How to change the /login/authenticate to /auth?
At the established parameters:
grails.plugin.springsecurity.useBasicAuth = true
grails.plugin.springsecurity.auth.useForward = true
The answer to your question can be found in the documentation.
It should be possible to set the URL via
grails.plugin.springsecurity.apf.filterProcessesUrl = "/auth"
Related
I'm using following class in Java. But this class has limited implementation of properties.
SnowflakeBasicDataSource basicDataSource = new SnowflakeBasicDataSource();
basicDataSource.setSsl(true);
basicDataSource.setUser(dbSnowFlakeUsername);
basicDataSource.setPassword(dbSnowFlakePassword);
basicDataSource.setUrl(dbSnowFlakeUrl);
basicDataSource.setLoginTimeout(dbSnowFlakeLoginTimeoutSeconds);
For example i want to indicate networkTimeout and queryTimeout. But this is not implemented
How do i pass it to SnowflakeBasicDataSource?
Tried to pass withing url like this
jdbc:snowflake://ni31094.eu-central-1.snowflakecomputing.com/?db=TEST_DB&schema=PUBLIC&role=SYSADMIN&warehouse=TEST_WAREHOUSE&tracing=FINE&networkTimeout=10&queryTimeout=10
But don't think it works.
Please need assistance.
The two parameters for Network and Query Timeout are:
Network Timeout: networkTimeout
Query Timeout: queryTimeout=<number>
Looking at your string: Yes, you are using the two parameters correctly but I see your user and password-parameters are missing.
You can also try to:
ensure your properties are set correctly
adjust your connection string and accountinformation-values
You can find some more detail information about troubleshooting here: https://docs.snowflake.com/en/user-guide/jdbc-configure.html#troubleshooting-tips
Setting the properties in the URL for the SnowflakeBasicDataSource does work. I tested the queryTimeout with a long-running query and the query correctly get cancelled after the specified time in the parameter.
Testing networkTimeout is a little more difficult since it's hard to tell how it is actually used. It is used by net.snowflake.client.jdbc.RestRequest and I've tested that the correct parameter gets passed through, and it does. The reason you're getting a timeout of 60 seconds is that the HTTP request for the initial login request gets set to that by default. The initial login request seems to ignore the networkTimeout. The request which contains the query to run gets correctly set to the networkTimeout parameter passed in through the query string. Since my java skills aren't great I was unable to test a situation where the networkTimeout causes an error, unfortunately.
Here is some scala code which shows you that the two params get correctly set in the session:
import net.snowflake.client.jdbc.{SnowflakeBasicDataSource, SnowflakeConnectionV1}
import java.sql.Statement
import java.io.FileReader
import java.util.Properties
object BasicConnector extends App{
val prop = new Properties
prop.load(new FileReader("~/snowflake_conn.properties"))
val username = prop.getProperty("username")
val password = prop.getProperty("password")
val url = prop.getProperty("url") + "?networkTimeout=54321&queryTimeout=1234"
val basicDataSource = new SnowflakeBasicDataSource()
basicDataSource.setSsl(true)
basicDataSource.setUser(username)
basicDataSource.setPassword(password)
basicDataSource.setUrl(url)
basicDataSource.setWarehouse("DEMO_WH")
val conn: SnowflakeConnectionV1 = basicDataSource.getConnection().asInstanceOf[SnowflakeConnectionV1]
val statement: Statement = conn.createStatement()
val queryTimeout = conn.getSfSession.getQueryTimeout
val networkTimeout = conn.getSfSession.getNetworkTimeoutInMilli
println(s"query timeout: $queryTimeout")
println(s"network timeout: $networkTimeout")
statement.close()
conn.close()
The above prints out:
query timeout: 1234
network timeout: 54321
As you can see, I had to cast the Connection object to a SnowflakeConnectionV1 and use the getSfSession method to inspect the params with .asInstanceOf[SnowflakeConnectionV1]. This is because the JDBC Connection type doesn't have this method. You shouldn't have to do this though if you don't care about inspecting the parameter, it'll still use them correctly.
I am trying to implement signalR in angularJS,
I want to pass relative url to hub connection, but it's making current url (on which my angular application is hosted)
My API base url : http://localhost:81/NrsService/api/TestSignal
My angular application running at
http://localhost:81
Here is my signalR setup :
$.connection.hub.url = "/NrsService/api/TestSignal";
//Getting the connection object
connection = $.hubConnection();
Like it is sending request at http://localhost:81/signalr/negotiate? but I want it to be http://localhost:81/NrsService/api/TestSignal/negotiate?
You have to edit the generated JavaScript code where the client proxy is defined. As of SignalR 2.4.0 there is a createHubProxies function defined where you should find this line of code:
signalR.hub = $.hubConnection("/signalr", { useDefaultPath: false });
Change it to the following to prevent the "/signalr" ending in your requests:
signalR.hub = $.hubConnection("", { useDefaultPath: false });
After that, you can simply change the url which should be called the way you provided in your question, e.g.:
$.connection.hub.url = "/NrsService/api/TestSignal";
If you also want to change this Url dynamically, you can use the document.location properties. In my case, I did something like this:
var subPath = document.location.pathname.substr(0, document.location.pathname.lastIndexOf("/"));
$.connection.hub.url = subPath; // subpath equals to "/NrsService/api"
Hope this helps.
I have an angularJS frontend that I redirect to a third party payment gateway when a customer clicks on the Pay button.
I am currently using the following function to redirect to the payment gateway:
if(status.data.result == "true"){
var ref = window.open(url,'_self');
}
};
This code works well when I try it on localhost. But does not work when I put it on the ubuntu server.
Any ideas on why?
Regards,
Galeej
Try adding return false after var ref = window.open(url,'_self'); like
var ref = window.open(url,'_self');
return false;
return false will prevent from page submit and it may work this way to properly redirect on the same page.
May be your content security policy is blocking this url to load.
You can try using _blank instead of _self to see if that is the case.
Also it would be better to use $window, because angular.
Also are you using the fully qualified URL ?
The solution that worked for us was using window.location = url
I saw the below instructions in the README file of XCGLogger github page.
"Another common usage pattern is to have multiple loggers, perhaps one for UI issues, one for networking, and another for data issues.
Each log destination can have its own log level. As a convenience, you can set the log level on the log object itself and it will pass that level to each destination. Then set the destinations that need to be different."
I think that's very useful and meaningful to use XCGLogger. Could any expert show an demo about how to add multiple destinations with different purpose. Or I need to use multiple log objects?
Yes, you would use different log objects in that case.
Based on the example of advanced usage in the readme, you could do something like this:
// Create a logger for UI related events
let logUI = XCGLogger(identifier: "uiLogger", includeDefaultDestinations: false)
// Create a destination for the system console log (via NSLog)
let systemLogDestination = XCGNSLogDestination(owner: logUI, identifier: "uiLogger.systemLogDestination")
// Optionally set some configuration options
systemLogDestination.outputLogLevel = .Debug
systemLogDestination.showLogIdentifier = false
systemLogDestination.showFunctionName = true
systemLogDestination.showThreadName = true
systemLogDestination.showLogLevel = true
systemLogDestination.showFileName = true
systemLogDestination.showLineNumber = true
systemLogDestination.showDate = true
// Add the destination to the logger
logUI.addLogDestination(systemLogDestination)
// Create a logger for DB related events
let logDB = XCGLogger(identifier: "dbLogger", includeDefaultDestinations: false)
// Create a file log destination
let fileLogDestination = XCGFileLogDestination(owner: logDB, writeToFile: "/path/to/file", identifier: "advancedLogger.fileLogDestination")
// Optionally set some configuration options
fileLogDestination.outputLogLevel = .Verbose
fileLogDestination.showLogIdentifier = false
fileLogDestination.showFunctionName = true
fileLogDestination.showThreadName = true
fileLogDestination.showLogLevel = true
fileLogDestination.showFileName = true
fileLogDestination.showLineNumber = true
fileLogDestination.showDate = true
// Add the destination to the logger
logDB.addLogDestination(fileLogDestination)
// Add basic app info, version info etc, to the start of the logs
logUI.logAppDetails()
logDB.logAppDetails()
// Add database version to DB log
logDB.info("DB Schema Version 1.0")
This creates two log objects, one for UI events with a Debug level, one for DB events with a Verbose level.
Assume I have set up an arbitrarily complex Flow[HttpRequest, HttpResponse, Unit].
I can already use said flow to handle incoming requests with
Http().bindAndHandle(flow, "0.0.0.0", 8080)
Now I would like to add logging, leveraging some existing directive, like logRequestResult("my-service"){...}
Is there a way to combine this directive with my flow? I guess I am looking for another directive, something along the lines of
def completeWithFlow(flow: Flow): Route
Is this possible at all?
N.B.: logRequestResult is an example, my question applies to any Directive one might find useful.
Turns out one (and maybe the only) way is to wire and materialize a new flow, and feed the extracted request to it. Example below
val myFlow: Flow[HttpRequest, HttpResponse, NotUsed] = ???
val route =
get {
logRequestResult("my-service") {
extract(_.request) { req ⇒
val futureResponse = Source.single(req).via(myFlow).runWith(Sink.head)
complete(futureResponse)
}
}
}
Http().bindAndHandle(route, "127.0.0.1", 9000)
http://doc.akka.io/docs/akka/2.4.2/scala/http/routing-dsl/overview.html
Are you looking for route2HandlerFlow or Route.handlerFlow ?
I believe Route.handlerFlow will work based on implicits.
eg /
val serverBinding = Http().bindAndHandle(interface = "0.0.0.0", port = 8080,
handler = route2HandlerFlow(mainFlow()))