Skip to main content

MVC 3 - Handling 404 errors

Intr-un post anterior am promis ca o sa revin cu cativa pasi ce trebuie facuti pentru a putea face handling corect la o aplicatie ASP.NET MVC 3.
Mai jos o sa gasiti cei 3 pasi care trebuie facuti pentru a face handling la erorile de tip 404 cat mai bine, fara sa avem surprize neplacute cand aplicatia este deja in productie. Exista mai multe variante. Varianta aleasa de mine nu necesita existenta sau modificarea unui base controller.
1. Pentru toate erorile care apar in sistem avem nevoie de un loc comun
Toate erorile trebuie sa fie controlate dintr-un loc comun. In cazul in care vrem sa vedem la ce erori se face handling sau care este modalitatea prin care se face handling, ca sa nu cautam prin controale, cel mai usor este sa ne facem un controller care se ocupa doar cu acest lucru. public
class ErrorController
{
    public ActionResult Http404(string url)
    {
        Response.StatusCode = (int)HttpStatusCode.NotFound;
        var model = new ErrorViewModel();
        model.RequestedUrl = Request.Url.OriginalString.Contains(url) & Request.Url.OriginalString != url
                ? Request.Url.OriginalString
                : url;
        model.ReferrerUrl = Request.UrlReferrer != null
                && Request.UrlReferrer.OriginalString != model.RequestedUrl
                ? Request.UrlReferrer.OriginalString
                : null;
        return View("NotFound", model);
    }
}
In interiorul actiunii Http404 se pot scrie informatii in trace cu privire la eroarea aparuta.
2. Handling la erorile de tip 404 din fisierul de configurare
In web.config trebuie sa facem handling la erorile de tip 404 in doua locatii.
<system.webServer>
    <httpErrors errorMode="Custom">
      <remove statusCode="404" subStatusCode="-1" />
      <error statusCode="404" path="/Error/Http404" responseMode="ExecuteURL" />
      <remove statusCode="500" subStatusCode="-1" />
      <error statusCode="500" path="/Error/ServerError" responseMode="ExecuteURL" />
    </httpErrors>   
<system.webServer>
</system.web>
si
<system.web>
    <customErrors mode="On" defaultRedirect="/Error/Http404">
      <error statusCode="404" redirect="/Error/ServerError" />
    </customErrors>
</system.web>
De foarte multe ori se uita de sectiune httpErrors, care poate sa genereze uneori probleme.
3. Global.asax - custom routes
Cand definim "tabela" pentru routes, nu trebuie sa uitam sa mapam erorile de tip 404 si sa le redirectionam spre controlerul de erori.
routes.MapRoute(
        "Error - 404",
        "NotFound",
        new { controller = "Error", action = "Http404" }
        );
    routes.MapRoute(
        "Error - 500",
        "ServerError",
        new { controller = "Error", action = "ServerError"}
        );
Este foarte important ca aceste doua route sa fie primele definite. Dupa aceste route putem sa adaugam cele custom pentru aplicatia noastra.

Exista si alte variante. Aceasta mi s-a parut destul ca nu genereaza modificari de cod si in alte zone, unde poate nu vrem sa facem nici o modificare.

Comments

  1. Interesant - mai greu e de decis ce sa apara in pagina de 404 not found - macar un link care sa duca user-ul inapoi la aplicatie, poate un feature de search cand e posibil: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/creating-user-friendly-404-pages.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dar daca toata aplicatia este down se poate crea o bucla din cauza redirectariilor. Trebuie avut grija daca folosim un controller pentru Erori, ca acesta sa fie cat mai simplu si de evitat sa mosteneasca din ceva BaseController a aplicatiei noastre.
    Cea mai sigura varianta pagini HTML simple.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mie personal mi se pare gresit (dpdv SEO) sa redirectionezi in caz de URL inexistent. In mod normal ar trebui sa raspunzi cu 404 si URL-ul sa nu se schimbe in browser.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exista cazuri cand eroarea 404 iti scapa din cod si aici e ultimul loc unde o poti prinde (sau din cod, dar tot pe baza unei configurati asemanatoare).

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Database Modernization Matters for AI

  When companies transition to the cloud, they typically begin with applications and virtual machines, which is often the easier part of the process. The actual complexity arises later when databases are moved. To save time and effort, cloud adoption is more of a cloud migration in an IaaS manner, fulfilling current, but not future needs. Even organisations that are already in the cloud find that their databases, although “migrated,” are not genuinely modernised. This disparity becomes particularly evident when they begin to explore AI technologies. Understanding Modernisation Beyond Migration Database modernisation is distinct from merely relocating an outdated database to Azure. It's about making your data layer ready for future needs, like automation, real-time analytics, and AI capabilities. AI needs high throughput, which can be achieved using native DB cloud capabilities. When your database runs in a traditional setup (even hosted in the cloud), in that case, you will enc...

Cloud Myths: Migrating to the cloud is quick and easy (Pill 2 of 5 / Cloud Pills)

The idea that migration to the cloud is simple, straightforward and rapid is a wrong assumption. It’s a common misconception of business stakeholders that generates delays, budget overruns and technical dept. A migration requires laborious planning, technical expertise and a rigorous process.  Migrations, especially cloud migrations, are not one-size-fits-all journeys. One of the most critical steps is under evaluation, under budget and under consideration. The evaluation phase, where existing infrastructure, applications, database, network and the end-to-end estate are evaluated and mapped to a cloud strategy, is crucial to ensure the success of cloud migration. Additional factors such as security, compliance, and system dependencies increase the complexity of cloud migration.  A misconception regarding lift-and-shits is that they are fast and cheap. Moving applications to the cloud without changes does not provide the capability to optimise costs and performance, leading to ...

Cloud Myths: Cloud is Cheaper (Pill 1 of 5 / Cloud Pills)

Cloud Myths: Cloud is Cheaper (Pill 1 of 5 / Cloud Pills) The idea that moving to the cloud reduces the costs is a common misconception. The cloud infrastructure provides flexibility, scalability, and better CAPEX, but it does not guarantee lower costs without proper optimisation and management of the cloud services and infrastructure. Idle and unused resources, overprovisioning, oversize databases, and unnecessary data transfer can increase running costs. The regional pricing mode, multi-cloud complexity, and cost variety add extra complexity to the cost function. Cloud adoption without a cost governance strategy can result in unexpected expenses. Improper usage, combined with a pay-as-you-go model, can result in a nightmare for business stakeholders who cannot track and manage the monthly costs. Cloud-native services such as AI services, managed databases, and analytics platforms are powerful, provide out-of-the-shelve capabilities, and increase business agility and innovation. H...