I'd like to attach a debugger to a WCF service without interrupting incoming requests which are not the one I intend to debug. I thought I could use a conditional break point to only break on specific conditions in the request coming from my machine. I used SoapUI to send the request with the specific conditions. When that break point was hit, I opened a different request in SoapUI, but that request was not processed until I released my break. My goal was to see if I could attach a remote debugger to a production server without interrupting other requests. Is there anyway to do this?
Related
I have a driver that I need to access via a web site that is not thread-safe. Since many people can be on the site at a given time I figured I would create a WCF service that would handle all the calls. Most of the calls would be asynchronous calls to add items to a work queue. Some would be synchronous calls to get a list of items still unprocessed or items that have been processed.
Since the driver isn't thread safe, the service must take in potentially many requests at once and either add items to the work queue, return the work queue, or return the work-completed queue. A single-threaded operation in the service needs to read from the work queue, processes the job using this non-thread-safe driver, and, when complete, update the work-completed queue.
While I conceptually have clear in my mind what to do, the specifics of implementation confuse me a little. I think I should host the service in IIS since it will have to respond to web requests and otherwise act like any other web site, but I'm not sure how to guarantee that the access of the driver will remain single-threaded without blocking web requests. Do I need a second service, perhaps a Windows service, that would process all access to the driver and use the IIS-hosted WCF service to get the next queue item and update the queue when processing is complete?
I'd consider:
Clients call your aspx pages,
Pages call to wcf service (netMsmqBinding)? - to avoid blocking and waiting (singke service, can be hosted where you want).
When server done - it's notify clients (websocket? SignalR?)
I have always followed the guidance of try/Close/catch/Abort when it comes to a WCF proxy. I am facing a code base now that creates proxies in MVC controllers and just lets them go out of scope. I'm arguing the case that we need to edit the code base to use try/Close/catch/Abort but there is resistance.
Does anyone know a metric (e.g. perfmon) I can capture to illustrate the problem/benefit. Or a definitive reference that spells out the problem/benefit no one can dispute?
You can create a sample application to mimic the problem. Though I haven't tried you can try this,
Create a simple service and limit the maxConcurrentCalls and maxConcurrentSessions to 5.
Create a client application and in that, call the service method without closing the connection.
Fire up 6 or more clients
See what happens when you open a new connection from a client. Probably the client will wait for certain time and you get some exception.
If the client don't close the connection properly, the connection will still remain open in the service so what happens if 1000s of client connected to the service at a time and leave their connections open? The service has a limitation that it could server 'n' connections at a time and because of that the service can't handle any new requests from clients and that's why closing connections are very important.
I think you are aware about the using problem in WCF service. In my applications I close the WCF connections using an extension method as said in this thread.
Have you tried a simple 'netstat -N' from the command prompt both on server and client? Yoy are likely to see a lot of waiting/pending connections which might exhaust your server resources for no reason.
Imagine the following setup: a Silverlight client tunnels a serialized command over the network using a WCF service which in turn deserializes the command and sends it using NServiceBus to a generic host which is responsible for processing the command. The WCF service has - upon sending the command - registered a callback to be invoked. The generic host validates the command and 'returns' an error code (either 0 == success or >0 == failure).
Note: The WCF service is modelled after the built-in WCF service. The difference is that this WCF service receives a 'universal command' (not an IMessage), deserializes it into a real command (which does implement IMessage), and consequently sends the deserialized command off to the bus.
When unexpected exceptions occur, the command gets (after a certain amount of retries) queued in an error queue. At this point, the initiating WCF service sits there idle, unaware of what just happened. At some later point, the Silverlight client will time out according to the WCF client proxy configuration.
Things which are fuzzy in my head:
Does NServiceBus handle this scenario in any way? When does the timeout exception get thrown (if at all)? Or is this something exclusive to sagas?
Presuming I use [OperationContract(AsyncPattern=true)], are there any WCF related timeout settings that will kill the service operation? Or will the EndXXX method be somehow called? Or will it sit there forever, leaking, waiting for something that will never come?
Ways to proceed:
reuse existing timeout mechanisms, provided things don't leak.
build my own timeout mechanism between the wcf service and nservicebus.
notify the wcf service somehow when the command lands in the error queue.
build my own async notifcation mechanism using full blown callback message handler in the WCF service layer.
Things I've done:
run the example provided with NServiceBus.
spiked the happy case.
Any guidance on how to proceed is welcome, be it blog post, mailing list entries, ...
Some motivations for picking my current approach
I'm trying to leverage some of the scalability advantages (using distributor in a later phase) of NServiceBus.
I don't want to host a gazillion WCF services (one for each command), that's why I cooked up a bus-like WCF service.
Even though this is somewhat request/response style, I'm mostly concerned with gracefully handling a command reply not coming through.
You can develop any sort of message type you desire, IMessage is simply a marker interface. If you inspect the WSDL file that the service mex endpoint provides, there is no reference to IMessage, therefore you can define any command you like in you service. That being the case you should be able to use the provided WCF host.
I was able to reproduce the issue you describe using the built-in WCF hosting option. When an exception is thrown, the entire transaction is rolled back and this includes the Bus.Return, and therefore the service never gets a response.
I found a hack around this that I could provide, but I recommend reconsidering how you are using the service. If you are truly looking to do some expensive operations in a separate process then I would recommend in your WCF endpoint that you do a Bus.Send to a different process altogether. This would ensure to your client that the command was successfully received and that work is in progress. From there it would be up to the server to complete the command(some up front validation would help ensure its success). If the command was not completed successfully this should be made known on another channel(some background polling from the client would do).
I need to know if Windows Communication Foundations (WCF) can completely and easly help to solve the next scenario:
I need a server program which
constantly receives events that,
according to the content of the
signal, helps to trigger one or many
processes; this server program will
run as a Windows Service.
These events will be generated as
signals from many client WPF
programs and so, can be enqueued.
These events will be generated
according to the results of a timer
also.
The communication between the client
and the server will be using an
exclusive port.
For security reasons the data
communication using the exclusive
port will need to be encrypted.
Finally, The clients will need to
monitor the results of the programa
execution.
If the answer is yes, please try to indicate me which libraries/classes should I consider for points:
1) The event management
2) The enqueue process
4) The setting, opening, use and closing of the port
5) The encryption process
6) Monitoring of the server program execution from the client.
Many, many thanks.
Rather than writing a Windows Service program from scratch, which will need to handle multithreaded queueing of incoming messages, why not make the server a web service? That way, IIS can worry about receiving, queueing, etc. and you can just write the code to process the requests.
From your description, I think a WCF service hosted in a NT Service seems like a great fit.
1) I need a server program which constantly receives events that,
Not a problem at all, the NT service will be up and running at all times, even without anyone being logged on.
2) These events will be generated as signals from many client WPF programs and so, can be enqueued.
Again, no problem for a WCF service - you can create a http, a net.tcp, a MSMQ queue endpoint - all in a single service, really. You get all the flexibility you might need.
4) The communication between the client and the server will be using an exclusive port.
Works just fine - if you self-host the WCF service in a NT service, you can completely control the endpoint addresses.
5) For security reasons the data communication using the exclusive port will need to be encrypted.
All WCF communication is encrypted by default, unless you turn it off.
6) Finally, The clients will need to monitor the results of the programa execution.
Again - not a problem.
For a MSMQ queue, you can create a number of response queues that clients can listen on. For HTTP or NetTCP, you can create a response message (if the processing is very quick) or create a "check for status" operation that allows clients to check for statuses. Or you can mix and match as needed.
All in all, I am convinced WCF will serve you very well indeed !
I have a WCF Service that I have written, which is hosted within a Windows service. It is operating in PerSession mode. The service permits clients to open files, make changes to files and close files remotely through the service. So far all works very smoothly.
When the Windows service is stopped, I would like to be able have the WCF Service not accept any new sessions and yet allow already connected clients to complete their current sessions and work (within a reasonable period/timeout).
What would be the best way to accomplish this?
Basically, calling ServiceHost.Close() will accomplish this - it will let all currently running request run to completion, but new request are being rejected will the orderly shutdown is in progress.
There's a "CloseTimeout" setting on your binding that you configured for your service - that controls how long the WCF runtime will allow running requests to take until they've properly shut down. If that timeout happens, the still running requests will be killed.
The ServiceHost.Abort() method on the other hand is the digital equivalent of a sledgehammer - all running requests are terminated at once, and the host is shut down.
ON the client side, you have the same .Close() and .Abort() methods on your client proxy which behave the same way.