Skip to main content

Sharepoint feature activation and strange timeouts....

 

So I have been meaning to write a blog entry for some time now and at last I have finally manage to drag together a few coherent sentences and get the ball rolling. So what topic have I picked to start my blogging experience with at Conchango? Well Sharepoint of course!

Anyway down to business and the reason for the post is that the other day I had to deal with an issue surrounding a timeout when activating a feature via the "ManageFeatures.aspx" page within the Windows Sharepoint Services (WSS) user interface. The feature itself was somewhat of a beast and did a lot of work within the "FeatureActivated" method behind the screens setting up lists, creating content etc which meant it was going to take a long time to complete.  So a timeout issue?

Well as it turns out yes. The problem is that activating a feature via the "ManageFeatures.aspx" page means that the request to activate the feature is handled by asp.net and as such is subject to the same rules that govern any asp.net request, including maximum execution time out.  For application pages that live within the layouts directory in the 12 hive such as "ManageFeatures.aspx" this timeout value can be changed by modifying the "web.config" at the root of the layouts directory. The actual value you need to change is the attribute called "executionTimeout" within the "httpRuntime" element. An example is shown below were the execution timeout has been changed to ten minutes.

<httpRuntime executionTimeout="600" />

Additional it is worth keeping in mind that this issue will not occur if have debug set to true within the compilation element of your sites "web.config" or you are installing and activating your features via "stsadm" at the command line and as such may not be identified until a site has been deployed into a environment that mirrors production.   

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

X509 certificate encryption fun :-)

Recently I needed to encrypt data on a server and allow a limited number of service accounts the ability to decrypt that data so it was as safe as possible. The approach I took to achieve this was by using a X509 certificate and it's ability to allow you to encrypt information via it's public key and decrypt that information through the private key. The key parts of this approach are: - Create a certificate - Ensure the KeySpec of the certificate is set up correctly to allow for encryption e.g. "KeyExchange" or "None" if you are doing this via PowerShell - Set the security on the private keys so only specific user accounts can access it and decrypt information encrypted via the public key. Step 1 - Create a certificate to use The easiest way to get a quick example going is via PowerShell to create a dummy root certificate and the one we will use for encrypting and decrypting. $rootCert = New-SelfSignedCertificate -CertStoreLocation Cert:\LocalMachine\My -Dns
Post a Comment
Read more

SharePoint - Search Service Application (SSA) - Attempted to perform an unauthorized operation

On my current project I needed to adjust and add some search mapping via SharePoint's Central Administration web site. This should have been very straight forward as you have the ability to add managed properties and mappings easily via the UI. However, when I went to save my changes I got the error "The settings could not be saved because of an internal error: Attempted to perform an unauthorized operation". Now this was very confusing as I am administrator on the server and added into all of the correct SharePoint groups. I also tried the same action via PowerShell and got the same error.   After a few hours of research and head scratching I managed to get to the bottom of the problem which is the way my user account had been added as an administrator to the server. In the company I work for to make it easier to manage the administrators on a server a group is created in active directory called " servername_admins ". This group is added to the local administra
Post a Comment
Read more

Why poor tests are worse than no tests

It's been awhile since I wrote my last blog post so I thought I would resume with a subject close to my heart...unit testing. Unit testing is tricky and lots of people don't focus enough on the key pillars that make up a good test: Trustworthy - Can the test be run multiple times and work in the same way each time? A test which works sometimes and fails randomly when a build happens during continuous integration(CI) is just going to be ignored and has no benefit to the team. Worse still, a bad test can give you a false impression that everything is fine when really it's not.   Readable - Can you look at the name of the test and work out what it's meant to do? For example, a test named "It_works_and_doesnt_fail" isn't as good as "It_will_add_a_valid_order_without_errors". Maintainable - Is your test simple to setup and refactor when code changes are made in the rest of the system? The
Post a Comment
Read more