loading...
Cover image for REST API Guide

REST API Guide

drminnaar profile image Douglas Minnaar ・20 min read

tl;dr

This is a guide with the goal of laying down foundational knowledge that is required when speaking about building REST API's. The following topics are covered:

  • REST Constraints
  • Richardson Maturity Model
  • REST in Practice (Some practical guidelines)
  • Example project (Written in C# using .Net Core 3.1) called Ranker

The main points that I would like to summarize with regards to REST are listed as follows:

  • REST IS an architectural style used to describe web architecture
  • REST IS protocol agnostic
  • REST IS about web architecture (REST != API)
  • REST IS NOT a design pattern
  • REST IS NOT a standard. However standards can be used to implement REST.

1. REST Fundamentals

This sections covers REST essentials. The goal of this section is to make the reader comfortable with the notion of REST. It is also intended to provide the minimum required theory to start talking about REST and building HTTP services that incorporate a REST architectural style.

Introduction

REST (REpresentational State Transfer) is an architectural style that was defined by Roy Thomas Fielding in his PhD dissertation "Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures".

According to Fielding,

The name “Representational State Transfer” is intended to evoke an image of how a well-designed Web application behaves: a network of web pages (a virtual state-machine), where the user progresses through the application by selecting links (state transitions), resulting in the next page (representing the next state of the application) being transferred to the user and rendered for their use.

(Fielding, 2000) pg 109

Why REST?

If you're someone that builds HTTP services for distributed systems, then understanding and applying REST principles will help you build services that are more:

  • scalable
  • reliable
  • flexible
  • portable

By building services based on REST principles, one is effectively building services that are more web friendly. This is because REST is an architectural style that describes web architecture.

REST Architectural Constraints

Fielding describes REST as a hybrid style that is derived from several network-based architectural styles (Chapter 3) combined with a number of additional constraints. In this section, the six architectural constraints as applied to REST are discussed. The key takeaway is that these constraints encourage design that will result in applications that easily scale, are faster, and more reliable.

The 6 architectural REST constraints are as follows:

1. Client-Server

A guiding principle of Client-Server is the separation of concerns. It's all about achieving high cohesion and loose coupling in order to improve portability and flexibility. It also allows systems to evolve independently of each other. As can be seen by the diagram below, a Client sends a request, and a Server receives the request.

rest-client-server

2. Statelessness

A Server must not store any state during communications. All information required to understand a request must be contained within the Request. Therefore, every Request should be able to execute on its own and be self-contained. Also, a Client must maintain it's own state. The benefit of this approach is as follows:

  • Visibility - Everything required to understand the Request is within the Request. This makes monitoring a request easier.
  • Reliability - Recovering from failures is easier because the Server does not need to track/rollback/commit state because all the state is essentially captured within the message. If a Request fails, it can be as simple as resending the Request.
  • Scalability - Because there is no need to manage state and resources between requests, and because all Requests are isolated,scalability is improved and simplified.
  • Aligned with web architecture (the internet is designed this way)

rest-stateless

A disadvantage of this approach is that it decreases network efficiency because the Requests need to contain all the information required for that interaction. The more information, the larger the Request size, and therefore the more bandwidth is used. This will have a negative effect on latency as well.

3. Cache

The primary reason for the Cache constraint is to improve network efficiency. As noted above in the Stateless constraint, the size of Requests can decrease network efficiency due to the need for more bandwidth. Through caching, it is possible to reduce and sometimes remove the need for a Client to interact with the Server. In other words it's possible to reduce and/or eliminate the need for Requests. Therefore, the Cache constraint states that a Server must include additional data in the response to indicate to the client whether the Request is cacheable and for how long. A network Client can then decide the appropriate action based on provided cache information in Response.

Caching can improve performance. However, it comes with a number of disadvantages that impact the reliability of the system. For example:

  • Data Integrity - Response data could be inaccurate due to stale or expired data
  • Complexity - The implementation and use of caching mechanisms is renowned for it's complexity in the Computer Science world

4. Uniform Interface

At the core of this constraint is the principle of generality which is closely related to the principle of anticipation. It stems from the fact that it is impossible to build the exact required interface for all network clients of a server service. Therefore, by providing a generic interface, one is able to provide a simplified interface with higher visibility that is able to satisfy the requirements of more clients. A disadvantage of this approach is that because the interface is so general, one is not able to satisfy specific client requirements. In other words, providing a generic interface can lead to a sub-optimal interface for many clients.

There are four additional constraints that form part of the Uniform Interface and are listed as follows:

  • Identification of resources

    A key abstraction of REST is a resource. According to Fielding (Resources and Resource Identifiers), a resource is any information that can be named. Furthermore, I personally like to think of a resource as a "Noun".

    Noun - a word (other than a pronoun) used to identify any of a class of people, places, or things ( common noun ), or to name a particular one of these ( proper noun ).

    It is also better to think of a single resource as a collection of resources. For example, if we were to provide an API to allow a Client to submit or retrieve a "rating", one would typically identify the resource as follows:

     GET /ratings
    

    Generally, there should only be a single way to access a resource. But this is more a guideline than a rule.

  • Manipulation of resources through representations

    This constraint states that the client should hold the representation of a resource that has enough information to create, modify or delete a resource. It's important that the representation of a resource is decoupled from the way the resource is identified. A resource can be represented in multiple formats or representations such as JSON, XML, HTML, PNG etc. A client should be able to specify the desired representation of a resource for any interaction with the server. Therefore, a Client can specify to receive a resource in JSON format, but send the resource as input in XML format.

    For example:

    For the retrieval of an Employees resource, we use XML format
    by specifying a "Accept: application/xml" header.

     GET /ratings
     Accept: application/xml
    
     <ratings>
       <rating>
         <id>7337</id>
         <userId>98765</userId>
         <movieId>12345</movieId>
         <score>6</score>
       </rating>
     </ratings>
    

    For the creation of an Employees resource, we use
    JSON format by specifying a "Content-Type: application/json" header

     POST /ratings
     Content-Type: application/json
     {
         "userId": 98765,
         "movieId": 12345,
         "score": 6
     }     
    

    Should a specific format not be supported, it is important for the Server to provide an appropriate response to indicate that a specific format is not supported. For example:

    • Return a 406 Not Acceptable status code to indicate that the client specified a request with an Accept header format that the Server is unable to fulfill. [See here for more information]
    • Return a 415 Unsupported Media Type when a response is specified in an unsupported content type. [See here for more information]
  • Self descriptive messages

    Self descriptive messages enable intermediary communication by allowing intermediary components to transform the content of the message. In other words, the semantics of the message are exposed to the intermediaries. The implication of this constraint is that interactions are stateless, standard methods and media types are used to expose the semantics of message, and responses indicate cacheability.

  • Hypermedia as the engine of application state (HATEOAS)

    A key concept about HATEOAS is that it implies that a Response sent from a Server should include information that informs the Client on how to interact with the Server.

    rest-hateoas

    The advantages of HATEOAS are as follows:

    • Improves discoverability of resources through published set of links (provided with response)
    • Indicates to Clients what actions can be taken next. In other words, without HATEOAS, a Client only has access to the data but no idea about what actions may be taken with that data

5. Layered System

The key principle of this constraint is that the Client cannot make any assumptions that it is communicating directly with the Server. This constraint relates to the Client-Server constraint (discussed above) in such a way that Client and Server are decoupled. Therefore the Client makes no assumptions about any kind of hidden dependencies and this enables us to insert components and entire sub-systems between the Client and the Server. This allows one to add load balancers, DNS, caching servers and security (authentication and authorization) between Client and Server without disrupting the interaction.

Layering allows one to evolve and improve ones architecture to improve scalability and reliability ones system.

6. Code On Demand

This is an optional constraint. The key concept about this constraint is that when a Client makes a request to a resource on a Server, it will receive the resource as well as the code to execute against that resource. The Client knows nothing about the composition of the code and only needs to know how to execute it. Javascript is an example of where this is done.

Richardson Maturity Model

The Richardson Maturity Model is a heuristic maturity model that can be used to better understand how mature a service is in terms of the REST architectural style.

rest-rmm

  • Level 0

Services at this level are described as having a single URI, and using a single HTTP verb (usually POST). This is very characteristic of most Web Services (WS-*) in that this services would have a single URI accepting an HTTP POST request having an XML payload.

  • Level 1

Services at this level are described as having many URIs with a single HTTP verb. The primary difference between Level 0 and Level 1 is that Level 1 services expose multiple logical resources as opposed to a single resource.

  • Level 2

Services at this level are described as having many URI-addressable resources. Each addressable resource supports both multiple HTTP verbs and HTTP status codes.

  • Level 3

Services at this level are like Level 2 services that additionally support Hypermedia As The Engine Of Application State (HATEOAS). Therefore, representations of a resource will also contain links to other resources (the actions that can be performed relating to current resource).

When thinking about the RMM applies to your API, please refrain from thinking in terms of having a Level 2 or Level 3 REST API. According to this model, an API cannot be called a REST API unless it at least satisfies a Level 3 of the RMM. Therefore, it would be better to think of ones API as an HTTP API that satisfies a Level 1,2, or 3 on the RMM.


2. REST in Practice

I have developed a simple Http Api to demonstrate some of the concepts that I discussed in Part 1 of this guide.

A REST API guide with and example project written in C# using .Net Core 3.1

I've also started another project that I plan to use to demonstrate various technology concepts like REST API's.

A playground for demonstrating concepts such as architecture, design, dotnet core, typescript, react, database and docker

2. Defining A Contract

In this example, we are going to define contracts for 3 types of resources:

  • Users
  • Movies
  • Ratings

There are 5 important aspects to defining a contract:

  • Naming a resource
  • Http methods used to interact with resource
  • Status codes used to describe the state of an interaction
  • Content Negotiation
  • Be consistent

2.1 Naming Guidelines

  • Resources should have names that are represented by nouns and not actions (behaviors)
  # Incorrect naming

  /getUsers
  /getUserById/{userId}

  # Correct Naming

  /users
  /users/{userId}
  • Resources should be named using plural form
  # Incorrect naming

  /user
  /movie
  /rating

  # Correct naming

  /users
  /movies
  /ratings
  • Mapping RPC style methods to resources

The naming guidelines seem to suit naming resources very well. However, what happens when one needs to name something that is more a behavior than a resource? For example, let's say we want to compute the average rating for a movie. How would we structure our naming?

  /movies/{movieId}/averageRating

I don't think there is 100% consensus on what the correct naming strategy is for a scenario such as this one. However, when faced with defining a contract for something that feels more about behavior than resources, I like to define contracts based on the outcomes of those behaviors. Therefore, for the example above:

  /averageMovieRatings
  /averageMovieRatings/{movieId}

But what if we try to define a contract for a calculator? This is clearly an example of where defining a contract around a behavior is very difficult and "unnatural" to REST. The reason why it feels unnatural is because REST is an architectural style for describing web architecture. So if you imagined every endpoint as a webpage, then clearly the behaviors for a calculator don't map very well. My suggestion is to use an alternative technology like gRPC if you are building API's that are more about behavior than resources.

  • Represent hierarchy
  /users/{userId}
  /users/{userId}/ratings
  /users/{userId}/ratings/{ratingId}

  /movies/{movieId}
  /movies/{movieId}/ratings
  /movies/{movieId}/ratings/{ratingId}
  • Filtering, searching and sorting are not part of naming

For filtering:

  # Incorrect
  /users/firstName/{firstName}

  # Correct
  /users?firstName={firstName}

For searching:

  # Incorrect
  /users/search/{query}

  # Correct
  /users?q={query}

For ordering:

  # Incorrect
  /users/orderBy/{firstName}

  # Correct
  /users?order={firstName}

2.2 Http Methods

Http Method Request Body Uri Response
GET - /users List of users
GET - /users/{userId} Single user
POST Single user /users Single user
PUT Single user /users/{userId} -
PATCH Json Patch Document for user /users/{userId} -
DELETE - /users/{userId} -
HEAD - /users -
HEAD - /users/{userId} -
OPTIONS - /users -

2.3 Status Codes

In this section, a list of commonly used status codes is provided. Status codes help convey meaning in client/server interactions. They also help achieve consistency in terms of defining a contract.

Level 200 - Success

  • 200 Ok - Request succeeded
  • 201 Create - Request succeeded and resource created
  • 204 No Content - Request succeeded and there is no additional content to send in response body

Level 300 - Redirection Responses

  • 301 Moved Permanently - The URL of requested resourced has changed permanently. The new URL is provided in response
  • 302 Found - Indicates that the URI of requested resource changed, and can therefore use the same URI for future requests
  • 304 Not Modified - Used for caching. Indicates that the resource has not changed and that the same cached version can be used

Level 400 - Client Mistake

  • 400 Bad Request - The request could not be understood by the server due to malformed syntax. The client should not repeat the request without modifications
  • 401 Unauthorized - Request failed due to authentication failure
  • 403 Forbidden - Request failed due to authorization failure
  • 404 Not Found - The requested resource could not be found
  • 405 Method Not Allowed - The request method is understood by server but not supported. In other words, the server doesn't have an endpoint supporting requested method.
  • 406 Not Acceptable - When a request is specified in an unsupported content type using the Accept header
  • 409 Conflict - Indicates a conflict in terms of requested resource state. For a POST, it could mean that a resource already exists. For a PUT, it could mean that the state of resource changed thereby making current request data stale.
  • 415 Unsupported Media Type - When a response is specified in an unsupported content type
  • 422 Unprocessable Entity - Indicates the the request was correct and understood by server, but the data contained within request is invalid.

Level 500 - Server Mistake

  • 500 Internal Server Error - Indicates that something went wrong on the server that prevent the server from fulfilling the request.
  • 503 Service Unavailable - Indicates that the server is functional but not able to deliver requested resource. This is usually a result of a server being overloaded, server is under maintenance, or a client side issue relating to DNS server (DND server could be unavailable).
  • 504 Gateway Timeout - Indicates that a proxy server did not receive a timely response from the origin (upstream) server.

2.4 Content Negotiation

Implies the type of representation (Media Type) that will be used for request and response. The Media Type is specified in header of request. Two popular Media Type formats that are used with Http Api's are:

  • application/json
  • application/xml

Typically, I would support at least the two aforementioned formats. For any media type format that is not supported, the Api should return a 406 Not Acceptable status code.

Examples:

# Send POST request to create a a new user.
# The request will use 'application/json' as input, but XML in return (application/xml)

POST /users
Accept: application/xml
Content-Type: application/json

{
  "firstName": "Bob",
  "lastName": "TheBuilder"
}

# The response is returned as XML

<User>
  <Id>112233</Id>
  <FirstName>Bob</FirstName>
  <LastName>TheBuilder</LastName>
</User>

3. Example Project

To illustrate some of the topics that have been discussed, I created an example project called Ranker.

Ranker is an API that has been designed by using REST as a guide. In terms of the Richardson Maturity Model, I have implemented all endpoints to be at least a Level 2. However, I have implemented some endpoints to a Level 3 (with HATEOAS). Conceptually, Ranker provides the following features:

  • Interface to manage Users (with HATEOAS)
  • Interface to manage Movies
  • Interface to manage Ratings

In the following sections I provide more detail about the project and how to get started.

Architecture

Although the focus of this example project is to illustrate an implementation of REST, I decided to provide a basic architecture to also illustrate a good separation of concerns so that the Api layer (Controllers) are kept very clean.

I've chosen a architecture based on the Onion Architecture. Below, I provide 2 different views of what equates to exactly the same architecture.

Layered Architecture

Layered Architecture

Onion Architecture



Onion Architecture

  • API

Primary Responsibility: Provides a distributed interface that gives access to application features

This API has been implemented as a number of HTTP services based on REST guidelines. The API itself is based on an MVC (Model, View, and Controllers) architecture. The Controllers are essentially the public facing API contract.

  • Infrastructure

Primary Responsibility: Provide the core of the system an interface to the "world".

This layer is all about defining and configuring external dependencies such as:

  • database access
  • proxies to other API's
  • logging
  • monitoring
  • dependency injection

    • Application

Primary Responsibility: Application logic.

This layer is typically where you would find "Application "Services".

  • Domain

Primary Responsibility: Enterprise domain logic.

All domain logic relating to domain models and domain services are handled in this layer.

API Contract

The API has been implemented with the Open Api Specification (OAS). Once you have the API up and running, you can browse to the following Url to get access to the OAS Swagger Document.

http://localhost:5000

The Swagger document will look something like below:

movies-oas

ratings-oas

users-oas

Pagination

For this project, any endpoint returning a collection of items has been implemented with paging. Use the following query parameters to control paging:

  • page - the page number
  • limit - the number of items per page

Pagination has been implemented in two ways for this example project.

  • Pagination in Header
  GET http://localhost:5000/v1/movies?page=2&limit=5

  Header: X-Pagination

  {
      "CurrentPageNumber": 2,
      "ItemCount": 9742,
      "PageSize": 5,
      "PageCount": 1949,
      "FirstPageUrl": "http://localhost:5000/v1/movies?page=1&limit=5",
      "LastPageUrl": "http://localhost:5000/v1/movies?page=1949&limit=5",
      "NextPageUrl": "http://localhost:5000/v1/movies?page=3&limit=5",
      "PreviousPageUrl": "http://localhost:5000/v1/movies?page=1&limit=5",
      "CurrentPageUrl": "http://localhost:5000/v1/movies?page=2&limit=5"
  }
  • Pagination as links (HATEOAS)
  GET http://localhost:5000/v1/users?page=1&limit=1

  {
    .
    .
    .
    "links": [
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?page=1&limit=1",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "current-page"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?page=2&limit=1",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "next-page"
        },
        {
            "href": "",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "previous-page"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?page=1&limit=1",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "first-page"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?page=610&limit=1",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "last-page"
        }
    ]
  }

Filtering

Where practical, I've tried to provide a filter per resource property. I've implemented filtering using 3 techniques:

1. Basic

   // filter users by last name and age

   GET http://localhost:5000/v1/users?last-name=doe&gender=male

2. Range

For numeric resource (and date) properties, I've implemented range filters as follows:

   // Possible input for age could be:
   // age=gt:30
   // age=gte:30
   // age=eq:30
   // age=lt:30
   // age=lte:30

   GET http://localhost:5000/v1/users?age=gte:30

3. Multiple (comma separated values)

   // get a list of movies for the genres animation and sci-fi

   GET http://localhost:5000/v1/movies?genres=animation,sci-fi

Ordering

I've chosen to keep ordering parameters very succinct. Therefore, ordering for a collection of resources may be executed in the following ways:

  • Order by a single resource property in ascending order
  // order by last name ascending

  GET http://localhost:5000/v1/users?order=last-name
  • Order by a single resource property in descending order
  // order by age descending

  GET http://localhost:5000/v1/users?order=-age
  • Order by multiple resource properties using mixed sort orders

Notice that we use comma separated values for the order.

  // order by last-name ascending then by age descending

  GET http://localhost:5000/v1/users?order=last-name,-age

Caching

I have implemented some basic client side caching behavior.

For example:

The following endpoints use response caching where the cache expires after 10 seconds.

GET http://localhost:5000/v1/users

GET http://localhost:5000/v1/movies
GET http://localhost:5000/v1/movies/{movieId}

GET http://localhost:5000/v1/ratings
GET http://localhost:5000/v1/ratings/{ratingId}

The following endpoint uses caching with an ETag.

GET http://localhost:5000/v1/users/{userId}

HATEOAS

The following endpoints have been implemented to return links as part of response.

// Get links available from root

GET http://localhost:5000/v1

[
    {
        "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1",
        "method": "GET",
        "rel": "self"
    },
    {
        "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/movies",
        "method": "GET",
        "rel": "movies"
    },
    {
        "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/movies",
        "method": "POST",
        "rel": "create-movie"
    },
    {
        "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/ratings",
        "method": "GET",
        "rel": "ratings"
    },
    {
        "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/ratings",
        "method": "POST",
        "rel": "create-rating"
    },
    {
        "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users",
        "method": "GET",
        "rel": "users"
    },
    {
        "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users",
        "method": "POST",
        "rel": "create-user"
    }
]
// Get as single user, including a list of navigational links

GET http://localhost:5000/v1/users

{
    "userId": 10,
    "age": 30,
    "firstName": "Durham",
    "lastName": "Franks",
    "gender": "male",
    "email": "durhamfranks@kog.com",
    "links": [
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/10",
            "method": "DELETE",
            "rel": "delete-user"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/10",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "self"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?Page=1&Limit=10",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "users"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users",
            "method": "OPTIONS",
            "rel": "options"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/10",
            "method": "PATCH",
            "rel": "patch-user"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users",
            "method": "POST",
            "rel": "create-user"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/10",
            "method": "PUT",
            "rel": "update-user"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/10/ratings",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "ratings"
        }
    ]
}

And for a collection of users (with links), we can use the request below. Please take note of the paging information that is returned as part of response

// Get list of users (with links), and paging links

GET http://localhost:5000/v1/users

{
    "users": [
        {
            "userId": 23,
            "age": 40,
            "firstName": "Michele",
            "lastName": "Jacobs",
            "gender": "female",
            "email": "michelejacobs@kineticut.com",
            "links": [
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/23",
                    "method": "DELETE",
                    "rel": "delete-user"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/23",
                    "method": "GET",
                    "rel": "self"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?Page=1&Limit=10",
                    "method": "GET",
                    "rel": "users"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users",
                    "method": "OPTIONS",
                    "rel": "options"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/23",
                    "method": "PATCH",
                    "rel": "patch-user"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users",
                    "method": "POST",
                    "rel": "create-user"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/23",
                    "method": "PUT",
                    "rel": "update-user"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/23/ratings",
                    "method": "GET",
                    "rel": "ratings"
                }
            ]
        },
        {
            "userId": 33,
            "age": 40,
            "firstName": "Barnett",
            "lastName": "Griffith",
            "gender": "male",
            "email": "barnettgriffith@corpulse.com",
            "links": [
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/33",
                    "method": "DELETE",
                    "rel": "delete-user"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/33",
                    "method": "GET",
                    "rel": "self"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?Page=1&Limit=10",
                    "method": "GET",
                    "rel": "users"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users",
                    "method": "OPTIONS",
                    "rel": "options"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/33",
                    "method": "PATCH",
                    "rel": "patch-user"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users",
                    "method": "POST",
                    "rel": "create-user"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/33",
                    "method": "PUT",
                    "rel": "update-user"
                },
                {
                    "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users/33/ratings",
                    "method": "GET",
                    "rel": "ratings"
                }
            ]
        }
    ],
    "links": [
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?order=-age&page=1&limit=2",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "current-page"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?order=-age&page=2&limit=2",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "next-page"
        },
        {
            "href": "",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "previous-page"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?order=-age&page=1&limit=2",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "first-page"
        },
        {
            "href": "http://localhost:5000/v1/users?order=-age&page=305&limit=2",
            "method": "GET",
            "rel": "last-page"
        }
    ]
}

4. Technology Used

OS

I have developed and tested Ranker on the following Operating Systems.

Ubuntu is an open source software operating system that runs from the desktop, to the cloud, to all your internet connected things.

  • Windows 10 Professional

In addition to developing Ranker on Windows 10, I have also tried and tested Ranker using Windows Subsystem For Linux. Specifically, I have used [WSL-Ubuntu]. See more about WSL below.

  • Windows Subsystem For Linux

    The Windows Subsystem for Linux lets developers run a GNU/Linux environment -- including most command-line tools, utilities, and applications -- directly on Windows, unmodified, without the overhead of a virtual machine.

  • Windows Subsystem For Linux 2

    NOTE: I have not tested Ranker on WSL2 yet. I mention it here because I want to be clear that I've only tested on WSL.

    WSL 2 is a new version of the architecture in WSL that changes how Linux distros interact with Windows. WSL 2 has the primary goals of increasing file system performance and adding full system call compatibility. Each Linux distro can run as a WSL 1, or a WSL 2 distro and can be switched between at any time. WSL 2 is a major overhaul of the underlying architecture and uses virtualization technology and a Linux kernel to enable its new features.

Code

Visual Studio Code is a source code editor developed by Microsoft for Windows, Linux and macOS. It includes support for debugging, embedded Git control, syntax highlighting, intelligent code completion, snippets, and code refactoring.

A fully-featured, extensible, FREE IDE for creating modern applications for Android, iOS, Windows, as well as web applications and cloud services.

Database

  • Kept things simple and only used an in-memory database

5. Getting Started

Before getting started, the following frameworks must be installed on your machine:

  • Dotnet Core 3.1

Get The Code

Clone 'ranker' repository from GitHub

# using https
git clone https://github.com/drminnaar/ranker.git

# or using ssh
git clone git@github.com:drminnaar/ranker.git

Build The Code

# change to project root
cd ./ranker

# build solution
dotnet build

Running the API

Run the API from the command line as follows:

# change to project root
cd ./ranker/Ranker.Api

# To run 'Ranker Api' (http://localhost:5000)
dotnet watch run

Open Postman Collection

I have provided a postman collection for the Ranker API. Please find the Postman collection _'Ranker.postman_collection'_at the root of the solution.

ranker-postman-collection


Posted on by:

drminnaar profile

Douglas Minnaar

@drminnaar

Developer, architect and mentor with 15+ years experience building financial and sport betting systems

Discussion

markdown guide
 

Hello All,

I need to discuss regarding RESTful API for accessing oracle database tables.
API was created using Oracle Rest Data Services (rest data enable at SQL developer).
I am getting error : 401 unauthorized while doing query through post man as below:

GET localhost:8080/ords/autodemo2/meta...

However below is working fine (code 200 OK):
localhost:8080/ords/autodemo2/open...

Not sure why metadata query is facing authorization issue while swagger(open API) one is giving response without issue at postman.

I tried for other schema alias autodemo and here both are giving proper response:
localhost:8080/ords/autodemo/metad...
localhost:8080/ords/autodemo/open-...

Thanks,
Rajneesh

 

Please fix your HTTP reference chart. The /{id} needs to be removed from the POST.

 
 

Great post! Perhaps you should mention 202 HTTP status code for async resource creation.