idempotent

Getting error when using post method in form

由 本小妞迷上赌 提交于 2019-12-02 17:26:39
问题 I am getting null when I am using post method while passing a form to the next page A repeat of this question link text <html> <head> Title <script> function callme() { alert("Hi"); alert(document.getElementById("prio").value); } </script> </head> <body> <FORM method="post" name="test"enctype="multipart/form-data" action="testjsp.jsp" > <select name="prio" id="prio"> <option>1</option> <option>2</option> </select> <input type="submit" value="Submit" onClick=callme();> </form> </body> </html>

Does idempotency include response codes?

由 て烟熏妆下的殇ゞ 提交于 2019-12-02 17:05:46
Do repeated requests to idempotent methods have to return the same response code? A lot of other people are asking the same question and ending up with contradicting answers. The answer should reference an authoritative source on the matter. I asked this question on the HTTP mailing list and was told that idempotency does not include return codes . Meaning, you are free to return HTTP 204 the first time a resource is deleted, and HTTP 404 at a later time, so long as the subsequent request does not change the server state. While it is true that subsequent requests may not change the server

Consequences of POST not being idempotent (RESTful API)

由 守給你的承諾、 提交于 2019-12-02 15:33:32
I am wondering if my current approach makes sense or if there is a better way to do it. I have multiple situations where i want to create new objects and let the server assign an ID to those objects. Sending a POST request appears to be the most appropriate way to do that. However since POST is not idempotent the request may get lost and sending it again may create a second object. Also requests being lost might be quite common since the API is often accessed through mobile networks. As a result i decided to split the whole thing into a two-step process. First sending a POST request to create

Getting error when using post method in form

由 与世无争的帅哥 提交于 2019-12-02 09:47:10
I am getting null when I am using post method while passing a form to the next page A repeat of this question link text <html> <head> Title <script> function callme() { alert("Hi"); alert(document.getElementById("prio").value); } </script> </head> <body> <FORM method="post" name="test"enctype="multipart/form-data" action="testjsp.jsp" > <select name="prio" id="prio"> <option>1</option> <option>2</option> </select> <input type="submit" value="Submit" onClick=callme();> </form> </body> </html> IN testjsp.jsp I am trying to prin the prio variable which I am not able to do and its prining null.I

Since properties order in objects is not guaranteed in JavaScript, how does JSON.stringify() actually behave?

由 五迷三道 提交于 2019-12-02 08:19:16
问题 Since properties order in objects is not guaranteed in JavaScript, how does JSON.stringify() actually behave? Is the following always true (same object)? const o = { a: 1, b: 2 }; console.log(JSON.stringify(o) === JSON.stringify(o)); Is the following always true (deeply equal objects, same key declaration order)? console.log(JSON.stringify({ a: 1, b: 2 }) === JSON.stringify({ a: 1, b: 2 })); How to make the following be true (deeply equal objects, different key declaration order)? console.log

Should IDisposable.Dispose() implementations be idempotent?

由 我只是一个虾纸丫 提交于 2019-12-01 02:12:22
The Microsoft.NET framework provides the IDisposable interface which requires an implementation of void Dispose() method. Its purpose is to enable manual, or scope-based releasing of expensive resources an IDisposable implementation may have allocated. Examples include database collections, streams and handles. My question is, should the implementation of the Dispose() method be idempotent - when called more than once on the same instance, the instance to be 'disposed of' only once, and subsequent calls not to throw exceptions. In Java, most of the objects that have similar behavior (again

PUT POST being idempotent (REST)

由 别来无恙 提交于 2019-11-30 15:07:28
问题 I don't quite get how the HTTP verbs are defined as idempotent. All I've read is GET and PUT is idempotent. POST is not idempotent. But you could create a REST API using POST that doesn't change anything (in the database for example), or create a REST API for PUT that changes every time it is called. Sure, that probably is the wrong way to do things but if it can be done, why is PUT labeled as idempotent (or POST as not) when it is up to the implementation? I'm not challenging this idea, I'm

How can I prevent database being written to again when the browser does a reload/back?

由 青春壹個敷衍的年華 提交于 2019-11-30 15:07:02
I'm putting together a small web app that writes to a database (Perl CGI & MySQL). The CGI script takes some info from a form and writes it to a database. I notice, however, that if I hit 'Reload' or 'Back' on the web browser, it'll write the data to the database again. I don't want this. What is the best way to protect against the data being re-written in this case? Do not use GET requests to make modifications! Be RESTful ; use POST (or PUT) instead the browser should warn the user not to reload the request. Redirecting ( using HTTP redirection ) to a receipt page using a normal GET request

PUT POST being idempotent (REST)

由 ＊爱你＆永不变心＊ 提交于 2019-11-30 13:44:35
I don't quite get how the HTTP verbs are defined as idempotent. All I've read is GET and PUT is idempotent. POST is not idempotent. But you could create a REST API using POST that doesn't change anything (in the database for example), or create a REST API for PUT that changes every time it is called. Sure, that probably is the wrong way to do things but if it can be done, why is PUT labeled as idempotent (or POST as not) when it is up to the implementation? I'm not challenging this idea, I'm probably missing something and I ask to clear my understanding. EDIT: I guess one way to put my

Defining Idempotence

由 给你一囗甜甜゛ 提交于 2019-11-30 12:58:29
So "idempotence" can be defined as: An action, that if performed N times has the same effect as performing the action only once. Got it, easy enough. My question is about the subtlety of this definition -is an action considered idempotent by itself, or must you also consider the data being passed into the action? Let me clarify with an example: Suppose I have a PUT method that updates some resource, we'll call it f(x) Obviously, f(3) is idempotent, as long as I supply 3 as the input. And equally obvious, f(5) will change the value of the resource (i.e., it will no longer be 3 or whatever value
订阅 idempotent