Activities of "selinkoykiran"

Hello,

Like your SignalRTieredDemo.Web we have a MessageEventHandler class in web layer. When we want to send a request from this class to our api host with interface injection (dynamic proxy method) we get the below exception which is Code:Volo.Authorization:010001. And it makes sense actually because this handler starts to work even user doesn't login. It triggered by Rabbitmq.
How can we solve this issue ?

Thank you

• ABP Framework version: v5.3.3
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes
• Exception message and stack trace:
• 023-03-10 10:33:24.835 +03:00 [WRN] Exception of type 'Volo.Abp.Authorization.AbpAuthorizationException' was thrown. Volo.Abp.Authorization.AbpAuthorizationException: Exception of type 'Volo.Abp.Authorization.AbpAuthorizationException' was thrown. at Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authorization.AbpAuthorizationServiceExtensions.CheckAsync(IAuthorizationService authorizationService, AuthorizationPolicy policy) at Volo.Abp.Authorization.MethodInvocationAuthorizationService.CheckAsync(MethodInvocationAuthorizationContext context)
• Steps to reproduce the issue:"

Hello, We are building a system like some entities will be seeding over different modules which are using this centralized service. We'll need something like this :

When I check the code from abp repositories like (Volo.Abp.Settings, Volo.Abp.Features , Volo.Abp.Authorization.Permissions) I couldn't understand when these definitions are seeding into database, when they are persisting ? I saw below approach in Feature and Permission side :

But I couldn't see the same approach on Settings part, but I know Settings also has a definitionProvider but I couldn't understand when these configurations persisting ? How settings module handle that ? By the way what is the difference between SaveStaticPermissionsToDatabaseAsync or InitializeDynamicPermissions (these are also included in feature side, too ) persistence. I couldn't see any documentation about these topics . But we need to understand how this system works and then we can implement for our own module. We want to understand the design of these approaches overall, Can you help ?

Thank you

• ABP Framework version: v5.3.3
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes
• Exception message and stack trace:
• Steps to reproduce the issue:"

Hello, We know you have an abstraction module for user syncronization between multiple modules like below link . https://support.abp.io/QA/Questions/1442/Sync-Users-Between-Modules Do you think to add this abstraction layer for the rest of the identity models like organizationunit or role, permissions ... ? If you don't, can you explain why , is it a bad practice ? As we doing with User entity, we can also need organizationunit syncronization (or other identity entities) incase of deploying to another place this identity module, right ? What do you think about ?

Thank you ?

• ABP Framework version: v5.3.3
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes

Hello , We have different aggregate roots , they have a relation over Id property like below :

Project first aggregate:

Phase second aggregate :

created migration with foreign key:

Like you saw in the pictures , even we try NotMapped attribute , still migration is creating foreign key automagically :) Depends on your framework suggestions and DDD , we don't want to generate foreign key between aggregate roots , instead we keep them seperately, we just want to saw ProjectId column inside Phase table not foreign key relation . But we can not do that right know it's always creating itself , we can't understand the situation.

Below example is from an outside-native ef core in a console application, when we don't use abp-wrapped ef core, they can prevent the generation of foreign key , if we ignore the navigation property , they don't create the foreign key. We're expecting the same approach basically.

What can we do about this situation ? Thank you

• ABP Framework version: v5.3.3
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes

Hello , we want to filter /api/saas/tenants with ActivationState parameter , but total count parameter returns wrongly from backend . We've checked from the module code : Why doesn't count method use the same filtering with the GetListAsync () method ?

Why do you use only EditionId and name filtering for GetCountAsync() ? Is there any reason or is it forgotten ?

Thank you.

• ABP Framework version: v5.1.1
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes
• Exception message and stack trace:
• Steps to reproduce the issue:"

Hello all, Actually We're having same issue still with below question after upgrading to Volo.Abp.BackgroundWorkers.Hangfire" Version="5.2.0-rc.2" , but I can't reply because the question was locked.

https://support.abp.io/QA/Questions/2578/AbpBackgroundWorkersHangfireModule-exception-without-using-hangfire-configuration

I'm sharing the exception below , too. Thank you.

• ABP Framework version: v5.2.0-rc.2
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) **: yes
• Exception message and stack trace: An error occurred during the initialize Volo.Abp.Modularity.OnPreApplicationInitializationModuleLifecycleContributor phase of the module Volo.Abp.BackgroundWorkers.Hangfire.AbpBackgroundWorkersHangfireModule, Volo.Abp.BackgroundWorkers.Hangfire, Version=5.2.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null: An exception was thrown while activating λ:Volo.Abp.Hangfire.AbpHangfireBackgroundJobServer -> λ:Hangfire.JobStorage.. See the inner exception for details. ---> Autofac.Core.DependencyResolutionException: An exception was thrown while activating λ:Volo.Abp.Hangfire.AbpHangfireBackgroundJobServer -> λ:Hangfire.JobStorage. ---> System.InvalidOperationException: JobStorage.Current property value has not been initialized. You must set it before using Hangfire Client or Server API. at Hangfire.JobStorage.get_Current()
• Steps to reproduce the issue:"

Hello all,

Is it possible to override one of the AbpModule itself ? There are lots of way inside the below link: https://docs.abp.io/en/abp/latest/Dependency-Injection#DependencyInterfaces But none of them are mentioning about overriding or replacing a module itself. For example I want to change AbpBackgroundWorkersModule module's ConfigureServices method inside, how can I do that ? Thank you.

• ABP Framework version: v5.1.1
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes
• Exception message and stack trace:
• Steps to reproduce the issue:"

Hello all, NOTE => First of all we've found this usage by searching from your code, could you please share a usage of DynamicOptions inside your docs , too ? The usage sample like below : We have an optionsManager Then an options class :

And the configuration is like below :

We are settings OdmsOptions inside SettingAppService like below :

When a person changes the options from setting page, we are just updating our options with Set() method call. After that we want to get the latest options with injecting this Option class like below :

But after injecting this OdmsOptions class we are getting default options, not setted options. Why the behaviour is like that. We needed to call OdmsOptions.SetAsync(); method again to get latest settings, Why do we need another Set method call , we've already done this setting in another place. When we are injecting the Odmsoptions , should we get the latest changes without calling another set method ?

Could you check and help please? Thank you.

• ABP Framework version: v5.1.1.
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes
• Exception message and stack trace:
• Steps to reproduce the issue:"

Hello all, We're using hangfire background worker in our project we we're referenced this library in our dependent modules like below :

But this module has an issue , after that module is injected in our domain module , we are getting errors like below at irrelevant places like identity Server . We've disabled the usage of backgroundworker and job inside of Identity Server Module :

But exception is still occurring. We've trace your code and we are thinking the base problem is in AbpHangfireModule We're thinking this issue is occurring because of wrong ordered configuration . You can see below your AbpBackgroundWorkersHangfireModule using AbpBackgroundWorkerOptions .

when we disable the AbpBackgroundWorkerOptions , it'll pass the exception but it'll continue with below module which is AbpHangfireModule.

So because of the OnApplicationInitialization method , even we don't have any job storage for example inside Identity Server module, we're getting below irrelevant exception.

Could you check the usage of this module. We are bypassing the problem like below in our project , we just wrapped exception with try catch and we don't do anything (override the AbpHangfireModule like below ):

So with this bypassing we can use IdentityServer and other related modules with hangfire module without exception.

Exception like below :

But we're thinking you should check this one.

Thank you.

• ABP Framework version: v5.1.1
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes
• Exception message and stack trace:
• Steps to reproduce the issue:"

Hello all, We came up to an issue with abpContext and ef core. We have an entity which is using ISoftDelete interface like below (and default behaviour is cascade delete with parent ).

And this entity is the child of parent Model aggregate root. We have a case like => we want to mark as deleted this entity and after we want to hard delete this entity from database without deleting parent Model entity. We are getting these children from db like below :

after that point we are operating deletion inside rich domain model like below (with removeall or clear it doesn't metter, it's not working):

So this operation should mark exports as deleted(in ef core state) and after saveChanges operation it should be deleting all exports from db. But nothing happened. (we also check with sql profiler , there wasn't any deletion operation which should be seen ). And as ef core state we also can't see the state change , children entity stayed as unchanged .

We've also checked this issue without abp library with just using ef core library. And with default ef core lib , we can get included children with parent, after that we marked these children with removeAll or clear methods and it worked as expected and this operation deleted all the children of the parent object without deleting parent. So we're thinking that this issue is related with abp framework library . Could you help with that issue , please ? It's really important for us.

Thank you.

• ABP Framework version: v5.1.1
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes
• Exception message and stack trace:
• Steps to reproduce the issue:"