I have a WCF app on NetTCP Binding based. In client app i have created its proxy class object as static. This client app may run for 4-8 hrs after deployment. Basically at login window I am creating and initializing DataServiceClient proxy class (mainly database insert & updates) and using same object throughout my application until user closes Main Window.
Is there any adverse effect (performance wise) of creating static object of proxy class? If yes then how I can avoid this. Before using static object I was creating individual object at every window (wherever required) but this had increased window loading time.
How I can improve WCF performance. I am satisfied with its performance but it could be my illusion.
Nothing wrong with using the same instance, but make sure your error handling is good. Otherwise the proxy object will go into a faulted state when an error happens and you have to restart the whole application. There are some events you can attach to when the state changes.
After the proxy object goes into the faulted state you have to create a new one, there is no way to recover a faulted proxy object.
I have found that using message headers reduces the amount of methods I actually need to expose, but that really depends on what your service does.
Otherwise I would recommend to use streaming when possible. Keep your data as small as possible. Use the binary formatter.
Looks like you client is a Windows Forms application - a static service proxy should be ok for you as long as you don't do any multi-threading or callbacks on your proxy etc. Essentially, in such case, you need to synchronize the access to static variables.
Talking in general terms, WCF performance can be improved
Designing the service contract carefully - its should be chunky interface and not chatty so that number of service calls gets reduced
Choosing appropriate binding - TCP Binding would be faster than HTTP Binding but it would be .NET propriety and may not work over internet as other ports would be blocked. If your communicating on same machine then named piped binding would be the fastest mode
Related
I am new to WCF & Service development and have a following question.
I want to write a service which relies on some data (from database for example) in order to process client requests and reply back.
I do not want to look in database for every single call. My question is, is there any technique or way so that I can load such data either upfront or just once, so that it need not go to fetch this data for every request?
I read that having InstanceContextMode to Single can be a bad idea (not exactly sure why). Can somebody explain what is the best way to deal with such situation.
Thanks
The BCL has a Lazy class that is made for this purpose. Unfortunately, in case of a transient exception (network issue, timeout, ...) it stores the exception forever. This means that your service is down forever if that happens. That's unacceptable. The Lazy class is therefore unusable. Microsoft has declared that they are unwilling to fix this.
The best way to deal with this is to write your own lazy or use something equivalent.
You also can use LazyInitializer. See the documentation.
I don't know how instance mode Single behaves in case of an exception. In any case it is architecturally unwise to put lazy resources into the service class. If you want to share those resources with multiple services that's a problem. It's also not the responsibility of the service class to do that.
It all depends on amount of data to load and the pattern of data usage.
Assuming that your service calls are independent and may require different portions of data, then you may implement some caching (using Lazy<T> or similar techniques). But this solution has one important caveat: once data is loaded into the cache it will be there forever unless you define some expiration strategy (time-based or flush on write or something else). If you do not have cache entry expiration strategy your service will consume more and more memory over time.
This may not be too important problem, though, if amount of data you load from the database is small or majority of calls access same data again and again.
Another approach is to use WCF sessions (set InstanceContextMode to PerSession). This will ensure that you have service object created for lifetime of a session (which will be alive while particular WCF client is connected) - and all calls from that client will be dispatched to the same service object. It may or may not be appropriate from business domain point of view. And if this is appropriate, then you can load your data from the database on a first call and then subsequent calls within same session will be able to reuse the data. New session (another client or same client after reconnect) will have to load data again.
This question already has answers here:
Best Practice for WCF Service Proxy lifetime?
(4 answers)
Reuse of WCF service clients
(2 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
I have a UI application in which I consume a WCF service like this
public MainWindow()
{
....
mServiceClient = new ServiceClient("EndPointTCP");
}
Should I create the client as a member of class and close the client along with exit of my application or Should I create a new client whenever its required in a method and close there itself.
It depends solely onwhat you want to achieve. There is no "best way to do it" since both ways are possible, good, and have different tradeoffs.
Holding the clientobject simply wastes resources. It also may leak context data between calls. You might have a bug that will cause mClient.Buy(100) and mClient.Sell(100) to work properly when used alone, but fail when used together mClient.Buy(100); mClient.Sell(100). Dropping and re-creating fresh instance each time could save you from that one bug, but obviously that's not a good argument for it.
Recreating the client each time a call is to be made has however the vague benefit of .. having a fresh client every time. If your app has a possibility to dynamically change the endpoint during the app's runtime, then automatically your client will be always using the newest addresses/logins/passwords/etc.
However, not recreating the client object at every time is simply faster. Mind that it's WCF layer, so the actual underlying connection can be any. Were it some protocol with heavy setup with some keyexchange, encryption, etc, you may find that creating a new client every time might create a new connection at every time and it will slow down eveyrthing, while keeping the instance will work blazingly fast, since connection might be kept open and reused. Often you try to keep the connection when you have to perform many and often calls to the service, like 24h/day twice/sec monitoring some remote value for breaching safe limits.
On yet the other hand, you might not want the connection to linger. Your remote service may have thousands of clients and limited resources, so you might want to close the connection ASAP so others may connect. Often you'd do it like that when the calls to the service are really rarely done, only once in a time, ie. when user clicks after returning from coffe break.
Please don't get me wrong: all above is just conjuring some vague "facts" from a void. I do not know your app, nor your service, nor your bindings (sans "endpoint TCP"). The most important factors are all on your side and they sit in the actual way how your app and that remote service work and interoperate. If you care about what you ask, you must first simply research the topic on your side. Best - simply try both ways and check if it works and how does it perform. The difference would be something like 2..6 lines of code, so that's, well, rather quick.
There are already some similar questions:
Reuse of WCF service clients
Reusing a WCF service client or creating one each time?
In my opinion it depends on your application type (scalability, performance requirements, ...) but usually I think that it's more safe to recreate the ServiceClient each time. In this way you don't need special code if there are connections problems between requests and with the latest version of WCF seems that there isn't a big performance impact.
See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa738757.aspx.
Consider also that ServiceClient is not thread safe (at least reading MSDN).
I'm trying to design an application that will allow two users over a network to play the prisoner's
dilemma game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma).
Basically, this involves:
Game starts (Round 1).
Player 1 chooses to either cooperate, or betray.
Player 2 chooses to either cooperate, or betray.
Each other's decisions are then displayed
Round 2 begins
Etc.
I've done some thinking and searching and I think the application should contain the following:
Server class that accepts incoming tcp/ip connections
Gui clients (Seperate program)
For each connection (maximum 2) the server will create a new ConnectedClient class. This class will contain the details of the two player's machines/identities.
The Server class and the ConnectedClient class will connect/subscribe events to each so they can alert one another when e.g. server instruction ready to transmit to players, or players have transmitted their inputs to the server.
I'm not sure whether the best approch is to use a single thread to do or the work, or have it multithreaded. Single threaded would obviously be easier, but I'm not sure whether it is possible for this situation - I've never made a application before requiring TCP/IP connections, and I'm not sure if you can listen for two incoming connections on one thread.
I've found the following guide online, but it seems that it opens two clients on two threads, and they communicate directly to each other - bypassing the server (which I will need to control the game logic): http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/429144/Simple-Instant-Messenger-with-SSL-Encryption-in-Cs
I'm very interested and would be grateful on any advice on how you would go about implementing the application (mainly the server class).
I hope I've explained my intentions clearly. Thanks in advance.
My 1st advice would be to forget about TCP/IP and sockets here. You definitely can do it with that technology stack, but you would also get a lot of headache implementing all the things you want. And the reason is it too low level technology for such a class of tasks. I would go with tcp/ip and sockets only for academic interest, or if I need tremendous control over the communication, or if I have very high performance requirements.
So, my 2nd advice would be to look at WCF technology. Don't be afraid if you haven't used it before. It's not that difficult. And if you were ready to use sockets for your app, you can handle WCF definitely. For you task you can create basic communication withing 1-2 hours from scratch using any WCF tutorial.
So, I would create a server WCF service which will have some API functions containing your business logic. It can be hosted within a windows service, IIS, or even a console application.
And your clients would use that WCF service, calling their functions like it's functions from another local class in your project. WCF could also help you do the events which you want (it's a little bit more advanced topic though). And you can even forget about threading here, most of the things will be working out of the box.
First, as others have said, separate your game logic as much as you can, so the basic funcionality won't depend too much on your comunication infrastructure.
For the communication, WCF can handle the task. You can make your clients send a request to a service hosted in IIS, doing some kind of identification/authentication, and open a Duplex channel from where your service can push results and comunicate the start of new rounds.
Once one client connects, it waits for another. When it happens, it notifies the first client using the Duplex Channel callback and awaits for its choice. Then it asks the second user, awaits for its response. When it comes, it notifies the result to both and restarts the game.
Going a little bit deeper in the implementation:
You will have a service with some operations (like Register, PushDecision, more if needed). You will also define a callback interface, with the operations your service will need to push to the client (NotifyResult, RequestDecision, again, these are examples). You then create proxies for your clients that maps to your service operations and implement the callback operations in a way it expose events and raise them when the service pushs messages.
A use case:
Client A creates the proxy, calls Register on the server. The server receives the call, register the cilent and saves the callback object in a state. A duplex connection will be established. What does that mean? It means that (if you using the PollingDuplexBinding, as you probably will) from now on the proxy object in Client A will be doing long poll requests to the server, checking if there is a callback message. If there isnt, then it long polls again. If there is, it calls the method of the callback in the proxy passing the data the server has push. The callback method in the proxy will tipically raise an event, or execute a delegate, its up to you to choose.
Client B connects (calling Register), does the same as it did to A, and the server, noticing that two clients are connected, requests a response to A through its saved callback. This can happen during the processing of the B's Register call, or it can be triggered to execute in a new thread (or better, run in the ThreadPool or start a new Task) in B's register call.
Client A will receive the server callback requesting its choice. It can then notify the user and get the choice through the UI. A new call is made to the server (PushDecision, for example). The server receives Client A choice, asks B the same way. Once it has both responses, it calculates the result and pushes the outcome to the Clients.
An advantage of using Duplex Channels with PollingDuplex with WPF is that, as it uses long polling, there will be no need to use other ports than 80.
This is by no means a final implementation, is just a little guide to give you some ideas instead of just giving you some misty advices. Of course, there may be a bunch of other ways of doing that with WCF.
We can first assume that the application can handle only two users per time and then, if you want, you can scale up, making your service keep some form of state with a mapping table with locked access, as another example.
Some thoughts on WCF: There is an easy path to start developing with WCF using the Visual Studio tools (svcutil) but I don't like that approach. You don't "get to know" the WCF infrastructure well, you become tied to the verbose magic with which it generates your proxies, and you lose flexibility, especially in special scenarios, like Duplex polling that you may want to use.
The other way, that is to manually create your services and your proxies, is not that hard, though, and gets very interesting once you realize what you can do with it. Related to that I can give you one advice: do everything you can to make your proxy operations use Task-based Async Pattern (you can see the different ways to implement proxy operations here). This will make your code much cleaner and straight forward when combined with the new C# async/await keywords and your UI will be a joy to implement.
I can recommend some links to get you started. Some of them are old, but very didactic.
There used to be a fantastic article of WCF in this link but it seems to be now offline. Luckily, I found the content available there in a file in this link.
This one covers your hosting options.
Topics on WCF infrastructure: link
Topics on Duplex Services: link link link
Topics on Task-based Async Pattern: link link link
Well one advice I can give you if you insist that all user communicate through server and you want your application to scale:
Separate your logic (by understanding each part of the logic you want to build on the server)
Make your classes such that it can handle multiple users per transaction
Use IOCP whenever possible
it depends on the structure of your application if you need authentication and user profiles etc .. you may introduce the WCF or whatever web-service for user and hide your actual action in the background (this will cost you performance but it might be the only suitable solution you have) , so you may have your authentication framework at the top of your server logic, and a pipelined action logic in the behind .. i.e. users get authenticated to be able to access the services presented by the server, but these services pipeline all users and handle as many as possible simultaneously — if you don't need authentication then you might directly communicate to your server logic and you may use completion ports on user's request - a lot of work to be done here.
I need to process thousands of user details from different (clients) web applications. I have finished a console app that does the actual processing. I have also decided to use MSMQ (the console app will get the user details from a Queue).
I need help deciding how the client web applications will pass data to the Queue. I am thinking I can add a WCF service that will receive data from the client apps and pass it on to the Queue.
Would this be the best way to go? Or is there a better way(s)?
If the whole architecture is Microsoft based I can suggest you to push messages to MSMQ using an InProc dll which is much faster than access via WCF (which add one more layer to the architecture and it slow down the process as it need to serialize/deserialize) the objects. If you design this component in a proper way (SOLID principles) and you make it not coupled to the code you can easily switch to WCF(if you need it) adding a data contract and an End Point to expose your component as a service(at the end of the day WCF exposes an Interface)
Yes it would be the best - in that it's what WCF is for; as it's config driven you'll be able to use different binding types to suit the environment you're in (sending the data across).
The assumption is that the web clients are all (mostly) out on the public internet; being on a private network would give you more options.
WCF can use a queue as a binding type, not sure if that gives you any advantage since you're going to put them into a queue anyway. A synchronous WCF call using an http binding will be fine performance wise as the act of giving it to the MSMQ you have should be pretty quick.
Take a look at NServiceBus
I have a little experience with WCF and would like to get your opinion/suggestion on how the following problem can be solved:
A web service needs to be accessible from multiple clients simultaneously and service needs to return a result from a shared data set. The concrete project I'm working on has to store a list of IP addresses/ranges. This list will be queried by a bunch of web servers for a validation purposes and we speak of a couple of thousand or more queries per minute.
My initial draft approach was to use Windows service as a WCF host with service contract implementing class that is decorated with ServiceBehavior(InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.Single, ConcurrencyMode = ConcurrencyMode.Multiple) that has a list object and a custom locking for accessing it. So basically I have a WCF service singleton with a list = shared data -> multiple clients. What I do not like about it is that data and communication layers are merged into one and performance wise this doesn't feel "right".
What I really really (- want is Windows service running an instance of IP list holding container class object, a second service running WCF service contract implementation and a way the latter querying the former in a nice way with a minimal blocking. Using another WCF channel would not really take me far away from the initial draft implementation or would it?
What approach would you take? Project is still in a very early stage so complete design re-do is not out of question.
All ideas are appreciated. Thanks!
UPDATE: The data set will be changed dynamically. Web service will have a separate method to add IP or IP range and on top of that there will be a scheduled task that will trigger data cleanup every 10-15 minutes according to some rules.
UPDATE 2: a separate benchmark project will be kicked up that should use MySQL as a data backend (instead on in-memory list).
It depends how far it has to scale. If a single server will suffice, then fine; keep it conveniently in memory (as long as you can recreate the data if the server gets restarted). If the data-volume is low, then simple blocking (lock) should work fine to synchronize the data, or for higher throughput a ReaderWriterLockSlim. I would probably not store it directly in the WCF class instance, though.
I would avoid anything involving sessions (if/when this ties into the WCF life-cycle); this is rarely helpful to simple services.
For distributed load (over multiple servers) I would give consideration to a separate dedicated backend. A database or memcached / AppFabric / etc would be worth consideration.