.gigya.com/035_Mobile_SDKs/020_Android#Logging_in_the_User
Beneath, it simply suggests:
If you wish to implement the graphic design by yourself, use the login method instead.
The standard login method calls a dedicated post-login callback with an onLogin(...) method and all subsequent flows are described as stemming from this event. The other login method calls a standard onGSResponse(...) callback; it's not clear how the response can be used to construct a user so I've set up my implementation to call socialize.getUserInfo. Attempts to call either method have resulted in lots of unusual errors.
As per the Gigya instructions I'm starting up with
mGSAPI = new GSAPI(GIGYA_APP_KEY, this);
mGSAPI.setAPIDomain("eu1.gigya.com");
in onCreate(...) (where GIGYA_APP_KEY is a value copied from our console). I'm calling setAPIDomain because we were getting an invalid data center error (albeit with a 500001 code, not a 301001 code!), which this has fixed.
Facebook login goes through the login flow as I'd expect and then comes back with error 400093 (which the docs tell me is an invalid API parameter, and has the message " Missing parameter: client_id").
Twitter login comes back with 206002, " Account Pending Verification", which seems to make sense; I then call
mGSAPI.sendRequest(
"getUserInfo",
null, //parameters
true, //use HTTPS
this, //the callback
null //a context object
);
and this gives me the error:
Missing required parameter: No secret or signature were provided. Request could not be verified.
The documentation for socialize.getUserInfo suggest a UID is required for web apps, but not for native ones. It mentions no other mandatory fields. I am a bit stuck ... shouldn't the GSAPI object be handling verification, as it's initialized with the API key?
I can give you some direction at a very high level for integrating GIGYA. (Code below is not verbatim) Hopefully it is somewhat helpful.
For a private Android app I had created a Manager object (GigyaManager) that maintained a singleton instance of the GSAPI object.
This singleton GigyaManager was initialized in my application object:
public static GigyaManager getInstance(String apiKey, Context context) {
mGSAPI = new GSAPI(apiKey, context);
}
My GigyaManager class also had a wrapper method for handling the login w/social services:
public void loginWithSocialService(GigyaSocialProvider provider, GSResponseListener listener) throws Exception {
// did the user attempt a social login, and bail out on the registration
// phase?
if (GigyaManager.getInstance().getGSAPI().getSession() != null) {
logout();
}
GSObject providerArgs = new GSObject();
providerArgs.put(GigyaManager.GIGYA_ARG_PROVIDER, provider.name().toLowerCase());
mGSAPI.login(providerArgs, listener, null);
}
This was fired from an onClick listener in a fragment that contained a "login" button:
GigyaManager.getInstance("appKey", getActivity()).loginWithSocialService(GigyaSocialProvider.FACEBOOK, this);
That fragment had to implement GSResponseListener that has the callbacks to deal with whether the login was successful or not:
#Override
public void onGSResponse(String method, GSResponse response, Object context) {
if (!method.equalsIgnoreCase("login") || response.getErrorCode() != 0) {
return;
}
GIGYAResponseWrapper resp = new GIGYAResponseWrapper(response.getResponseText());
// user is attached to login provider?
if (resp.isIsAttached()) {
// start some sort of loader or asynctask to get information about user account
// connected to GIGYA social login
Bundle args = new Bundle();
args.putString(ARG_UID, resp.getUid());
args.putString(ARG_UID_SIGNATURE, resp.getUidSignature());
args.putString(ARG_SIGNATURE_TIMESTAMP, resp.getSignatureTimestamp());
args.putString(ARG_SOCIAL_NICKNAME, resp.getNickname());
} else {
// login success, but this social account is not associated with anything in GIGYA
}
}
I'm using the In App Billing sample app to add this feature to my application.
After I finished adding it to my app, and tested all working, I noticed the comment in this Security class:
Security-related methods. For a secure implementation, all of
this code should be implemented on a server that communicates with
the application on the device. For the sake of simplicity and
clarity of this example, this code is included here and is executed
on the device. If you must verify the purchases on the phone, you
should obfuscate this code to make it harder for an attacker to
replace the code with stubs that treat all purchases as verified.
As Google suggests, I do the purchase verification on the server side so I really don't need the Security class in my project.
The problem is, I can't figure out how to remove the BillingService class dependency in the Security class.
I started by deleting the Security class and following the errors in the BillingService and most places it's being used I can remove easily, except in one place:
private void purchaseStateChanged(int startId, String signedData, String signature) {
ArrayList<Security.VerifiedPurchase> purchases;
purchases = Security.verifyPurchase(signedData, signature);
if (purchases == null) {
return;
}
ArrayList<String> notifyList = new ArrayList<String>();
for (VerifiedPurchase vp : purchases) {
if (vp.notificationId != null) {
notifyList.add(vp.notificationId);
}
ResponseHandler.purchaseResponse(this, vp.purchaseState, vp.productId,
vp.orderId, vp.purchaseTime, vp.developerPayload);
}
if (!notifyList.isEmpty()) {
String[] notifyIds = notifyList.toArray(new String[notifyList.size()]);
confirmNotifications(startId, notifyIds);
}
}
Would love if someone can share his/hers purchaseStateChanged method (based on the in app billing sample app) without the use of the Security class.
So here's what I did. First the calls to BillingService occur on the applications main thread, so you need to issue your server calls in a background thread. I chose to finish up processing on the main thread, since I wasn't sure what impact calling methods like 'confirmNotifications' on a background thread might have.
I created a callback interface VerifyTransactionCompletion which could be dispatched back to the main thread after the remote call completed.
I keep around the Security class and have it manage the call to the server now, instead of what it originally performed in the sample. So when you see the call to Security, that's where I call out to my server and perform signature validation.
/**
* Callback interface to <em>finish</em> processing a transaction once the remote
* servers have processed it.
*/
public interface VerifyTransactionCompletion {
public void transactionVerified(List<Security.VerifiedPurchase> purchases);
}
private void purchaseStateChanged(final int startId, String signedData, String signature) {
// verifyPurchase issues remote call to server (in a background thread), then
// calls transactionVerified on the main thread to continue processing.
Security.verifyPurchase(signedData, signature, new VerifyTransactionCompletion() {
#Override
public void transactionVerified(List<VerifiedPurchase> purchases) {
if (purchases == null) {
return;
}
ArrayList<String> notifyList = new ArrayList<String>();
for (VerifiedPurchase vp : purchases) {
if (vp.notificationId != null) {
notifyList.add(vp.notificationId);
}
ResponseHandler.purchaseResponse(BillingService.this, vp.purchaseState, vp.productId,
vp.orderId, vp.purchaseTime, vp.developerPayload);
}
if (!notifyList.isEmpty()) {
String[] notifyIds = notifyList.toArray(new String[notifyList.size()]);
confirmNotifications(startId, notifyIds);
}
}
});
}