Activities of "selinkoykiran"

So what about , permission and feature side , these have different implementation ? Settings domain module doesn't have any saveasync thing , so how does this module persist definition providers at first run ?

Hello, We are building a system like some entities will be seeding over different modules which are using this centralized service. We'll need something like this :

When I check the code from abp repositories like (Volo.Abp.Settings, Volo.Abp.Features , Volo.Abp.Authorization.Permissions) I couldn't understand when these definitions are seeding into database, when they are persisting ? I saw below approach in Feature and Permission side :

But I couldn't see the same approach on Settings part, but I know Settings also has a definitionProvider but I couldn't understand when these configurations persisting ? How settings module handle that ? By the way what is the difference between SaveStaticPermissionsToDatabaseAsync or InitializeDynamicPermissions (these are also included in feature side, too ) persistence. I couldn't see any documentation about these topics . But we need to understand how this system works and then we can implement for our own module. We want to understand the design of these approaches overall, Can you help ?

Thank you

• ABP Framework version: v5.3.3
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes
• Exception message and stack trace:
• Steps to reproduce the issue:"

Hello, We know you have an abstraction module for user syncronization between multiple modules like below link . https://support.abp.io/QA/Questions/1442/Sync-Users-Between-Modules Do you think to add this abstraction layer for the rest of the identity models like organizationunit or role, permissions ... ? If you don't, can you explain why , is it a bad practice ? As we doing with User entity, we can also need organizationunit syncronization (or other identity entities) incase of deploying to another place this identity module, right ? What do you think about ?

Thank you ?

• ABP Framework version: v5.3.3
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes

Thank you for the IExtraProperties information. I'm sharing the fluentapi part :

As I shared at first post , even I ignore ProjectId column , it's still creating fk with ProjectId1 ? Thank you .

Hello , Anyone checked this issue ? Just a reminder :)

Thank you.

Hello , We have different aggregate roots , they have a relation over Id property like below :

Project first aggregate:

Phase second aggregate :

created migration with foreign key:

Like you saw in the pictures , even we try NotMapped attribute , still migration is creating foreign key automagically :) Depends on your framework suggestions and DDD , we don't want to generate foreign key between aggregate roots , instead we keep them seperately, we just want to saw ProjectId column inside Phase table not foreign key relation . But we can not do that right know it's always creating itself , we can't understand the situation.

Below example is from an outside-native ef core in a console application, when we don't use abp-wrapped ef core, they can prevent the generation of foreign key , if we ignore the navigation property , they don't create the foreign key. We're expecting the same approach basically.

What can we do about this situation ? Thank you

• ABP Framework version: v5.3.3
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes

Hello, Actually, yes we can override easily :) We don't do another request like you mentioned :) For example:

In this example, we are filtering the tenants just with activation state , it returns 1 record (which is true in our case , because we have only 1 record with that activation state in the db) , because of the total count which is 3 (because of GetCountAsync() filtering issue) , our datatable's and paging is just going crazy.

So , we can override of course , but what do you think about this specific example ? Is it right when you have paging and you're filtering the records you have totally 3 records from the count but the real count is 1 so you are expecting 2 more records because max count is 10 ? What do you think ?

Hello , we want to filter /api/saas/tenants with ActivationState parameter , but total count parameter returns wrongly from backend . We've checked from the module code : Why doesn't count method use the same filtering with the GetListAsync () method ?

Why do you use only EditionId and name filtering for GetCountAsync() ? Is there any reason or is it forgotten ?

Thank you.

• ABP Framework version: v5.1.1
• UI type: MVC
• DB provider: EF Core
• **Tiered (MVC) : yes
• Exception message and stack trace:
• Steps to reproduce the issue:"

By the way , if I change configuration simply like below : it's working again

So , global configuration is just necessary from abp hangfire implementation side, I think it's because of the below implementation that AbpHangfireOptions itself doesn't add anything.

Thank you.

Hello , So , in that case abp's default async periodic workers like (Token CleanUp Background worker) need that global configuration right ?
If we want to create background jobs or workers (recurring things) which should be working with Hangfire server, we need to configure this global configuration ? AbpHangfireOptions is just for Hangfire server itself , but it is not including jobs or workers working with this server ? Thank you.