ASP.NET Core Data Access Layer Custom Class AddSingleton - asp.net-core

I have my EntityFrameworkCore DBContext in ConfigureServices
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddDbContext<MyDBContext>(Options => ... );
...
}
I also have my data access layer factory class which receives DBContext in constructor
public partial class DataAccessFactory
{
public readonly ProductsDataAccess Products;
public readonly CategoriesDataAccess Categories;
public DataAccessFactory(MyDBContext db)
{
Products = new ProductsDataAccess(db);
Categories = new CategoriesDataAccess(db);
}
}
In order to work with Data Access Layer, I have to create new instance of DataAccessFactory per each request.
My question is, does it make sence and is there any way to create one instance of DataAccessFactory and add it as a Singleton?

You can register your service inside ConfigureServices in Startup.cs:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
...
services.AddSingleton<DataAccessFactory>();
}
and inject it where you needed:
public class MyController
{
public readonly DataAccessFactory Factory;
public MyController(DataAccessFactory factory)
{
Factory = factory;
}
}
It will be created only once per application life. If you instead will want to change it scope for example per request, just change AddSingleton to AddScoped.
Update:
But be careful when mixing different-scoped services. You cannot inject short living object into long living, because it will cause exceptions. In your situation you will need to change DbContext scope to singleton (sic) or consider to change Factory lifetime to Scoped. Here is example how to change DbContext scope.

Related

Creating Singleton CacheManager in Asp.Net Core

I am trying to create Singleton CacheManager class that has dependency on IMemoryCache.
public class CacheManager:ICacheManager
{
private readonly IMemoryCache _cache;
public CacheManager(IMemoryCache cache)
{
_cache = cache;
}
public void LoadCache(MyData data)
{
// load cache here at startup from DB
}
}
I also have a Scoped service that retrives data from the database
public class LookupService:ILookupService
{
private readonly MyDatabaseContext _dbContext;
public class LookupService(MyDatabaseContext dbContext)
{
_dbContext = dbContext;
}
public void Dispose()
{
//Dispose DBContext here
}
// some async methods that returns lookup collection
}
Register these services in Startup.cs
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
// EF
services.AddDbContext<MyDatabaseContext>(options => options.UseSqlServer(Configuration.GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection")));
// domain services
services.AddScoped<ILookupService, LookupService>();
services.AddMemoryCache();
// singleton
services.AddSingleton<CacheManager>(sp=>
{
using(var scope = sp.CreateScope())
{
using (var service = scope.ServiceProvider.GetService<ILookupService>())
{
how do i create cacheManager instance by injecting IMemoryCache and also register callback function
}
}
});
}
ILookupService is registered as Scoped service becuase it has dependency on DBContext which is also (by default) registered with Scoped lifetime. I do not want to change lifetime of these services.
However I want CacheManager to be registered as Singleton, that means I cannot inject ILookupService as dependency into CacheManager.
So here is my possible solution to create & register singleton instance of CacheManager
services.AddSingleton<CacheManager>(sp=>
{
using(var scope = sp.CreateScope())
{
using (var lookupService = scope.ServiceProvider.GetService<ILookupService>())
{
var cache = scope.ServiceProvider.GetService<IMemoryCache>();
var manger = new CacheManager(cache);
manger.LoadCache(lookupService.GetData());
return manger;
}
}
});
Not sure this is the best way to create CacheManager. How do I implement a callback function to re-populate CacheEntry if it becomes null?
I guess I would simply configure services.AddSingleton<CacheManager>();
(CacheManager having a default constructor)
After configuring all of the DI dependencies and having a serviceprovider, get the Cachemanager singleton and initialize it with LoadCache.
(so let DI create "empty" singleton cachemanager, but initialize immediately somewhere in startup of application)
var cachemanager = scope.ServiceProvider.Get<CacheManager>();
var lookupService = scope.ServiceProvider.Get<ILookupService>();
var cache = scope.ServiceProvider.Get<IMemoryCache>();
cachemanager.Cache = cache;
cachemanager.LoadCache(lookupService.GetData());
Looks like the underlying issue is that ILookupService cannot be resolved until runtime and requests start coming in. You need to create CacheManager before this.
DI COMPOSITION
This should be done when the app starts - as in this class of mine. Note the different lifetimes for different types of object but I just focus on creating the objects rather than interactions.
DI RESOLUTION
.Net uses a container per request pattern where scoped objects are stored against the HttpRequest object. So a singleton basically needs to ask for the current ILookupService, which is done by calling:
container.GetService<ILookupService>
So include the DI container as a constructor argument to your CacheManager class and you will be all set up. This is the service locator pattern and is needed to meet your requirement.
An alternative per request resolution mechanism is via the HttpContext object as in this class, where the following code is used:
IAuthorizer authorizer = (IAuthorizer)this.Context.RequestServices.GetService(typeof(IAuthorizer));
SUMMARY
The important thing is to understand the above design pattern, and you can then apply it to any technology.
register Cache service as singleton, try below code
public class CacheService : ICacheService
{
private ObjectCache _memoryCache;
/// <summary>
/// Initializes a new instance of the <see cref="CacheService"/> class.
/// </summary>
public CacheService()
{
this._memoryCache = System.Runtime.Caching.MemoryCache.Default;
}
}

Inject DbContextOptions vs DbContext in a repository EF Core

I have the StudentDbContext
public class StudentDbContext : DbContext
{
public StudentDbContext()
{
}
public StudentDbContext(DbContextOptions<StudentDbContext> options)
: base(options)
{
}
public virtual DbSet<Students> Students{ get; set; }
}
and then I have a repository and I try to understand what is the difference if I inject the StudentDbContext vs inject DbContextOptions
Inject the DbContextOptions
class StudentRepository : IStudentRepository
{
private readonly DbContextOptions<StudentDbContext> _context;
public StudentRepository(DbContextOptions<StudentDbContext> context)
{
_context = context;
}
}
Inject StudentDbContext
class StudentRepository : IStudentRepository
{
private readonly StudentDbContext _context;
public StudentRepository(StudentDbContext context)
{
_context = context;
}
}
Are there any advantages or disadvantages in each case?
DbContextOptions class is used to create the options to be used by a DbContext. It configures the database (and other options) to be used for the database context. DbContext class contains DbSet properties for each entity in the model.
If you try to use DbContextOptions in a repository you will have no access to any model since it doesn't have them.
DbContextOptions and DbContextOptions<TContext> have different use cases.
You need to inject DbContextOptions (generic or not) in subtypes of DbContext.
The DbContextOptions instance will contain the options that you have configured in the Startup class:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddDbContextFactory<ConcreateDbContext>(
options => options.UseSqlServer(#"Server=(localdb)\mssqllocaldb;Database=Test")
);
}
If your DbContext implementation is not supposed to be inherited from, you will inject in your ConcreateDbContext the generic version of options type DbContextOptions<ConcreateDbContext>, and this ensures that the correct options for the specific DbContext subtype are resolved from dependency injection. You can also, mark your ConcreateDbContext as sealed, as the class is not designed to be inherited from.
public sealed class ConcreateDbContext: DbContext
{
public ConcreateDbContext(DbContextOptions<ConcreateDbContext> contextOptions)
: base(contextOptions)
{
}
}
In case that you want to have a DbContext that is intended to be inherited from, you are supposed to expose a protected constructor which will take as a parameter the non-generic version of DbContextOptions.
public class BaseDbContext: DbContext
{
protected BaseDbContext(DbContextOptions contextOptions)
: base(contextOptions)
{
}
}
In case you want to have a DbContext that is intended to be both instantiated and inherited from, you will have two constructors, one taking the generic, and one the non-generic version of DbContextOptions.
And when you want to interact with the data in your database, you will inject the concrete DbContext implementation (in your case StudentDbContext).

c# asp.net core 3 calling different methods from the controller, depending on the request body

I have a controller with the following content (simplified version):
[HttpPost]
public Task<OkResult> Post([FromBody] commonRequest)
{
parser.DoWork(commonRequest);
return Ok();
}
The commonRequest object is populated from the incoming JSON request.
The parser.DoWork method should invoke the creation of a new instance of the class, depending on requestBody.
Here's what it looks like:
public class CommonParser : ICommonParser
{
private readonly ILogger<CommonParser> logger;
private IServiceProvider serviceProvider;
public CommonParser(ILogger<CommonParser> _logger, IServiceProvider _serviceProvider)
{
this.logger = _logger;
this.serviceProvider = _serviceProvider;
}
public void DoWork(CommonRequest commonRequest)
{
ICommonParser parser = (ICommonParser)Activator.CreateInstance(Type.GetType(commonRequest.instance)
, serviceProvider);
parser.DoWork(commonRequest);
}
}
I have three classes whose names are passed through commonRequest.instance. All of these classes implement the ICommonParser interface. Inside these classes, I pass a serviceProvider so that they can get the ILogger inside themselves and use it.
Here is an example constructor of this class:
private readonly ILogger<Parser1> logger;
public Parser1(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
this.logger = serviceProvider.GetRequiredService<ILoggerFactory>().CreateLogger<Parser1>();
}
As a result, I can send only one message in this way. On the second call, I get a message that serviceProvider.GetRequiredServiceILoggerFactory () has been destroyed.
Please tell me what to do in such cases. I think I'm designing wrong.
From Dependency Injection in ASP.NET Core:
Avoid using the service locator pattern. For example, don't invoke
GetService or GetRequiredService to obtain a service instance when you
can use DI instead.
1) register the logger factory or the logger service, in case of the logger factory
services.AddSingleton<ILoggerFactory, LoggerFactory>();
2) use constructor injection to inject logger factory into the constructor
public Parser1(ILoggerFactory loggerFactory)
{
}
3) you might create a new interface for the parsers (parser1, 2, 3). The parsers implement this interface. Register them as services
public interface IParser
{
void DoWork(CommonRequest commonRequest);
}
services.AddTransient<Parser1>(); // implements IParser
services.AddTransient<Parser2>();
This post gives an answer how to resolve classes implementing the same interface. For getting parser with DI you will actually need IServiceProvider:
_serviceProvider.GetService<Parser1>();

How to write an extension method that allows you to set options without creating the options instance

I really like the pattern where I can configure a service through an option class without having to create it, but I can't find an example of how to write an extension method that allows me to use that same pattern such as the one below that exists for registering a DbContext.
services.AddDbContext<MyDbContext>(options => options.EnableDetailedErrors());
I can see the method signature uses an action method, but I can't seem to find the extension class in GitHub for ASP.NET Core that shows me how to write an extension method using that type of option builder pattern.
For example, take the following service code. How would I write the extension method so that I could configure the options during service registration.
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddMyService(options => options.SomeSetting = true);
}
public interface IMyService
{
void DoSomething();
}
public class MyService : IMyService
{
private readonly MyServiceOptions _options;
public MyService(IOptions<MyServiceOptions> options)
{
_options = options.Value;
}
public void DoSomething()
{
Console.WriteLine(_options.SomeSetting);
}
}
public static class MyServiceExtensions
{
// How would I write this extension method so that I could configure it with options overload
public static IServiceCollection AddMyService(this IServiceCollection services, Action<MyServiceOptions> configure)
{
services.AddSingleton<IMyService, MyService>();
return services;
}
}
ASP.NET Core provides this mechanism with the IConfigureOptions
interface. You implement this interface in a configuration class and
use it to configure the IOptions object in any way you need.
It's as easy as:
public class MyServiceConfiguration : IConfigureOptions<MyServiceOptions>
{
private MyServiceOptions _options;
public MyServiceConfiguration(IOptions<MyServiceOptions> options)
{
_options = options.Value;
}
public void Configure(MyServiceOptions options)
{
options.SomeSetting = _options.SomeSetting;
options.SomeOtherSetting = _options.SomeOtherSetting;
}
}
All that remains is to register this implementation in the DI container.:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.Configure<MyServiceOptions>(options => options.SomeOtherSetting = true);
services.AddSingleton<IMyService, MyService>();
}
With this configuration, when IOptions is injected into your service, the MyServiceOptions object will be configured by the ConfigureMyServiceOptions class.
Be careful! The ConfigureMyServiceOptions object is registered as a singleton,
so it will capture any injected services of scoped or transient lifetimes.

Entity framework DbContext in wcf per call instance mode

I have a repository like this
public abstract class BaseRepository<TEntity> : IRepository<TEntity> where TEntity : class
{
protected DbContext _dbContext;
public BaseRepository(DbContext dbContext)
{
_dbContext = dbContext;
}
public TEntity GetByKey(object keyValue)
{
// todo
}
}
and a concrete repository like this
public CustomerRepository : BaseRepository<Customer> , ICustomerRepository
{
public CustomerRepository(DbContext context) : base (context) { }
public Customer FindCustomerByKey(string key)
{
_dbContext.Set<Customer>().Find(key);
}
}
I have wcf service like this
[ServiceBehavior(InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.PerCall)]
public class CustomerSatisfactionService : ICustomerSatisfactionService
{
private ICustomerRepository _customerRepository;
private IHelpDeskRepository _helpdeskRepository;
public AccountService(ICustomerRepository customerRepository,IHelpdeskRepository helpdeskRepository)
{
_customerRepository = customerRepository;
_helpdeskRepository = helpdeskRepository;
}
public void DoSomethingUsingBothRepositories()
{
// start unit of work
// _customerRepository.DoSomething();
// _helpdeskRepository.DoSomething();
// commit unit of work
}
}
and I am using StructureMap for injecting DbContext instances like this
For<DbContext>().Use(() => new MyApplicationContext());
My problem is when a client calls the service, a new CustomerSatisfactionService instance is created, hence new instances of CustomerRepository and HelpdeskRepository are created but with different DbContexts.
I want to implement the unit of work pattern, but in the DoSomethingWithBothRepositories method, the two repositories have different DbContexts.
Is there any way to tell structure map to spin up a DbContext instance on a per call basis?
You must specify lifecycle for your DbContext so that only one instance is created per call. StructureMap doesn't contain build-in lifecycle management for per call WCF but you can find one implementation on this blog.
You need to implement UnitOfWork pattern so that same context is shared amongst entities. Take a look at http://blogs.msdn.com/b/adonet/archive/2009/06/16/using-repository-and-unit-of-work-patterns-with-entity-framework-4-0.aspx for a way to implement it.
I don't know if you need/want StructureMap to control the instantiation of dbcontext, have a look at this reply, UoW and UoW Factory setup dbcontext for the calls that need to be made in the repository.
EF ObjectContext, Service and Repository - Managing context lifetime.