What is the best and easiest method that can be used for inter-process communication in a very large project?
My requirement is to communicate between a normal Windows Forms Application and Windows Services.
Methods that are easy to maintain and implement are preferred.
Thanks
From the tags I understand that we are talking about .NET. Perhaps you should try Microsoft WCF. It unifies this issue, abstracting specific inter-process (inter-service) communication technology from actual code. So generally you'll design and write the interfaces that your processes will use to talk to each other and then you'll configure a specific communication technology in XML config file. That is, you have rather clear separation between "what do the processes talk about" and "how is this communication implemented specifically".
WCF supports SOAP, TCP\IP communication, MSMQ etc., you processes can be IIS-hosted web-services, usual Windows services, console applications etc. - all this under unified framework. I think, this is exactly what you are looking for.
It really depends on the project as there are a large number of methods.
This may depend on where the different portions of the project run (They could run on different servers, or different technology stacks altogether.).
The most common method is probably web services. Although these come with an overhead, so it may be worth looking at a simple interface API via a DLL.
Whatever you do it should probably be thought about and designed carefully, considering security and performance, and how you will extend or modify it in the future.
Not necessarily the best or the easiest....
In the .NET world try MSMQ or IBM MQ message queue middle ware.
If the communication is mostly 1-way, then consider using WCF services, which are both good and easy if you let the code generators in Visual Studio do most of the work for you.
Related
Alright, so I've asked several questions on StackOverflow about .NET Remoting, and there is always at least one person who just has to chime in, ".NET Remoting is deprecated, use WCF instead." I understand that it's deprecated and there is no guarantee of future support with new versions of the .NET Framework. But what are some other good reasons we would want to move over to WCF? I have seen a few mostly minor annoyances with .NET Remoting, however, this is not enough to change the minds the powers that be who believe firmly in "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". At this time, the only reason that attitude will change is if .NET Remoting is removed from a future version of the .NET Framework, so who knows how long that will be?
Does anybody have any insight as why exactly WCF is "better" than .NET Remoting, or why Remoting is inferior to WCF? What are the pros and cons of each technology? Are there additional things you can do with WCF and not with Remoting?
I mean, it would be great if I could convince them to let us migrate our software over to WCF just to allow a configurable TcpChannel timeout to be set on the client side (this seems to have been broken for a while, no matter what steps or troubleshooting I try), and when this happens, it makes our software look like absolute shite.
Thanks in advance for helping to shed some light on this.
There are plenty of reasons to ditch remoting; a few might include:
lack of transport flexibility
versioning requirements are huge pain
platform dependent (no sensible chance of cross-platform usage)
no chance of usage from the growing mobile market
lack of future development: whatever feature you want added - it won't be
however, I would disagree that WCF is the automatic replacement; WCF itself is a pretty versatile tool, but can be pretty complex, and has restrictions of its own. I haven't used it myself, but I have seen lots of praise for Service Stack, essentially with users describing it as "WCF done right", i.e. the good bits of WCF, without the pain points. However, there are plenty of other options too. One nice thing about the idea of Service Stack, though, is that it iterates pretty quickly, and if it lacks something you want you can change it.
.NET Remoting is now a legacy technology, quoted from MSDN:
This topic is specific to a legacy technology that is retained for backward compatibility with existing applications and is not recommended for new development. Distributed applications should now be developed using the Windows Communication Foundation (WCF).
And here is a performance comparison between WCF and .NET Remoting done in 2007: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb310550.aspx
To summarize the results, WCF is 25%—50% faster than ASP.NET Web
Services, and approximately 25% faster than .NET Remoting.
So I guess speed is a good reason to drop .NET Remoting.
While the given reasons are probably the driving considerations there are other non-trivial reasons:
Transport independence
IDE tooling
Ease of testing
Maintainability
When you use WCF you can change transport merely by editing your config file. This can be very handy when some sanctimonious system admin won't open a port and you need to use HTTP on port 80 to get through the corporate firewall.
The WCF tooling in Visual Studio is phenomenal. The hardest part is figuring out the URL you need. After that it's just point and click for code generation. There are one or two gotchas with serialisation of collections but broadly speaking if you tell both ends to use arrays it will just plain work. If you need a collection at the destination you can always construct one around the received array, and since LINQ will happily operate on arrays you can fold this into other transformations.
I'm not sure what Stephan P means by pain points. Editing the config can be tricky but Microsoft provides an excellent GUI tool that takes all the guesswork out of it by providing a full tree of options yet generating a sparse config file.
WCF services are easy to test because they have a published interface to which you can connect a test harness. This is more a virtue of SoA in general rather than WCF in particular, but it's still desirable.
WCF makes things a great deal simpler in my code, since neither application nor service is polluted with "routing" code (to determine what ought to process the message content); it looks like simple method calls or implementations. I mostly use WCF as a wrapper for MSMQ, and the only visible consequence of the transport selection is that these method calls must all be void functions because it's a OneWay transport. But that's hardly surprising when the point was persistent queueing.
This all speaks to maintainability. Even for in-house applications, maintenance is a dominant cost, and when you're supporting your software at customer sites poor maintainability can be crippling.
Then there's interoperability with otherwise incompatible platforms. In this case I'm thinking of using HTTP/XML or HTTP/JSON to provide service to web apps written in (eg) PHP.
Going the other way isn't quite so easy but it's fairly straightforward.
I give points for WCF with respect to logging and security.
Logging
WCF has an integrated Logging mechanism that helps you log traces that become a boon during maintanence. In other technologies, developer has to do some work to achieve this but in WCF, all that we have to do is to enable trace by changing the config file and WCF starts providing traces for you.
Security
Security mechanism in WCF is fairly simple and out of box when you look from the implementors perspective but is very robust and highly secure. The best part is that for the highy used and recommended bindings, WCF provides default security which can be trusted to the core. The message security on WSHTTPbinding is an example on these lines.
.NET Framework remoting does not do authentication or encryption by default. Therefore, it is recommended that you take all necessary steps to make certain of the identity of clients or servers before interacting with them remotely
Moreover WCF is an framework to develop Service Oriented applications under microsoft platform mixing both message and rpc style of programming. Which was not in the remoting. Remoting is basically oriented to rpc only.
I have 2 windows services that I created using C#.
I would like one of the services to call a function in the second windows service.
How should I do it?
EDIT:
The issue is That I have to application that running ( I don't need them to be Rather service Process is good too) but I need this 2 application to communicate, this 2 application are on the same server,
Sure. There are a bunch of IPC mechanisms you could use. Remoting, TCP/HTTP Listeners, etc.
Does either service provide functionality that might be useful outside of the other service?
See this thread for more ideas:
IPC Mechanisms in C# - Usage and Best Practices
EDIT:
As Davide Piras pointed out, if WCF is available for you to use, then consider using it. It will simplify life. The WCF configuration files are sometimes a pain to wield, but there's a nice tool for that too:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms732009.aspx
Are the services on the same box? Do you have .NET 4? Highly recommend using the fastest mode possible, memory-mapped files.
If they're on the same box, but you don't have .NET 4, or are in a homogenous Microsoft Windows network, named pipes could work. More to the point, I'd use WCF over a named pipe.
I found all the other answers correct but a little too much complicated (WCF is a big deal) and not scalable (memory and named pipes will only work on the same sever). I suggest you DotNetMQ messaging system. It's easy to use and deploy and let's you communicate even between processes running on different servers.
I'm interested in gaining a better understanding of WCF.
Of course, I can read books and tutorials about it, but it seems that a better way would be to actually come up with some project idea (either open-source or a startup) which would actually benefit from using WCF, and then build it using WCF.
What are your ideas for small-scale projects which might benefit from WCF?
I'm not sure it is really a matter of scale that drives a decision to use WCF. If a learning project is all you are interested in, then take a normal idea for a project, and turn the entire data access layer into WCF calls.
This should give you a fair understanding of all the little nooks and crannies of WCF, and allow you to fail in a controlled manner. That way you can make decisions in the future about when are where it is best to apply a service boundary using WCF.
As was already mentioned, anything to do with the web can benefit tremendously from WCF. Heck, you could build a pure JavaScript and HTML 5 application using WCF without ever touching ASP.Net.
A hosted service that a mobile device (such as a WP7 or iPhone) could connect with to retrieve data
WCF is great for setting up non-ASPX endpoints for Ajax clients. See for example this article. There are many more out there.
Any project involving .NET and communication is likely to benefit from WCF. WCF is the replacement for ASMX web services and for .NET Remoting. There's no one particular type of application that it is suited for. For instance, it's not like it's suitable for Enterprise applications but not for small ones.
WCF data contracts are very easy and handy for storing application configuration, settings and state. Write a library/application to take care of serialisation and editing.
I'm looking for a technology which is targeting on building distributed applications. My friend adviced me to use CORBA (Java & C++ combination) . But I have read it's sort of obsolete stuff. I'm planning to write rather simple distributed application. What solutions would you advice to use? Thanks!
If you want to distribute your code logic to multiple servers and have it managed as a single entity, I would recommend CloudIQ Platform from Appistry. You can deploy Java, .NET and C/C++ code to the framework. From an administrative point of view, the servers work and act as one. When you submit a request for execution, the framework distributes the request to the best available worker, performing load balancing. With this framework, you can have producer/consumer, scatter/gather, and other parallel types of jobs.
The framework also monitors the execution of jobs, so if there is any type of hardware failure, other machines will get allocated the jobs that were running on the failed server.
CORBA is quite old. To choose a library or framework, the questions are: why do you want it to be distributed? (what's the goal? performance / parallelization? scalability? physical constraints on locations of parts of the system?) Which sort of nodes will be running the various parts? What languages would you rather use?
Recommend using ICE(Internet Communications Engine), ICE can support multiple operating system platform (Windows, Linux, Solars, Mac OS, iOS, Android...), multiple developing language (C++, Java, .NET, Python, Ruby, PHP), and it is simpler.
You can use SOAP web services. I'm currently developing distributed testing system on Python & .NET using using SOAP and it is easy to write and deploy.
There are a lot of different SOAP server/client libraries for different languages and platforms.
Yes, CORBA, and technologies like COM and DCOM are all pretty much obsolete... I am not sure exactly what you want to accomplish, but I would look towards .NET remoting to build distributed applications. If your application is really simple, you can even use mailslots or named pipes to pass simple data across a network.
As sinelaw mentioned, there are many questions before a good suggestion can be made, but, you may want to look at REST (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representational_State_Transfer) as a way to transfer data between applications. REST is nice in that what it can accept and return are flexible, for example, you can upload a file and return a PDF. Though it is used on http, that isn't the only allowed protocol. It is language/platform agnostic.
If you want to go with something that is standardized then SOAP or REST is probably your best bet, if you want to be platform-independent. If you don't mind being restricted to Java/JVM or .NET then there are other options, but that becomes very restricting.
What type of data is being passed? How critical is security? What platforms/languages should be usable? What is the purpose of the program, the goal?
If you want a portable solution that can also be used with different protocols, WCF on Mono might be a good fit
For .Net I suggest you WCF , it's quite simple to implement and very flexible, and about CORBA it's a good choice if your goal is to understand deeply distributed applications, but it's not more recommended for real projects, currently is very difficult to find developers mastering CORBA.
If my applications run on a same computer or even on different computers in a same LAN and need intense and quick communication, it seems illogical for me to use text-encoded web services and HTTP. I could possibly use IP/TCP/UDP sockets and invent my own protocols, but believe there is a standard way for .Net applications to send/receive object instances (and, maybe, even sharing an object by reference?). Can you tell me what's that standard way? I am only interested in .Net Framework 4 applications and don't need to support legacy frameworks.
You'll want to use Windows Communication Foundation:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163647.aspx
Another link on getting started with WCF
Microsoft has chosen this as their preferred method of communication for .net apps. It replaces Remoting and Web Services.
The great thing about it is that you can switch to different protocols with a small amount of work, so if one protocol doesn't work for you, you can change around the configuration to try another one.
Probably either WCF over NetTcp or NetNamedPipe bindings, or else .NET Remoting.
.Net 4 gives you the Memory-mapped File which you may back with the paging file and share between applications by name.
I you want to share objects, then .NET Remoting is probably a good way to achieve that.
In a word: remoting
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/kwdt6w2k(VS.71).aspx
If performance is still an issue, TCP (or even UDP depending on requirements) is still your friend.
To be future proof, I would use gRPC, which allows a) local communication between C# apps, b) local communication between apps in various languages and c) communication over network.