I'm implementing profiler to track http requests coming to .net core applications hosted in IIS. I'm using coreclr profiling api to hook method enter/exit.
Which method I should track to know a new http request coming into my application.
Create a middle ware and configure ASP.NET Core to use it. It should receive requests, process it, then pass it along with the pipeline.
For more information see here: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/fundamentals/middleware/?view=aspnetcore-2.2
Related
We are building a web application in Asp.Net Core that will be used to centralize and communicate with a lot of instances of a custom servers(which is in C# too).
We need versionning, because updating those custom servers is really time consuming and can be a blocker for people to install newer version of the web app.
For the HTTP part, it's "easy", we have to use the Asp.Net Core versionning and a given version of the custom server will know how to communicate with a given version of the web app.
But we have a SignalR service that is used to provide notification to the custom servers from the web app, and request some data, some actions, ... Is there a way to provide several version of the client interface for this? And having the signalR server able to transform the message to each version?
Thank you
I am building a REST API using ASP .NET Core Web API and Entity Framework Core for connecting a SQL Server Database.
I have a controller which is handling some critical requests and I need these request to be handled synchronously because if two or more requests are handled at the same time, concurrence issues may cause big integrity problems in a database table.
Is this possible to achieve using ASP.NET Web API?
Thanks for comments and suggestions.
It may not be the best approach, but I finally ended up with:
In controller class, when a request is received I just insert the request body into a queue. There is a background thread reading this queue and processing each request body sequentially
I've really enjoyed using Flurl the last year but have encountered a problem that Im hoping I can solve using Flurl if possible and not resort ripping it out and using IHttpClientFactory and HttpClient from System.Net.Http
I've got a DotNetCore 3.1 API and our client is calling these APIs with custom headers. "x-activityid" as an example. My API calls out to an external API and so I've created a separate Client class where im calling the endpoints on the external API using Flurl.
I need to propagate some of the headers from the requests incomming to my API to the requests I make to the external API that Im calling using Flurl.
Some related links:
Header propagation using ASP.NET Core
Make HTTP requests using IHttpClientFactory in ASP.NET Core
The whole idea of header propagation depends on awareness of some HTTP server context from which to grab the incoming headers, which is why ASP.NET Core can support such a feature directly while Flurl, a stand-alone library that often gets embedded in things like Xamarin apps, cannot.
But all is not lost, because Flurl is really just a wrapper around HttpClient. To get this feature to work without giving up Flurl, just wire up header propagation in ASP.NET Core exactly as prescribed, allow it to inject HttpClient instances into your service classes, then wrap those instances with Flurl inside those classes. Note that you'll need to adapt the pattern of using FlurlClient directly, as opposed to building calls off URL strings, if you're not doing that already.
We use Service stack, and run using the InProcess model on .net core.
We have some longer running requests, which we would like to timeout - however, I am struggling to do this. Before .net core, you could configure the httpRuntime's "executionTimeout" however, this is unavailable in .net core. The new way of doing this (I believe) is to use the "requestTimeout" in the config - but Microsoft's website claims this is not supported with the InProcess model. If feels like the only solution left is to configure this in Service Stack somewhere, but I am not seeing anywhere obvious.
Am I missing something here? Is there a ServiceStack option to force the thread to finish on a timeout, or is this just not not possible?
There are other timeout options via IIS, but none which will stop the execution
Thanks
ServiceStack operates as a library handler on the .NET HTTP Worker Request thread, i.e. it doesn't spawn or manage any of its own threads. Any request quota limits or timeouts would need to be configured on the underlying HTTP Server, i.e. just as any other ASP.NET Core App would need to do.
If you're using IIS, you can still configure ASP.NET Core Request Timeouts in Web.config in the <aspNetCore/> tag. If you're using the default Kestrel HTTP Server you can configure its limits when configuring your Web Host.
Currently I maintain an application that runs as a Windows service, reads messages from a message queue server, processes them and puts the result back into the message queue server. But it also contains a health monitoring component that is accessible through a web API.
It is implemented as a console app that uses Katana to self-host the health monitoring sub-system.
I'm now trying to figure out if we can move this to .NET Core and ASP.NET Core once they RTM. I know the Windows Service part cannot be ported, but I could also run the console app as a detached Docker container to basically achieve the same thing, in terms of main functionality.
But how will the health monitoring work? From what I can see the Katana project has been updated to ASP.NET 5 (which I guess is ASP.NET Core 1 before the big rename), but it does not run on the .NET Core CLR. Katana will require the full CLR. So that means Katana is out.
Does this mean that the way we build our app is impossible with .NET Core? Or does hosting the app through Kestrel not rule out the possibility of running code before the first request? With IIS the app does not live until the first request (unless you use the auto-start, but it's more of a speed-optimisation than have the app behave like an "allways-running-app") and generally the app is request-based and not continually running. Background threads in a IIS hosted app are a really bad idea.
Is this the same with Kestrel? Or will DNX start your app and keep it running until it's shutdown, much like a console app, so we can run all the background threads we want?
It follows the console app model. Katana is actually more the spiritual predecessor to kestrel. It is invoked for normal ASP.NET Core projects from the Main method with a normal method call. There are countless tutorials how to setup a server in RC1 (see Startup.cs Main method) and some for the upcoming RC2 (there is a builder for it). That would allow you to do both, your app code and your web api based monitoring, in a console app. Kestrel and DNX are not at all an application server like IIS. Kestrel is a plain HTTP server library and nothing more. You start it up and it listens from that moment on.
Nevertheless, you have to adjust your WebApi 2 and Katana based application to the new ASP.NET Core interfaces and middleware concept. But that should be easy compared to your message queuing adaption.