I would like to initialize some dependencies resolved from the MassTransit serviceProvider in the same way Asp.Net Core does with the pipeline's middlewares.
In particular I would like to inspect the incoming message before the consumer is called and extract the tenant from it (I'm currently working on a multitenant web application with single database per tenant).
With this informations I need to initialize some scoped instances (Ef Core DbContext for example).
I know that I can inject them in the Consumer through constructor but this means that I must do that everytime I write a new one, so I suppose that a filter should be the right place (correct me if I'm wrong).
The problem raises when I need to access the current consumer scope to resolve the dependencies that I need. I was thinking that the behavior of the MassTransit' pipeline was similar to the Asp.Net one regarding middleware injection but I was probably wrong.
I haven't found any documentation on how to do that clearly without cluttering the code of the filter, so any suggestion is going to be really appreciated.
This is the filter that I need to modify:
public class TenantContextInitializerFilter<T> : IFilter<T> where T : class, ConsumeContext
{
public void Probe(ProbeContext context) { }
public async Task Send(T context, IPipe<T> next)
{
//Resolve scoped instance here and do something before Consumer is called
var connectionStringProvider = scope.GetService<IConnectionStringProvider>();
await next.Send(context);
}
}
public class RegistrationsDeliveredEventConsumer : IConsumer<IRegistrationsDelivered>
{
private readonly IConnectionStringProvider _connectionStringProvider;
public RegistrationsDeliveredEventConsumer(IConnectionStringProvider connectionStringProvider)
{
//This should be the same instance that has been resolved in the filter' Send() method
_connectionStringProvider = connectionStringProvider;
}
public async Task Consume(ConsumeContext<IRegistrationsDelivered> context)
{
}
}
This is a simplified example of my code but this should be enough
There's two facets to consider: 1) are filters registered as services/pulled from the service collection when using the ASP.NET Core integration and 2) what lifetime do the filters have if they are. I'm not familiar with the MassTransit ASP.NET Core integration, but it looks like you should be good based on a cursory review. You'll need to confirm that both of those requirements are met.
For dependency injection, in general, constructor injection is the way to go unless there's a very specific need to do something different, which does not seem to be the case here. In short, you need a constructor for your filter.
What exactly you need to inject is a function of the lifetime of the filter. If it has a transient lifetime, then you can inject your scoped dependencies directly. If it has a singleton lifetime, then you'll need to inject IServiceProvider instead, and do the following whenever you need to use one of those dependencies:
using (var scope = _serviceProvider.CreateScope())
{
var dep = scope.ServiceProvider.GetRequiredService<MyDependency>();
// do something with `dep`
}
Here's a draft... I'm sure there are missing pieces, so let me know if you have questions.
public class TenantContextInitializerFilter<T> : IFilter<T> where T : class, ConsumeContext
{
private readonly Func<string, IDbConnection> _dbContextAccessor;
public void Probe(ProbeContext context) { }
public TenantContextInitializerFilter(Func<string, IDbConnection> dbContextAccessor)
{
_dbContextAccessor = dbContextAccessor;
}
public async Task Send(T context, IPipe<T> next)
{
var tenantId = ""; // place holder
using (var dbContext = _dbContextAccessor(tenantId))
{
//... do db logic
}
await next.Send(context);
}
}
public class Startup
{
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddScoped<IConnectionStringProvider>(
provider => null /* TODO figure out how to fetch scoped instance from a cache or some storage mechanism*/);
services.AddScoped(provider =>
{
IDbConnection Accessor(string tenantId)
{
if (provider.GetService<IConnectionStringProvider>()
.TryGetConnectionString(tenantId, out var connectionString, out var providerName))
return new SqlConnection(connectionString);
throw new Exception();
}
return (Func<string, IDbConnection>)Accessor;
});
}
}
I have three types of users in my application, let's say Type1, Type2 and Type3.
Then i want to create one service implementation for each type, let's say i have a service to get photos, i would have three services : Type1PhotosService, Type2PhotosService and Type3PhotosService, each of them implementing IPhotosService.
In the web api, i would inject IPhotosService :
IPhotosService _service;
public PhotosController(IPhotosService service){
_service = service;
}
The web api uses token authentication with claims. So what i want to achieve, is for each user, depending on the claim he has : type1 or type2 or type3, the correct implementation of the service will be automatically injected rather than injecting a single service in the startup file.
What i want to avoid, is having one service, with a bunch of switch and if statements to return the correct data depending on user type and the roles he has.
EDIT:
some comments were wondering what's the point of three implementations, so here are more details to give it a little more sense.
The service is a job finder service, and the application has three different profiles : candidate, employer and administration. Each of these profiles need a proper implementation. So rather than having three methods GetCandidateJobs, GetEmployerJobs and GetAdministrationJobs inside the same service and switch on the user type, i preferred to have one implementation per profile type, then depending on the profile type, use the correct implementation.
Without Using a Separate IoC Container
Here's an approach that's way easier than configuring your app to use another IoC container and then configuring that container. After working through this with Windsor this solution seems a whole lot easier.
This approach is simplest if you can use a singleton instance of each service implementation.
We'll start with an interface, some implementations, and the factory we can inject which will return an implementation selected at runtime based on some input.
public interface ICustomService { }
public class CustomServiceOne : ICustomService { }
public class CustomServiceTwo : ICustomService { }
public class CustomServiceThree : ICustomService { }
public interface ICustomServiceFactory
{
ICustomService Create(string input);
}
Here's a really crude implementation of the factory. (Didn't use string constants, or polish it at all.)
public class CustomServiceFactory : ICustomServiceFactory
{
private readonly Dictionary<string, ICustomService> _services
= new Dictionary<string, ICustomService>(StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase);
public CustomServiceFactory(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
_services.Add("TypeOne", serviceProvider.GetService<CustomServiceOne>());
_services.Add("TypeTwo", serviceProvider.GetService<CustomServiceTwo>());
_services.Add("TypeThree", serviceProvider.GetService<CustomServiceThree>());
}
public ICustomService Create(string input)
{
return _services.ContainsKey(input) ? _services[input] : _services["TypeOne"];
}
}
This assumes that you've already registered CustomServiceOne, CustomServiceTwo, etc. with the IServiceCollection. They would not be registered as interface implementations, since that's not how we're resolving them. This class will simply resolve each one and put them in a dictionary so that you can retrieve them by name.
In this case the factory method takes a string, but you could inspect any type or multiple arguments to determine which implementation to return. Even the use of a string as the dictionary key is arbitrary. And, just as an example, I provided fallback behavior to return some default implementation. It might make more sense to throw an exception instead if you can't determine the right implementation to return.
Another alternative, depending on your needs, would be to resolve the implementation within the factory when it's requested. To the extent possible I try to keep most classes stateless so that I can resolve and reuse a single instance.
To register the factory with the IServiceCollection at startup we would do this:
services.AddSingleton<ICustomServiceFactory>(provider =>
new CustomServiceFactory(provider));
The IServiceProvider will be injected into the factory when the factory is resolved, and then the factory will use it to resolve the service.
Here's the corresponding unit tests. The test method is the identical to the one used in the Windsor answer, which "proves" that we can transparently replace one factory implementation with another and change other stuff in the composition root without breaking stuff.
public class Tests
{
private IServiceProvider _serviceProvider;
[SetUp]
public void Setup()
{
var services = new ServiceCollection();
services.AddSingleton<CustomServiceOne>();
services.AddSingleton<CustomServiceTwo>();
services.AddSingleton<CustomServiceThree>();
services.AddSingleton<ICustomServiceFactory>(provider =>
new CustomServiceFactory(provider));
_serviceProvider = services.BuildServiceProvider();
}
[TestCase("TypeOne", typeof(CustomServiceOne))]
[TestCase("TypeTwo", typeof(CustomServiceTwo))]
[TestCase("TYPEThree", typeof(CustomServiceThree))]
[TestCase("unknown", typeof(CustomServiceOne))]
public void FactoryReturnsExpectedService(string input, Type expectedType)
{
var factory = _serviceProvider.GetService<ICustomServiceFactory>();
var service = factory.Create(input);
Assert.IsInstanceOf(expectedType, service);
}
}
As in the Windsor example, this is written to avoid any reference to the container outside of the composition root. If a class depends on ICustomServiceFactory and ICustomService you could switch between this implementation, the Windsor implementation, or any other implementation of the factory.
Using Windsor
I'm going to sidestep the questions about whether or not this makes sense in this case and just attempt to answer the question as asked:
.NET Core's IoC container isn't built particularly well for this sort of scenario. (They acknowledge this in their documentation.) You can work around it by adding another IoC container like Windsor.
The implementation ended up looking way more complicated than I would have liked, but once you get past the setup it's not bad and you get access to Windsor's features. I'm going to provide another answer that doesn't include Windsor. I had to do all of this work to see that I probably like the other approach better.
In your project, add the Castle.Windsor.MsDependencyInjection NuGet package.
Interfaces and Implementations for Testing
For testing, I added some interfaces and implementations:
public interface ICustomService { }
public interface IRegisteredWithServiceCollection { }
public class CustomServiceOne : ICustomService { }
public class CustomServiceTwo : ICustomService { }
public class CustomServiceThree : ICustomService { }
public class RegisteredWithServiceCollection : IRegisteredWithServiceCollection { }
The intent is to create a factory that will select and return an implementation of ICustomService using some runtime input.
Here's an interface which will serve as a factory. This is what we can inject into a class and call at runtime to get an implementation of ICustomService:
public interface ICustomServiceFactory
{
ICustomService Create(string input);
}
Configure the Windsor Container
Next is a class which will configure an IWindsorContainer to resolve dependencies:
public class WindsorConfiguration : IWindsorInstaller
{
public void Install(IWindsorContainer container, IConfigurationStore store)
{
container.AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>();
container.Register(
Component.For<ICustomService, CustomServiceOne>().Named("TypeOne"),
Component.For<ICustomService, CustomServiceTwo>().Named("TypeTwo"),
Component.For<ICustomService, CustomServiceThree>().Named("TypeThree"),
Component.For<ICustomService, CustomServiceOne>().IsDefault(),
Component.For<ICustomServiceFactory>().AsFactory(new CustomServiceSelector())
);
}
}
public class CustomServiceSelector : DefaultTypedFactoryComponentSelector
{
public CustomServiceSelector()
: base(fallbackToResolveByTypeIfNameNotFound: true) { }
protected override string GetComponentName(MethodInfo method, object[] arguments)
{
return (string) arguments[0];
}
}
Here's what's going on in here:
The TypedFactoryFacility will enable us to use Windsor's typed factories. It will create an implementation of our factory interface for us.
We're registering three implementations of ICustomService. Because we're registering more than one implementation, each must have a name. When we resolve ICustomService we can specify a name, and it will resolve the type according to that string.
For illustration I registered another implementation of ICustomService without a name. That will enable us to resolve a default implementation if we try to resolve using an unrecognized name. (Some alternatives are just throwing an exception, or returning a "null" instance of ICustomService or creating a class like UnknownCustomService that throws an exception.)
Component.For<ICustomServiceFactory>().AsFactory(new CustomServiceSelector()) tells the container to create a proxy class to implement ICustomServiceFactory. (More on that in their documentation.)
CustomServiceSelector is what takes the argument passed to the factory's Create method and returns the component name (TypeOne, TypeTwo, etc.) that will be used to select a component. In this case we're expecting that the argument passed to the factory will be the same as the registration name we've used. But we could replace this with other logic. Our factory could even take arguments of other types which we could inspect and determine which string to return.
Configure Your App To Use the Windsor Container
Now, in StartUp, modify ConfigureServices to return IServiceProvider instead of void and create an IServiceProvider that combines services registered directly with the IServiceCollection with those registered with the Windsor container:
public IServiceProvider ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddMvc();
var container = new WindsorContainer();
container.Install(new WindsorConfiguration());
return WindsorRegistrationHelper.CreateServiceProvider(container, services);
}
container.Install(new WindsorConfiguration()) allows WindsorConfiguration to configure our container. We could just configure the container right in this method, but this is a nice way to keep our container configurations organized. We can create numerous IWindsorInstaller implementations or our own custom classes to configure the Windsor container.
WindsorRegistrationHelper.CreateServiceProvider(container, services) creates the IServiceProvider that uses container and services.
Does It Work?
I wouldn't post all this without finding out first. Here's some NUnit tests. (I usually write some basic tests for DI configuration.)
The setup creates an IServiceProvider similar to what would happen in the application startup. It creates a container and applies the WindsorConfiguration. I'm also registering a service directly with the ServiceCollection to make sure that the two play well together. Then I'm combining the two into an IServiceProvider.
Then I'm resolving an ICustomerServiceFactory from the IServiceProvider and verifying that it returns the correct implementation of ICustomService for each input string, including the fallback when the string isn't a recognized dependency name.
I'm also verifying that the service registered directly with ServiceCollection is resolved.
public class Tests
{
private IServiceProvider _serviceProvider;
[SetUp]
public void Setup()
{
var services = new ServiceCollection();
services.AddSingleton<IRegisteredWithServiceCollection, RegisteredWithServiceCollection>();
var container = new WindsorContainer();
container.Install(new WindsorConfiguration());
_serviceProvider = WindsorRegistrationHelper.CreateServiceProvider(container, services);
}
[TestCase("TypeOne", typeof(CustomServiceOne))]
[TestCase("TypeTwo", typeof(CustomServiceTwo))]
[TestCase("TYPEThree", typeof(CustomServiceThree))]
[TestCase("unknown", typeof(CustomServiceOne))]
public void FactoryReturnsExpectedService(string input, Type expectedType)
{
var factory = _serviceProvider.GetService<ICustomServiceFactory>();
var service = factory.Create(input);
Assert.IsInstanceOf(expectedType, service);
}
[Test]
public void ServiceProviderReturnsServiceRegisteredWithServiceCollection()
{
var service = _serviceProvider.GetService<IRegisteredWithServiceCollection>();
Assert.IsInstanceOf<RegisteredWithServiceCollection>(service);
}
}
Is All of This Worth It?
Now that I've figured it out, I'd probably use it if I really needed this sort of functionality. It looks worse if you're trying to assimilate both using Windsor with .NET Core and seeing it's abstract factory implementation for the first time. Here's another article with some more information on Windsor's abstract factory without all the noise about .NET Core.
I am going to go out on a limb here and say that the attempt to utilize dependency injection for this purpose is sub-optimal. Normally this would be handled by a Factory pattern that produces service implementations using the dreaded if and switch statements. A simple example is:
public interface IPhotoService {
Photo CreatePhoto(params);
}
public class PhotoServiceFactory {
private readonly IPhotoService _type1;
private readonly IPhotoService _type2;
private readonly IPhotoService _type3;
public PhotoServiceFactory(IDependency1 d1, IDependency2 d2, ...etc) {
_type1 = new ConcreteServiceA(d1);
_type2 = new ConcreteServiceB(d2);
_type3 = new ConcreteServiceC(etc);
}
public IPhotoService Create(User user) {
switch(user.Claim) {
case ClaimEnum.Type1:
return _type1;
case ClaimEnum.Type2:
return _type2;
case ClaimEnum.Type3:
return _type3;
default:
throw new NotImplementedException
}
}
}
Then in your controller:
public class PhotosController {
IPhotoServiceFactory _factory;
public PhotosController(IPhotoServiceFactory factory){
_factory = factory;
}
public IHttpActionResult GetPhoto() {
var photoServiceToUse = _factory.Create(User);
var photo = photoServiceToUse.CreatePhoto(params);
return Ok(photo);
}
}
Alternately just use the concrete classes as arguments in the constructor and follow a similar logic as to the above.
Here is one solution, i have created inside asp.net core console application.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection;
namespace CreationalPattern
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
// Add dependency into service collection
var services = new ServiceCollection()
.AddTransient<FordFigoFactory>()
.AddTransient<AudiQ7Factory>();
/* Create CarServiceFactory as singleton because it can be used across the application more frequently*/
services.AddSingleton<ICarServiceFactory>(provider => new CarServiceFactory(provider));
// create a service provider from the service collection
var serviceProvider = services.BuildServiceProvider();
/* instantiate car*/
var factory = serviceProvider.GetService<ICarServiceFactory>();
var audiCar = factory.Create("audi").CreateACar("Blue");
Console.Read();
}
}
public interface ICarServiceFactory
{
ICreateCars Create(string input);
}
public class CarServiceFactory : ICarServiceFactory
{
private readonly Dictionary<string, ICreateCars> _services
= new Dictionary<string, ICreateCars>(StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase);
public CarServiceFactory(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
_services.Add("ford", serviceProvider.GetService<FordFigoFactory>());
_services.Add("audi", serviceProvider.GetService<AudiQ7Factory>());
}
public ICreateCars Create(string input)
{
Console.WriteLine(input + " car is created.");
return _services.ContainsKey(input) ? _services[input] : _services["ford"];
}
}
public interface ICreateCars
{
Car CreateACar(string color);
}
public class FordFigoFactory : ICreateCars
{
public Car CreateACar(string color)
{
Console.WriteLine("FordFigo car is created with color:" + color);
return new Fordigo { Color = color};
}
}
public class AudiQ7Factory : ICreateCars
{
public Car CreateACar(string color)
{
Console.WriteLine("AudiQ7 car is created with color:" + color);
return new AudiQ7 { Color = color };
}
}
public abstract class Car
{
public string Model { get; set; }
public string Color { get; set; }
public string Company { get; set; }
}
public class Fordigo : Car
{
public Fordigo()
{
Model = "Figo";
Company = "Ford";
}
}
public class AudiQ7 : Car
{
public AudiQ7()
{
Model = "Audi";
Company = "Q7";
}
}
}
Explanation:
To understand better try to read the program from bottom to top. We have 3 sections:
Car (Car, Fordigo, AudiQ7)
CarFactory (ICreateCars, FordFigoFactory, AudiQ7Factory)
CarService (ICarServiceFactory, CarServiceFactory)
In this Dependency injection is registered as transient for Factory classes FordFigoFactory and AudiQ7Factory. And Singleton for CarServiceFactory.
I have this CacheAttribute that accepts Duration Value like such
public class MyTestQuery : IMyTestQuery
{
private readonly ISomeRepository _someRepository;
public TestQuery(ISomeRepository someRepository)
{
_someRepository = someRepository;
}
[Cache(Duration = 10)]
public MyViewModel GetForeignKeysViewModelCache()
{
...code here...
return viewModel;
}
}
The Attribute looks like this
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Method)]
public class CacheAttribute : Attribute
{
public int Duration { get; set; }
}
When Intercepted using Castle.Proxy.IInterceptor it works but when I perform an Attribute.GetCustomAttribute either by IInvocation.MethodInvocationTarget or IInvocation.Method both returns a null value
Here it is in code
public class CacheResultInterceptor : IInterceptor
{
public CacheAttribute GetCacheResultAttribute(IInvocation invocation)
{
var methodInfo = invocation.MethodInvocationTarget;
if (methodInfo == null)
{
methodInfo = invocation.Method;
}
return Attribute.GetCustomAttribute(
methodInfo,
typeof(CacheAttribute),
true
)
as CacheAttribute;
}
public void Intercept(IInvocation invocation)
{
var cacheAttribute = GetCacheResultAttribute(invocation);
//cacheAttribute is null always
...more code here...
}
}
And this is how I register them
public class Bootstrapper
{
public static ContainerBuilder Builder;
public static void Initialise()
{
Builder = new ContainerBuilder();
...other codes in here...
CacheInstaller.Install();
var container = Builder.Build();
DependencyResolver.SetResolver(new AutofacDependencyResolver(container));
}
}
public class CacheInstaller
{
public static void Install()
{
Bootstrapper.Builder.RegisterType<CacheResultInterceptor>()
.SingleInstance();
Bootstrapper.Builder.RegisterAssemblyTypes(Assembly.Load("MyApplication.Web"))
.Where(t => t.Name.EndsWith("Query"))
.AsImplementedInterfaces()
.EnableInterfaceInterceptors()
.InterceptedBy(typeof(CacheResultInterceptor))
.SingleInstance();
}
}
My Expensive Method Class Ends with Query
Now the question is why invocation.MethodInvocationTarget and/or invocation.Method returns null?
What am I doing wrong?
Any other strategies so I can pass a parameter value without creating a Method for each value I can think of?
BTW I am using
Autofac 4.3.0.0
Autofac.Extras.DynamicProxy 4.2.1.0
Autofac.Integration.Mvc 4.0.0.0
Castle.Core 4.0.0.0
UPDATE 1
Here is what it returns when it runs for clarity
Here's what I found.
invocation.Method returns the method declaration on the interface, in your case IMyTestQuery.
On the other hand, invocation.MethodInvocationProxy returns the method that is going to be called when invoking invocation.Proceed(). This means it can be:
the next interceptor if you have several
a decorator if you have decorators over your interface
the final implementation of your interface
As you can see, MethodInvocationProxy is less deterministic than Method, which is why I would recommend you avoid using it, at least for what you're trying to achieve.
When you think about it, an interceptor should not be tied to an implementation as it proxies an interface, so why don't you put the [Cache] attribute at the interface level?
Using your code, I could successfully retrieve it when put on the interface.
Edit:
OK, I've put together a repository on GitHub that uses the specific versions of the NuGet packages you mentioned and shows how to retrieve an attribute on intercepted methods.
As a reminder, here are the used NuGet packages:
Microsoft.AspNet.Mvc v5.2.3
Autofac v4.3.0
Autofac.Mvc5 4.0.0
Autofac.Extras.DynamicProxy v4.2.1
Castle.Core v4.0.0
I created 2 query interfaces, IMyQuery and IMySecondQuery. Please note that as mentioned in my original answer, the [Cache] attributes are placed on the interfaces methods, not on the implementing classes.
public interface IMyQuery
{
[Cache(60000)]
string GetName();
}
public interface IMySecondQuery
{
[Cache(1000)]
string GetSecondName();
}
Then we have 2 very basic implementations of these classes. Not relevant at all, but for the sake of completeness:
public class DefaultMyQuery : IMyQuery
{
public string GetName()
{
return "Raymund";
}
}
public class DefaultMySecondQuery : IMySecondQuery
{
public string GetSecondName()
{
return "Mickaël Derriey";
}
}
And then the interceptor:
public class CacheResultInterceptor : IInterceptor
{
public void Intercept(IInvocation invocation)
{
var cacheAttribute = invocation.Method.GetCustomAttribute<CacheAttribute>();
if (cacheAttribute != null)
{
Trace.WriteLine($"Found a [Cache] attribute on the {invocation.Method.Name} method with a duration of {cacheAttribute.Duration}.");
}
invocation.Proceed();
}
}
Note that the GetCustomAttribute<T> method is an extension method over MemberInfo present in the System.Reflection namespace.
Let's move on to the registration in the Autofac container. I tried to follow you registration style as much as I could:
var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
builder.RegisterControllers(typeof(MvcApplication).Assembly);
builder
.RegisterType<CacheResultInterceptor>()
.SingleInstance();
builder
.RegisterAssemblyTypes(typeof(MvcApplication).Assembly)
.Where(x => x.Name.EndsWith("Query"))
.AsImplementedInterfaces()
.EnableInterfaceInterceptors()
.InterceptedBy(typeof(CacheResultInterceptor));
DependencyResolver.SetResolver(new AutofacDependencyResolver(builder.Build()));
The queries are then used in the HomeController:
public class HomeController : Controller
{
private readonly IMyQuery _myQuery;
private readonly IMySecondQuery _mySecondQuery;
public HomeController(IMyQuery myQuery, IMySecondQuery mySecondQuery)
{
_myQuery = myQuery;
_mySecondQuery = mySecondQuery;
}
public ActionResult MyQuery()
{
return Json(_myQuery.GetName(), JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
public ActionResult MySecondQuery()
{
return Json(_mySecondQuery.GetSecondName(), JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
}
What I did to test this is just put a breakpoint in the interceptor, F5 the application, open a browser and navigate to both http://localhost:62440/home/myquery and http://localhost:62440/home/myquery.
It did hit the interceptor and find the [Cache] attribute. In the Visual Studio Output window, it did show:
Found a [Cache] attribute on the GetName method with a duration of 60000.
Found a [Cache] attribute on the GetSecondName method with a duration of 1000.
Hopefully that helps you pinpoint what's going on in your project.
I pushed changes to the repository so that the first query calls the second one.
It still works. You should really make an effort and put some code on the question.
I am using ASP.NET Core and want to add a service to the IServiceProvider at runtime, so it can be used across the application via DI.
For instance, a simple example would be that the user goes to the settings controller and changes an authentication setting from "On" to "Off". In that instance I would like to replace the service that was registered at runtime.
Psuedo Code in the Settings Controller:
if(settings.Authentication == false)
{
services.Remove(ServiceDescriptor.Transient<IAuthenticationService, AuthenticationService>());
services.Add(ServiceDescriptor.Transient<IAuthenticationService, NoAuthService>());
}
else
{
services.Remove(ServiceDescriptor.Transient<IAuthenticationService, NoAuthService>
services.Add(ServiceDescriptor.Transient<IAuthenticationService, AuthenticationService>());
}
This logic works fine when I am doing it in my Startup.cs because the IServiceCollection has not been built into a IServiceProvider. However, I want to be able to do this after the Startup has already executed. Does anyone know if this is even possible?
Instead of registering/removing service at runtime, I would create a service factory that decides the right service at runtime.
services.AddTransient<AuthenticationService>();
services.AddTransient<NoAuthService>();
services.AddTransient<IAuthenticationServiceFactory, AuthenticationServiceFactory>();
AuthenticationServiceFactory.cs
public class AuthenticationServiceFactory: IAuthenticationServiceFactory
{
private readonly AuthenticationService _authenticationService;
private readonly NoAuthService _noAuthService;
public AuthenticationServiceFactory(AuthenticationService authenticationService, NoAuthService noAuthService)
{
_noAuthService = noAuthService;
_authenticationService = authenticationService;
}
public IAuthenticationService GetAuthenticationService()
{
if(settings.Authentication == false)
{
return _noAuthService;
}
else
{
return _authenticationService;
}
}
}
Usage in a class:
public class SomeClass
{
public SomeClass(IAuthenticationServiceFactory _authenticationServiceFactory)
{
var authenticationService = _authenticationServiceFactory.GetAuthenticationService();
}
}
Something of the sort is possible in Autofac:
private ILifetimeScope BeginChildScope()
{
return _lifetimeScope.BeginLifetimeScope(x =>
{
x.Register<IAuthenticationService>(b => new AuthenticationService());
});
}
using (var childScope = BeginChildScope())
{
// Do sth here
}
For .NET Core, I think this is the only possible solution atm.:
Best strategy for creating a child container (or isolated scope) with Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection
Microsoft states unsupported features of ASP.NET Core DI here:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/extensions/dependency-injection-guidelines#default-service-container-replacement
I'm trying to inject a service using the IoC container into a Validation class. See the example below:
[Validator(typeof(UserPayloadValidator))]
public class UserPayload
{
public int UserId { get; set; }
}
public class UserPayloadValidator : AbstractValidator<UserPayload>
{
private IUserService _userService;
public UserPayloadValidator(IUserService userService)
{
_userService = userService;
RuleFor(x => x.UserId).Must(BeUnique).WithMessage("This user already exists");
}
private bool BeUnique(int userId)
{
var user = _userService.GetUser(userId);
return user == null;
}
}
At this point I was hoping everything would auto-magically work and the userService would be injected into the validation class. Instead, I get an exception complaining about a parameter-less constructor not being found.
After some reasearch I've attempted to create a ValidationFactory as in the example linked.
public class LightInjectValidationFactory : ValidatorFactoryBase
{
private readonly ServiceContainer _serviceContainer;
public LightInjectValidationFactory(ServiceContainer serviceContainer)
{
_serviceContainer = serviceContainer;
}
public override IValidator CreateInstance(Type validatorType)
{
return _serviceContainer.TryGetInstance(validatorType) as IValidator;
}
}
and in the LightInject configuration
//Set up fluent validation
FluentValidationModelValidatorProvider.Configure(httpConfiguration, provider =>
{
provider.ValidatorFactory = new LightInjectValidationFactory(container);
});
This results in an exception:
Unable to resolve type: FluentValidation.IValidator`1
I guess the IoC container doesn't know how to resolve the correct instance for the validator.
Any ideas are much appreciated.
Thanks to the comment above I realized I wasn't actually registering the validator in container. This can be done like this for all the validators:
FluentValidation.AssemblyScanner.FindValidatorsInAssemblyContaining<UserPayloadValidator>()
.ForEach(result =>
{
container.Register(result.InterfaceType, result.ValidatorType);
});
Please note that UserPayloadValidator needs to be just one of your validators. Based on this type, FindValidatorsInAssembly can infer all the other available validators.
Also, in the validation factory you should use TryGetInstance instead of GetInstance in case the factory tries to instantiate non existant validators (parameter in the controller for which validators do not exist)
I have found solution for all validation classes use injected service.
Replace below code
FluentValidation.AssemblyScanner.FindValidatorsInAssemblyContaining<UserPayloadValidator>()
.ForEach(result =>
{
container.Register(result.InterfaceType, result.ValidatorType);
});
With
FluentValidation.AssemblyScanner findValidatorsInAssembly = FluentValidation.AssemblyScanner.FindValidatorsInAssembly(typeof(UserPayloadValidator).Assembly);
foreach (FluentValidation.AssemblyScanner.AssemblyScanResult item in findValidatorsInAssembly)
{
container.Register(item.InterfaceType, item.ValidatorType);
}
Using this your all validator classes use injected service.