根据微软:控制器动作返回类型在ASP。NET Core web API，向下滚动几乎到底部，你会发现下面关于404的简介，与数据库中没有的对象有关。在这里，他们建议404适用于空数据。

看完疑问后，为什么不应该使用404 ?

根据RFC 7231，正确的状态码是204

在上面的回答中，我注意到一个小错误:

1.—资源为:/users

2.- /users/8不是资源，而是:路由参数为8的资源/users，消费者可能注意不到，也不知道区别，但是发布者知道，而且必须知道!所以他必须为消费者返回一个准确的响应。时期。

so:

基于RFC: 404是不正确的，因为找到了资源/用户，但是使用参数8执行的逻辑没有找到任何内容作为响应返回，因此正确的答案是:204

这里的要点是:404甚至没有找到处理内部逻辑的资源

204是a:我找到了资源，逻辑被执行了，但我没有发现任何数据使用你在路由参数中给出的标准，所以我不能返回任何东西给你。对不起，核实你的标准后再打电话给我。

200:好吧，我找到了资源，逻辑被执行(即使当我不被迫返回任何东西)采取这一点，并在你的意愿使用它。

205:(GET响应的最佳选项)我找到了资源，逻辑被执行了，我有一些内容给你，好好使用它，哦，顺便说一下，如果你要在视图中共享这个，请刷新视图以显示它。

希望能有所帮助。

204号更合适。特别是当你有一个警报系统来确保你的网站是安全的，404在这种情况下会引起混乱，因为你不知道一些404警报是后端错误或正常的请求，但响应为空。

如果期望资源存在，但它可能是空的，我认为它可能更容易得到一个200 OK的表示，表明这个东西是空的。

因此，我宁愿让/things返回一个带有{"Items":[]}的200 OK，而不是一个没有任何内容的204，因为这样，一个包含0项的集合可以被视为一个包含一个或多个项目的集合。

我将把204 No Content留给put和delete，在这种情况下，可能真的没有有用的表示。

在/thing/9不存在的情况下，404是合适的。

根据w3的帖子，

200好了

请求成功。随响应返回的信息取决于请求中使用的方法

202年接受

请求已接受处理，但处理尚未完成。

204无内容

服务器已经完成了请求，但不需要返回实体主体，并且可能希望返回更新后的元信息。

400错误请求

由于语法错误，服务器无法理解请求。客户不应该在没有修改的情况下重复请求

401年未经授权

请求需要用户身份验证。响应必须包含一个WWW-Authenticate报头字段

404未找到

服务器没有发现任何与Request-URI匹配的内容。没有说明这种情况是暂时的还是永久的

现有的答案没有详细说明使用路径参数还是查询参数是有区别的。

In case of path parameters, the parameter is part of the resource path. In case of /users/9, the response should be 404 because that resource was not found. /users/9 is the resource, and the result is unary, or an error, it doesn't exist. This is not a monad. In case of query parameters, the parameter is not part of the resource path. In case of /users?id=9, the response should be 204 because the resource /users was found but it could not return any data. The resource /users exists and the result is n-ary, it exists even if it is empty. If id is unique, this is a monad.

使用路径参数还是查询参数取决于用例。我更喜欢将路径参数用于强制的、规范的或标识参数，将查询参数用于可选的、非规范的或属性参数(如分页、排序区域设置等)。在REST API中，我会使用/users/9而不是/users?Id =9，特别是因为可能嵌套获取“子记录”，如/users/9/ SSH -keys/0获取第一个公共SSH密钥或/users/9/address/2获取第三个邮政地址。

我更喜欢使用404。原因如下:

Calls for unary (1 result) and n-ary (n results) methods should not vary for no good reason. I like to have the same response codes if possible. The number of expected results is of course a difference, say, you expect the body to be an object (unary) or an array of objects (n-ary). For n-ary, I would return an array, and in case there are not results, I would not return no set (no document), I would return an empty set (empty document, like empty array in JSON or empty element in XML). That is, it's still 200 but with zero records. There's no reason to put this information on the wire other than in the body. 204 is like a void method. I would not use it for GET, only for POST, PUT, and DELETE. I make an exception in case of GET where the identifiers are query parameters not path parameters. Not finding the record is like NoSuchElementException, ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException or something like that, caused by the client using an id that doesn't exist, so, it's a client error. From a code perspective, getting 204 means an additional branch in the code that could be avoided. It complicates client code, and in some cases it also complicates server code (depending on whether you use entity/model monads or plain entities/models; and I strongly recommend staying away from entity/model monads, it can lead to nasty bugs where because of the monad you think an operation is successful and return 200 or 204 when you should actually have returned something else). Client code is easier to write and understand if 2xx means the server did what the client requested, and 4xx means the server didn't do what the client requested and it's the client's fault. Not giving the client the record that the client requested by id is the client's fault, because the client requested an id that doesn't exist.

最后一点:一致性

GET /用户/ 9 PUT /users/9和DELETE /users/9

PUT /users/9和DELETE /users/9已经必须在成功更新或删除的情况下返回204。如果用户9不存在，它们应该返回什么?根据所使用的HTTP方法将相同的情况显示为不同的状态代码是没有意义的。

Besides, not a normative, but a cultural reason: If 204 is used for GET /users/9 next thing that will happen in the project is that somebody thinks returning 204 is good for n-ary methods. And that complicates client code, because instead of just checking for 2xx and then decoding the body, the client now has to specifically check for 204 and in that case skip decoding the body. Bud what does the client do instead? Create an empty array? Why not have that on the wire, then? If the client creates the empty array, 204 is a form of stupid compression. If the client uses null instead, a whole different can of worms is opened.