For a few weeks now, there is a new "Parameter" section in the Designer of Logic Apps. We can create parameters and use these parameters in the Logic Apps:
Unfortunately, there are two things that are missing (or not working yet):
We are not able to set the "current value" of a parameter (as shown below, the field Actual Value is grayed)
When we export the Logic App as an ARM template, parameters are not used in the ARM template as ARM parameters.
Am I missing something or is it just due to the fact that there are features not yet deployed?
I'm not either sure how default/actual values should work in the Logic App designer but for the export of the ARM template with the (designer) parameters I'm using the last build of LogicAppTemplateCreator and it works for me.
The template snippet contains "paramDateFrom" parameter with its default value and it is used in the parameters section of ARM:
...
"paramDateFrom": {
"type": "string",
"defaultValue": "2019-12-19"
}
},
"variables": {},
"resources": [
{
"type": "Microsoft.Logic/workflows",
"apiVersion": "2016-06-01",
"name": "[parameters('logicAppName')]",
"location": "[parameters('logicAppLocation')]",
"dependsOn": [],
"properties": {
"definition": {
"$schema": "https://schema.management.azure.com/providers/Microsoft.Logic/schemas/2016-06-01/workflowdefinition.json#",
"contentVersion": "1.0.0.0",
"parameters": {
"DateFrom": {
"defaultValue": "[parameters('paramDateFrom')]",
"type": "String"
}
},
...
The template parameters file contains the actual value:
...
"parameters": {
"paramDateFrom": {
"value": "2019-12-20"
}
Related
Have two Azure accounts with different subscription, I wants to migrate azure logic app from old account to new account. Please help with the steps for migration
Navigate to your logic app, In overview pane beside subscription you can find move from where you can migrate to another account from present.
Now you can select the destination subscription and Resource group from the Subscription list and Resource group list and then select OK.
REFERENCES:
Move logic apps across subscriptions, resource groups, or regions
For Cloning
WAY - 1
One workaround that you can try is to clone the logic app into the same subscription and resource and then move to another subscription.
WAY - 2 Deploy the ARM template of your logic app to another Subscription.
Step-1
Navigate to the Export template and click deploy
Step-2
Change the subscription Id of your connectors then select the subscription and resource group to which you want to deploy.
You made a comment that you want to clone your LogicApp to another subscription/account, if the first answer isn't what you want then you can (in your words) clone the app by copying the code view and pasting it into a new LogicApp in the other subscription/account.
For example, this is a JSON definition for an extremely basic LogicApp I just created ...
{
"definition": {
"$schema": "https://schema.management.azure.com/providers/Microsoft.Logic/schemas/2016-06-01/workflowdefinition.json#",
"actions": {
"Initialize_variable": {
"inputs": {
"variables": [
{
"name": "Text String",
"type": "string",
"value": "This is a test"
}
]
},
"runAfter": {},
"type": "InitializeVariable"
}
},
"contentVersion": "1.0.0.0",
"outputs": {},
"parameters": {},
"triggers": {
"Recurrence": {
"evaluatedRecurrence": {
"frequency": "Month",
"interval": 12
},
"recurrence": {
"frequency": "Month",
"interval": 12
},
"type": "Recurrence"
}
}
},
"parameters": {}
}
It looks like this ...
You can literally take that JSON definition and paste it into any existing LogicApp and it will produce the same flow.
I created a project that returns an array. Looking at the swagger.json everything looks fine, importing this swagger.json . But when I download the API definition from the developer portal I see some objects like ...Array, ...Array-1, ...Array-2. Which I don't expect:
How can I prevent this? How can I ensure that the generation behaves the same as my normal object (so no dashes, but dots). I created an example project that reproduces my issue: https://github.com/mvdiemen/SwaggerArrayGenerationExample.
Is this related to changes in Azure API management that are described over here? : https://blog.tomkerkhove.be/2018/04/13/changes-to-azure-api-management-openapi/
APIM does not support inlined schema. Try specifying schemas for response/request via $ref only, even if it's an array of object you've already defined - define a new object of type array and reference it.
So, instead of something like this:
"200": {
"description": "Success",
"schema": {
"uniqueItems": false,
"type": "array",
"items": {
"$ref": "#/definitions/SwaggerGenerationSample.Models.Response.Employee"
}
}
}
Have array itself defined in definitions and reference it:
"200": {
"description": "Success",
"schema": {
"$ref": "#/definitions/EmployeeArray"
}
}
...
"definitions": {
"EmployeeArray": {
"uniqueItems": false,
"type": "array",
"items": {
"$ref": "#/definitions/SwaggerGenerationSample.Models.Response.Employee"
}
}
}
I've created a service bus, topic, and subscription to that topic in Azure. I have a logic app that is triggered when a message arrives but I need to apply a filter (or rule?) to that subscription where it looks for a particular value in the message header before the logic app processes the message. I don't see anywhere in the logic app or in the Azure portal to create filters for the subscriptions. What mechanism exists to create a filter for a subscription?
How did you create your topic subscription? did you use ARM Templates?
When you are creating the Subscription, you can add a SqlFilter to the rule applied in the topic subscription.
The ARM Template below (taken from here) shows you how to add a SqlFilter to the Rule in a Topic Subsctiption
"resources": [{
"apiVersion": "[variables('sbVersion')]",
"name": "[parameters('serviceBusNamespaceName')]",
"type": "Microsoft.ServiceBus/Namespaces",
"location": "[variables('location')]",
"sku": {
"name": "Standard",
},
"resources": [{
"apiVersion": "[variables('sbVersion')]",
"name": "[parameters('serviceBusTopicName')]",
"type": "Topics",
"dependsOn": [
"[concat('Microsoft.ServiceBus/namespaces/', parameters('serviceBusNamespaceName'))]"
],
"properties": {
"path": "[parameters('serviceBusTopicName')]"
},
"resources": [{
"apiVersion": "[variables('sbVersion')]",
"name": "[parameters('serviceBusSubscriptionName')]",
"type": "Subscriptions",
"dependsOn": [
"[parameters('serviceBusTopicName')]"
],
"properties": {},
"resources": [{
"apiVersion": "[variables('sbVersion')]",
"name": "[parameters('serviceBusRuleName')]",
"type": "Rules",
"dependsOn": [
"[parameters('serviceBusSubscriptionName')]"
],
"properties": {
"filterType": "SqlFilter",
"sqlFilter": {
"sqlExpression": "StoreName = 'Store1'",
"requiresPreprocessing": "false"
},
"action": {
"sqlExpression": "set FilterTag = 'true'"
}
}
}]
}]
}]
}]
You need to add your filter using Sql like expressions in the properties member of the rules sub-resource
e.g.
"sqlExpression": "YourMessageProperty='YourExpectedValue'",
If you are not using ARM Templates, the Service Bus Explorer allows you to remove the default subscription rule and create a new one with your own SqlFilter.
HTH
I have a Logic Apps instance with a variable AddedPoKey set out of parsed JSON
"Set_PO_Key_variable_": {
"inputs": {
"name": "AddedPoKey",
"value": "#{body('Parse_JSON')?['poKey']}"
},
"runAfter": {
"Parse_JSON": [
"Succeeded"
]
},
"type": "SetVariable"
},
I want to use the value to set the Id in a RESTful API collection resource. I have not been able to get it to work, though I am sure it should. I am possible not finding the best MS documentation on this and if any could be pointed out to me, I would appreciate it. I have tried:
"Set_Po_Lin_Add_url_": {
"inputs": {
"name": "CreatePoLineResourceUrl",
"value": "#{replace('https://api.plex.com/EDI/sales-orders/{PoKey}/lines','{PoKey}',triggerBody()['AddedPoKey'])}"
},
"runAfter": {
"Set_PO_Key_variable_": [
"Succeeded"
]
},
"type": "SetVariable"
}
Which results in InvalidTemplate. Unable to process template language expressions in action 'Set_Po_Lin_Add_url_' inputs at line '1' and column '2459': 'The template language expression 'replace('https://api.plex.com/EDI/sales-orders/{PoKey}/lines','{PoKey}',triggerBody()['AddedPoKey'])' cannot be evaluated because property 'AddedPoKey' doesn't exist, available properties are 'ContentData, ContentType, ContentTransferEncoding, Properties, MessageId, To, ReplyTo, ReplyToSessionId, Label, ScheduledEnqueueTimeUtc, SessionId, CorrelationId, SequenceNumber, LockToken, TimeToLive'. Please see https://aka.ms/logicexpressions for usage details.'.
and then
"#{replace('https://api.plex.com/EDI/sales-orders/{PoKey}/lines','{PoKey}',variables('AddedPoKey')}"
which works.
Note that https://aka.ms/logicexpressions had been my main references, but does not even have the word "variable" on the page at this time.
I'm writing a simple JSON schema and using minItems to validate the number of items in a given array. My schema is as follows:
{
"title": "My Schema",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"root": {
"type": "array",
"properties": {
"id": {
"type": "string"
},
"myarray": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"type": "string"
},
"minItems": 4,
"uniqueItems": true
},
"boolean": {
"type": "boolean"
}
},
"required": ["id","myarray","boolean"]
}
},
"required": [
"root"
],
"additionalProperties": false
}
Now I would expect the following JSON to fail validation given the element myarray has nothing in it. But when using this online validator, it passes. Have I done something wrong or is the schema validator I'm using faulty?
{
"root":[
{
"id":"1234567890",
"myarray":[],
"boolean":true
}
]
}
I am not sure why or what it is called, but the correct schema definition for your requirement should be as shown further down.
From what I understand from the JSON Schema definitions, you should declare the properties of an array inside the items declaration. In your schema you where defining properties outside of the array item declaration.
In your schema you have the two different types of array declaration:
Once with just a single object (a string for the "myarray" object)
Once with a complex object (the object name "myComplexType" in the code below)
Have a look at the definitions of both, how they are structured and how they would be interpreted.
The corrected schema:
{
"title": "My Schema",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"root": {
"type": "array",
"items": { <-- Difference here - "items" instead of "properties"
"type": "object", <-- here - define the array items as a complex object
"title": "myComplexType", <-- here - named for easier referencing
"properties": { <-- and here - now we can define the actual properties of the object
"id": {
"type": "string"
},
"myarray": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"type": "string"
},
"minItems": 4,
"uniqueItems": true
},
"boolean": {
"type": "boolean"
}
}
},
"required": [
"id",
"myarray",
"boolean"
]
}
},
"required": [
"root"
],
"additionalProperties": false
}
Remove the comments I added with <-- when copying over to your code, added for pointing where there changes are.
As a note, I do however don't understand why the validator didn't give an error for the 'malformed' schema, but might just be that it saw the definition as you had it as additional properties, not entirely sure.
The only thing wrong with your schema is that the root property should have type object instead of array. Because the properties keyword is not defined for arrays, it is ignored. Therefore, the part of the schema you were trying to test was completely ignored even though it was correct.
Here is the relevant passage from the specification
Some validation keywords only apply to one or more primitive types. When the primitive type of the instance cannot be validated by a given keyword, validation for this keyword and instance SHOULD succeed.
http://json-schema.org/latest/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.4.1