I'm looking for a real simple example of how to add an object to cache, get it back out again, and remove it.
The second answer here is the kind of example I'd love to see...
List<object> list = new List<Object>();
Cache["ObjectList"] = list; // add
list = ( List<object>) Cache["ObjectList"]; // retrieve
Cache.Remove("ObjectList"); // remove
But when I try this, on the first line I get:
'Cache' is a type, which is not valid in the given context.
And on the third line I get:
An object method is required for the non-static field blah blah blah
So, let's say I have a List<T>...
var myList = GetListFromDB()
And now I just wanna add myList to the cache, get it back out, and remove it.
.NET provides a few Cache classes
System.Web.Caching.Cache - default caching mechanizm in ASP.NET. You can get instance of this class via property Controller.HttpContext.Cache also you can get it via singleton HttpContext.Current.Cache. This class is not expected to be created explicitly because under the hood it uses another caching engine that is assigned internally.
To make your code work the simplest way is to do the following:
public class AccountController : System.Web.Mvc.Controller{
public System.Web.Mvc.ActionResult Index(){
List<object> list = new List<Object>();
HttpContext.Cache["ObjectList"] = list; // add
list = (List<object>)HttpContext.Cache["ObjectList"]; // retrieve
HttpContext.Cache.Remove("ObjectList"); // remove
return new System.Web.Mvc.EmptyResult();
}
}
System.Runtime.Caching.MemoryCache - this class can be constructed in user code. It has the different interface and more features like update\remove callbacks, regions, monitors etc. To use it you need to import library System.Runtime.Caching. It can be also used in ASP.net application, but you will have to manage its lifetime by yourself.
var cache = new System.Runtime.Caching.MemoryCache("MyTestCache");
cache["ObjectList"] = list; // add
list = (List<object>)cache["ObjectList"]; // retrieve
cache.Remove("ObjectList"); // remove
Here is the way that I've done it in the past:
private static string _key = "foo";
private static readonly MemoryCache _cache = MemoryCache.Default;
//Store Stuff in the cache
public static void StoreItemsInCache()
{
List<string> itemsToAdd = new List<string>();
//Do what you need to do here. Database Interaction, Serialization,etc.
var cacheItemPolicy = new CacheItemPolicy()
{
//Set your Cache expiration.
AbsoluteExpiration = DateTime.Now.AddDays(1)
};
//remember to use the above created object as third parameter.
_cache.Add(_key, itemsToAdd, cacheItemPolicy);
}
//Get stuff from the cache
public static List<string> GetItemsFromCache()
{
if (!_cache.Contains(_key))
StoreItemsInCache();
return _cache.Get(_key) as List<string>;
}
//Remove stuff from the cache. If no key supplied, all data will be erased.
public static void RemoveItemsFromCache(_key)
{
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(_key))
{
_cache.Dispose();
}
else
{
_cache.Remove(_key);
}
}
EDIT: Formatting.
BTW, you can do this with anything. I used this in conjunction with serialization to store and retrieve a 150K item List of objects.
If your using MemoryCache here is a very simple example:
var cache = MemoryCache.Default;
var key = "myKey";
var value = "my value";
var policy = new CacheItemPolicy { SlidingExpiration = new TimeSpan(2, 0, 0) };
cache.Add(key, value, policy);
Console.Write(cache[key]);
I wrote LazyCache to make this as simple and painless as possible, while also making sure you only execute your cacheable function calls once, even if two threads try and cache them at the same time.
Run the following command in the Package Manager Console
PM> Install-Package LazyCache
Add the namespace at the top of you class
using LazyCache;
and now cache stuff:
// Create the cache - (in constructor or using dependency injection)
IAppCache cache = new CachingService();
// Get products from the cache, or if they are not
// cached then get from db and cache them, in one line
var products = cache.GetOrAdd("get-products", () => dbContext.Products.ToList());
// later if you want to remove them
cache.Remove("get-products");
See more on the cache aside pattern or in the the LazyCache docs
Try this third party cache: CacheCrow, it is a simple LFU based cache.
Install using powershell command in visual studio: Install-Package CacheCrow
Code Snippet:
// initialization of singleton class
ICacheCrow<string, string> cache = CacheCrow<string, string>.Initialize(1000);
// adding value to cache
cache.Add("#12","Jack");
// searching value in cache
var flag = cache.LookUp("#12");
if(flag)
{
Console.WriteLine("Found");
}
// removing value
var value = cache.Remove("#12");
For more information you can visit: https://github.com/RishabKumar/CacheCrow
Related
I have a requirement where we need a plugin to retrieve a session id from an external system and cache it for a certain time. I use a field on the entity to test if the session is actually being cached. When I refresh the CRM form a couple of times, from the output, it appears there are four versions (at any time consistently) of the same key. I have tried clearing the cache and testing again, but still the same results.
Any help appreciated, thanks in advance.
Output on each refresh of the page:
20170511_125342:1:55a4f7e6-a1d7-e611-8100-c4346bc582c0
20170511_125358:1:55a4f7e6-a1d7-e611-8100-c4346bc582c0
20170511_125410:1:55a4f7e6-a1d7-e611-8100-c4346bc582c0
20170511_125342:1:55a4f7e6-a1d7-e611-8100-c4346bc582c0
20170511_125437:1:55a4f7e6-a1d7-e611-8100-c4346bc582c0
20170511_125358:1:55a4f7e6-a1d7-e611-8100-c4346bc582c0
20170511_125358:1:55a4f7e6-a1d7-e611-8100-c4346bc582c0
20170511_125437:1:55a4f7e6-a1d7-e611-8100-c4346bc582c0
To accomplish this, I have implemented the following code:
public class SessionPlugin : IPlugin
{
public static readonly ObjectCache Cache = MemoryCache.Default;
private static readonly string _sessionField = "new_sessionid";
#endregion
public void Execute(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
var context = (IPluginExecutionContext)serviceProvider.GetService(typeof(IPluginExecutionContext));
try
{
if (context.MessageName.ToLower() != "retrieve" && context.Stage != 40)
return;
var userId = context.InitiatingUserId.ToString();
// Use the userid as key for the cache
var sessionId = CacheSessionId(userId, GetSessionId(userId));
sessionId = $"{sessionId}:{Cache.Select(kvp => kvp.Key == userId).ToList().Count}:{userId}";
// Assign session id to entity
var entity = (Entity)context.OutputParameters["BusinessEntity"];
if (entity.Contains(_sessionField))
entity[_sessionField] = sessionId;
else
entity.Attributes.Add(new KeyValuePair<string, object>(_sessionField, sessionId));
}
catch (Exception e)
{
throw new InvalidPluginExecutionException(e.Message);
}
}
private string CacheSessionId(string key, string sessionId)
{
// If value is in cache, return it
if (Cache.Contains(key))
return Cache.Get(key).ToString();
var cacheItemPolicy = new CacheItemPolicy()
{
AbsoluteExpiration = ObjectCache.InfiniteAbsoluteExpiration,
Priority = CacheItemPriority.Default
};
Cache.Add(key, sessionId, cacheItemPolicy);
return sessionId;
}
private string GetSessionId(string user)
{
// this will be replaced with the actual call to the external service for the session id
return DateTime.Now.ToString("yyyyMMdd_hhmmss");
}
}
This has been greatly explained by Daryl here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/35643860/7708157
Basically you are not having one MemoryCache instance per whole CRM system, your code simply proves that there are multiple app domains for every plugin, so even static variables stored in such plugin can have multiple values, which you cannot rely on. There is no documentation on MSDN that would explain how the sanboxing works (especially app domains in this case), but certainly using static variables is not a good idea.Of course if you are dealing with online, you cannot be sure if there is only single front-end server or many of them (which will also result in such behaviour)
Class level variables should be limited to configuration information. Using a class level variable as you are doing is not supported. In CRM Online, because of multiple web front ends, a specific request may be executed on a different server by a different instance of the plugin class than another request. Overall, assume CRM is stateless and that unless persisted and retrieved nothing should be assumed to be continuous between plugin executions.
Per the SDK:
The plug-in's Execute method should be written to be stateless because
the constructor is not called for every invocation of the plug-in.
Also, multiple system threads could execute the plug-in at the same
time. All per invocation state information is stored in the context,
so you should not use global variables or attempt to store any data in
member variables for use during the next plug-in invocation unless
that data was obtained from the configuration parameter provided to
the constructor.
Reference: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg328263.aspx
Consider the following C# code using MemoryCache to generate a new value for a given key if not already preset in the cache:
private static MemoryCache _memoryCache = new MemoryCache();
public T Apply<T>(string key, Func<T> factory)
{
var expiration ...
var newValue = new Lazy<T>(factory);
var value = (Lazy<T>)_memoryCache.AddOrGetExisting(key, newValue, expiration);
return (value ?? newValue).Value;
}
Consider now this:
var hugeObject = new HugeObject();
return cache.Apply("SomeKey", () =>
{
return hugeObject.GetValue();
});
The factory will be invoked "immediately" after AddOrGetExisting or never, so the question is:
Does the Lazy class clear the reference to the factory delegate after having generated the value (so all the resources used by the factory like, in this case, hugeObject, can be released)?
Looking at the reference source, I believe it does release the factory, and call out why:
// We successfully created and stored the value. At this point, the value factory delegate is
// no longer needed, and we don't want to hold onto its resources.
m_valueFactory = ALREADY_INVOKED_SENTINEL;
There is quite a lot of threading code in there so I'm not sure it does so every time, but you'd hope that if they've realise they need to, they will have done so properly.
I am getting users and their data from external webservice. I cache those items because I don't want to hit web service every time. Now, If user update any of their information, I am saving it through webservice. But I don't want to get the latest data from web service as it takes lot of time. Instead I want to update my cache. Can I do that ? If so, what would be the best way ? Here is my Code
List<User> users = appSecurity.SelectUsers();
var CacheKey = string.Format("GetUserList_{0}", currentUser);
CacheFactory.AddCacheItem(CacheKey, users, 300);
CacheFactory is a class where I handle Adding, Clearing and Removing cache. Below is the code
public static void RemoveCacheItem(string key)
{
Cache.Remove(key);
}
public static void ClearCache()
{
System.Collections.IDictionaryEnumerator enumerator = Cache.GetEnumerator();
while (enumerator.MoveNext())
{
RemoveCacheItem(enumerator.Key.ToString());
}
}
public static void AddCacheItem<T>(string key, T value, double timeOutInSeconds)
{
var Item = GetCacheItem<T>(key);
if (Item != null)
{
RemoveCacheItem(key);
Item = value;
}
Cache.Insert(key, value, null, DateTime.Now.AddSeconds(timeOutInSeconds), System.Web.Caching.Cache.NoSlidingExpiration);
}
The answer is yes, it can be done. It can also be done in many different ways depending on what you want to solve. At the basic level you can create a cache by using a List<T> or Dictionary<T,T> to store your data.
When you get information from the external web-service, you push the data into your List or Dictionary. You can then use that data throughout your application. When you need to update that cache, you update the value in the List/Dictionary.
You can update your dictonary like so
Dictionary<string, int> list = new Dictionary<string, int>();
then you can set the value for the key "test" as follows
list["test"] = list["test"] + 1;
When you are ready to push the updated data to the external source. All you need to do is properly parse that data into the format the source is expecting and send away.
Like I said there are many different ways to do this, but this is a basic sample way to accomplishing it. You can use this example to build off and go from there.
I basically have created a class which when a user logs into a website it then queries the database and stores some settings in a List (So I have key/pair values).
The reason for this is because I want to always be able to access these settings without going to the database again.
I put these in a class and loop through the fields via a SQL query and add them to the list.
How can I then access these variables from another part of the application? or is there a better way to do this? I'm talking server side and not really client side.
Here is an example of what I had at the moment:
public static void createSystemMetaData()
{
string constring = ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["Test"].ConnectionString;
SqlConnection sql = new SqlConnection(constring);
sql.Open();
SqlCommand systemMetaData = new SqlCommand("SELECT * FROM SD_TABLES", sql);
//Set Modules
using (SqlDataReader systemMetaDataReader = systemMetaData.ExecuteReader())
{
while (systemMetaDataReader.Read())
{
var name = systemMetaDataReader.GetOrdinal("Sequence").ToString();
var value = systemMetaDataReader.GetOrdinal("Property").ToString();
var Modules = new List<KeyValuePair<string, string>>();
Modules.Add(new KeyValuePair<string, string>(name, value));
}
}
}
Thanks
Any static properties of a class will be preserved for the lifetime of the application pool, assuming you're using ASP.NET under IIS.
So a very simple class might look like:
public static class MyConfigClass
{
public static Lazy<Something> MyConfig = new Lazy<Something>(() => GetSomethings());
public static Something GetSomethings()
{
// this will only be called once in your web application
}
}
You can then consume this by simply calling
MyConfigClass.MyConfig.Value
For less users you can go with the SessionState as Bob suggested,however with more users you might need to move to a state server or load it from Data Base each time.
As others have pointed out, the risk of holding these values in global memory is that the values might change. Also, global variables are a bad design decision as you can end up with various parts of your application reading and writing to these values, which makes debugging problems harder than it need be.
A commonly adopted solution is to wrap your database access inside a facade class. This class can then cache the values if you wish to avoid hitting the database for each request. In addition, as changes are routed through the facade too, it knows when the data has changed and can empty its cache (forcing a database re-read) when this occurs. As an added bonus, it becomes possible to mock the facade in order to test code without touching the database (database access is notoriously difficult to unit test).
From the looks of things you are using universal values irrespective of users so an SqlCacheDependency would be useful here:
Make sure you setup a database dependency in web.config for the name Test
public static class CacheData {
public static List<KeyValuePair<string,string>> GetData() {
var cache = System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Cache;
SqlCacheDependency SqlDep = null;
var modules = Cache["Modules"] as List<KeyValuePair<string,string>>;
if (modules == null) {
// Because of possible exceptions thrown when this
// code runs, use Try...Catch...Finally syntax.
try {
// Instantiate SqlDep using the SqlCacheDependency constructor.
SqlDep = new SqlCacheDependency("Test", "SD_TABLES");
}
// Handle the DatabaseNotEnabledForNotificationException with
// a call to the SqlCacheDependencyAdmin.EnableNotifications method.
catch (DatabaseNotEnabledForNotificationException exDBDis) {
SqlCacheDependencyAdmin.EnableNotifications("Test");
}
// Handle the TableNotEnabledForNotificationException with
// a call to the SqlCacheDependencyAdmin.EnableTableForNotifications method.
catch (TableNotEnabledForNotificationException exTabDis) {
SqlCacheDependencyAdmin.EnableTableForNotifications("Test", "SD_TABLES");
}
finally {
// Assign a value to modules here before calling the next line
Cache.Insert("Modules", modules, SqlDep);
}
}
return modules;
}
How can I mole the DataContext that I'm using in a class to write messages to a table. I'd like to assert that the table LINQ is writing to has the expected count of messages. Here's what i have so far.
var context = new MJustTestingDataContext();
MyMessagewriter writer = new MyMessageWriter(context);
var messageList = new List<MIncmoingMessage>();
MTable<MIncomingMessage> messageTable = new MTable<MIncomingMessage>();
messageTable.Bind(messagesLinqList.AsQueryable());
If I use this code with xUnit in my class under test I'll get this exception
Microsoft.Moles.Framework.Moles.MoleNotImplementedException: DataContext.Dispose() was not moled.
What am I missing here and how to implement DataContext.Dispose() on the mole? I'm using moles standalone without Pex.
When you create a new Mole the default behavior for its methods and properties is to throw a MoleNotImplementedException whenever they are called.
To implement the mole you can do context.Dispose = () => {}; which means that nothing happens when the Dispose method gets called on the moled instance.
I reread the question and you probably are having a problem since Dispose is defined in a base class. To mole base method you need to do the following:
var context = new MJustTestingDataContext();
var baseContext = new MDataContext(context);
baseContext.Dispose = () => {};
You'll need to implement every property/method that gets called by the code under test or you can set the default behavior for the mole instance globally using the method BehaveAsDefaultValue. This way every method in the mole will do nothing and return the default value for it's return type if one exists instead of throwing a MoleNotImplementedException. However if you require this behavior it's better to use a stub than a mole.
I'm having trouble understanding what your test is doing. I had to do something similar yesterday, so I'll share my experience. First, it's important to understand that you don't need to use all the MoleTypes to test your code -- you just need to use Moles to redirect certain parts of your code to lambda expressions. Given a method that does this:
get a list of users to modify from the database
modify every user in the set
send the new set back to the database
I'd like to redirect 1 and 3 to not use the database. For instance, I can redirect the call to SubmitChanges (3) via this code:
bool hitSubmitChanges = false;
int changeCount = 0;
IList<object> updates = null;
// more code here...
// redirect DataContext.SubmitChanges() to a lambda to catch updates
MDataContext.AllInstances.SubmitChanges = (c) =>
{
changeCount = c.GetChangeSet().Updates.Count;
updates = c.GetChangeSet().Updates;
hitSubmitChanges = true;
};
That (and the call to get the users) would be the only Moletypes I'd use in the test. The rest of it would be normal. Then I can use assertions to check the values of changeCount, updates and hitSubmitChanges.