I have a WebApplication targetting .net core.
I have also created a Class Library targetting .net core as well.
I am creating a Users Repository following this Dapper tutorial Here
It would be nice to be able to provide the option that was injected in start up of the WebApplication into the project that will be the data access layer.
Here is the code for the Users Repository in a separate project.
class UsersRepository
{
private readonly MyOptions _options;
private string connectionString;
public UsersRepository(IOptions iopt/// insert Option here )
{
_options = iopt.Value;
connectionString = _options.connString;
}
public IDbConnection Connection
{
get
{
return new SqlConnection(connectionString);
}
}
The WebApplication Project Startup looks as follows.
public class Startup
{
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddOptions();
services.Configure<MyOptions>(Configuration);
services.AddMvc();
}
and of course MyOptions is a class in the web application that has only one property connString
One possible design is to make a new interface for your repository configuration inside your class library, and have your MyOptions type implement that interface.
For example, in your class library you can do the following:
public interface IRepositoryConfig
{
string ConnectionString { get; }
}
public class UserRepository
{
public UserRepository(IRepositoryConfig config)
{
// setup
}
}
And in your WebAPI Startup class you can wire this up as follows:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddOptions();
services.Configure<MyOptions>(Configuration);
services.AddMvc();
services.AddScoped<IRepositoryConfig>(s =>
s.GetService<IOptions<MyOptions>>().Value
);
services.AddScoped<UserRepository>();
}
Doing this will allow you to use the Asp.Net Core configuration/options framework without having to reference any Asp.Net DLLs in your class library directly.
Related
I am working with Asp.Net Core application. I have two classes namely Online and Offline. I have created interface and defined the methods in these two classes. Based on the need I have to connect to anyone of these two classes.
Previously when I worked in Asp.Net MVC, I have used unity container and Service Locator to specify the class name in XML file for invoking the class dynamically (between online and offline).
Now I want to implement the same with Asp.Net core. But I am not sure how to specify the class name outside for method invocation. Kindly help.
Thanks
In .net core dependency injection is in built. You don't need unity or any other any more.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/fundamentals/dependency-injection?view=aspnetcore-5.0
You can achieve what you want by using a little tweak.
//// classes
public interface IFileUploadContentProcess
{
IEnumerable<StoreOrder> ProcessUploads(IFormFile file);
}
public class ProcessExcelFiles : IFileUploadContentProcess
{
public IEnumerable<StoreOrder> ProcessUploads(IFormFile file)
{
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
}
public class ProcessCsvFiles : IFileUploadContentProcess
{
public IEnumerable<StoreOrder> ProcessUploads(IFormFile file)
{
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
}
//// register it
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddControllers();
services.AddTransient<IStoreOrderService, StoreOrderService>();
services.AddTransient<ProcessExcelFiles>();
services.AddTransient<ProcessCsvFiles>();
// Add resolvers for different sources here
services.AddTransient<Func<string, IFileUploadContentProcess>>(serviceProvider => key =>
{
return key switch
{
"xlsx" => serviceProvider.GetService<ProcessExcelFiles>(),
_ => serviceProvider.GetService<ProcessCsvFiles>(),
};
});
}
//use it
public class StoreOrderService : IStoreOrderService
{
private readonly Func<string, IFileUploadContentProcess> _fileUploadContentProcess;
public StoreOrderService(Func<string, IFileUploadContentProcess> fileUploadContentProcess)
{
_fileUploadContentProcess = fileUploadContentProcess;
}
public async Task<IEnumerable<StoreOrder>> UploadStoreOrdersAsync(IFormFile file)
{
//// passing csv to process csv type(default), if xlsx, pass xlsx
var records = _fileUploadContentProcess("csv").ProcessUploads(file);
return records;
}
}
After lot of brainstroming, I found the below solution
Create a class for ServiceLocator
public class ServiceLocator
{
private ServiceProvider _currentServiceProvider;
private static ServiceProvider _serviceProvider;
public ServiceLocator(ServiceProvider currentServiceProvider)
{
_currentServiceProvider = currentServiceProvider;
}
public static ServiceLocator Current
{
get
{
return new ServiceLocator(_serviceProvider);
}
}
public static void SetLocatorProvider(ServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
_serviceProvider = serviceProvider;
}
public object GetInstance(Type serviceType)
{
return _currentServiceProvider.GetService(serviceType);
}
public TService GetInstance<TService>()
{
return _currentServiceProvider.GetService<TService>();
}
}
Step 2: Create interface and inherit in the classes and define the interface methods
Step 3: Define class name in appSettings.json and read the values in startup.cs
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
//reading from appSettings.json
string strClassName = Configuration["DependencyInjection:className"];
if (strClassName == "OnlineData")
services.AddTransient<<<InterfaceName>>, <<OnlineClassName>>>();
if (strClassName == "OfflineData")
services.AddTransient<<<InterfaceName>>, <<OfflineClassName>>>();
}
Step 4: Create object for the dynamic class inside controller/action method
InterfaceNamemyService = ServiceLocator.Current.GetInstance<>();
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.
I have the following ASP.NET Core integration test using a custom WebApplicationFactory
public class CustomWebApplicationFactory<TEntryPoint> : WebApplicationFactory<TEntryPoint>
where TEntryPoint : class
{
public CustomWebApplicationFactory()
{
this.ClientOptions.AllowAutoRedirect = false;
this.ClientOptions.BaseAddress = new Uri("https://localhost");
}
public ApplicationOptions ApplicationOptions { get; private set; }
public Mock<IClockService> ClockServiceMock { get; private set; }
public void VerifyAllMocks() => Mock.VerifyAll(this.ClockServiceMock);
protected override TestServer CreateServer(IWebHostBuilder builder)
{
this.ClockServiceMock = new Mock<IClockService>(MockBehavior.Strict);
builder
.UseEnvironment("Testing")
.ConfigureTestServices(
services =>
{
services.AddSingleton(this.ClockServiceMock.Object);
});
var testServer = base.CreateServer(builder);
using (var serviceScope = testServer.Host.Services.CreateScope())
{
var serviceProvider = serviceScope.ServiceProvider;
this.ApplicationOptions = serviceProvider.GetRequiredService<IOptions<ApplicationOptions>>().Value;
}
return testServer;
}
}
which looks like it should work but the problem is that the ConfigureTestServices method is never being called, so my mock is never registered with the IoC container. You can find the full source code here.
public class FooControllerTest : IClassFixture<CustomWebApplicationFactory<Startup>>, IDisposable
{
private readonly HttpClient client;
private readonly CustomWebApplicationFactory<Startup> factory;
private readonly Mock<IClockService> clockServiceMock;
public FooControllerTest(CustomWebApplicationFactory<Startup> factory)
{
this.factory = factory;
this.client = factory.CreateClient();
this.clockServiceMock = this.factory.ClockServiceMock;
}
[Fact]
public async Task Delete_FooFound_Returns204NoContent()
{
this.clockServiceMock.SetupGet(x => x.UtcNow).ReturnsAsync(new DateTimeOffset.UtcNow);
var response = await this.client.DeleteAsync("/foo/1");
Assert.Equal(HttpStatusCode.NoContent, response.StatusCode);
}
public void Dispose() => this.factory.VerifyAllMocks();
}
I've blogged about ASP.NET Core Integration Testing & Mocking using Moq. It's not simple and requires some setup but I hope it helps someone out. Here is the basic code you need using ASP.NET Core 3.1:
Startup
The ConfigureServices and Configure methods in your applications Startup class must be virtual. This is so that we can iherit from this class in our tests and replace production versions of certain services with mock versions.
public class Startup
{
private readonly IConfiguration configuration;
private readonly IWebHostingEnvironment webHostingEnvironment;
public Startup(IConfiguration configuration, IWebHostingEnvironment webHostingEnvironment)
{
this.configuration = configuration;
this.webHostingEnvironment = webHostingEnvironment;
}
public virtual void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services) =>
...
public virtual void Configure(IApplicationBuilder application) =>
...
}
TestStartup
In your test project, override the Startup class with one that registers the mock and the mock object with IoC.
public class TestStartup : Startup
{
private readonly Mock<IClockService> clockServiceMock;
public TestStartup(IConfiguration configuration, IHostingEnvironment hostingEnvironment)
: base(configuration, hostingEnvironment)
{
this.clockServiceMock = new Mock<IClockService>(MockBehavior.Strict);
}
public override void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services
.AddSingleton(this.clockServiceMock);
base.ConfigureServices(services);
services
.AddSingleton(this.clockServiceMock.Object);
}
}
CustomWebApplicationFactory
In your test project, write a custom WebApplicationFactory that configures the HttpClient and resolves the mocks from the TestStartup, then exposes them as properties, ready for our integration test to consume them. Note that I'm also changing the environment to Testing and telling it to use the TestStartup class for startup.
Note also that I've implemented IDisposable's `Dispose method to verify all of my strict mocks. This means I don't need to verify any mocks manually myself. Verification of all mock setups happens automatically when xUnit is disposing the test class.
public class CustomWebApplicationFactory<TEntryPoint> : WebApplicationFactory<TEntryPoint>
where TEntryPoint : class
{
public CustomWebApplicationFactory()
{
this.ClientOptions.AllowAutoRedirect = false;
this.ClientOptions.BaseAddress = new Uri("https://localhost");
}
public ApplicationOptions ApplicationOptions { get; private set; }
public Mock<IClockService> ClockServiceMock { get; private set; }
public void VerifyAllMocks() => Mock.VerifyAll(this.ClockServiceMock);
protected override void ConfigureClient(HttpClient client)
{
using (var serviceScope = this.Services.CreateScope())
{
var serviceProvider = serviceScope.ServiceProvider;
this.ApplicationOptions = serviceProvider.GetRequiredService<IOptions<ApplicationOptions>>().Value;
this.ClockServiceMock = serviceProvider.GetRequiredService<Mock<IClockService>>();
}
base.ConfigureClient(client);
}
protected override void ConfigureWebHost(IWebHostBuilder builder) =>
builder
.UseEnvironment("Testing")
.UseStartup<TestStartup>();
protected override void Dispose(bool disposing)
{
if (disposing)
{
this.VerifyAllMocks();
}
base.Dispose(disposing);
}
}
Integration Tests
I'm using xUnit to write my tests. Note that the generic type passed to CustomWebApplicationFactory is Startup and not TestStartup. This generic type is used to find the location of your application project on disk and not to start the application.
I setup a mock in my test and I've implemented IDisposable to verify all mocks for all my tests at the end but you can do this step in the test method itself if you like.
Note also, that I'm not using xUnit's IClassFixture to only boot up the application once as the ASP.NET Core documentation tells you to do. If I did so, I'd have to reset the mocks between each test and also you would only be able to run the integration tests serially one at a time. With the method below, each test is fully isolated and they can be run in parallel. This uses up more CPU and each test takes longer to execute but I think it's worth it.
public class FooControllerTest : CustomWebApplicationFactory<Startup>
{
private readonly HttpClient client;
private readonly Mock<IClockService> clockServiceMock;
public FooControllerTest()
{
this.client = this.CreateClient();
this.clockServiceMock = this.ClockServiceMock;
}
[Fact]
public async Task GetFoo_Default_Returns200OK()
{
this.clockServiceMock.Setup(x => x.UtcNow).ReturnsAsync(new DateTimeOffset(2000, 1, 1));
var response = await this.client.GetAsync("/foo");
Assert.Equal(HttpStatusCode.OK, response.StatusCode);
}
}
xunit.runner.json
I'm using xUnit. We need to turn off shadown copying, so any separate files like appsettings.json are placed in the right place beside the application DLL file. This ensures that our application running in an integration test can still read the appsettings.json file.
{
"shadowCopy": false
}
appsettings.Testing.json
Should you have configuration that you want to change just for your integration tests, you can add a appsettings.Testing.json file into your application. This configuration file will only be read in our integration tests because we set the environment name to 'Testing'.
The best way to handle this is to factor out parts of your Startup that will need to be substituted during test. For example, instead of calling services.AddDbContext<MyContext>(...); directly in ConfigureServices, create a virtual private method like:
protected virtual void ConfigureDatabase(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddDbContext<MyContext>(...);
}
Then, in your test project, create a class like TestStartup which derives from your SUT's Startup class. Then, you can override these virtual methods to sub in your test services, mocks, etc.
Finally, just do something like:
builder
.UseEnvironment("Testing")
.UseStartup<TestStartup>();
You should create a fake startup:
public class FakeStartup : Startup
{
public FakeStartup(IConfiguration configuration)
: base(configuration)
{
}
public override void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
base.ConfigureServices(services);
// Your fake go here
//services.AddScoped<IService, FakeService>();
}
}
Then use it with IClassFixture<CustomWebApplicationFactory<FakeStartup>>.
Make sure to make your original ConfigureServices method virtual.
We have an ASP.NET Core 1.1 application which is splitted in 3 layers:
Web
Business Logic (BLL)
Data Access (DAL)
There we have some methods of the BLL and some of the DAL that need some values from the config. I see two possibilities to pass them the required values:
define the values as parameters of the method, get them in the web-layer and pass them to the BLL and DAL
inject IConfigurationRoot to the BLL and DAL
Which of the both possibilities is more recommendable?
With ASP.NET Core you should actually choose the third possibility:
use strongly typed settings injected with IOptions<T> wrapper.
Here is a sample:
POCO for the settings:
public class SomeSettings
{
public string SomeStringValue { get; set; }
public int SomeNumericValue { get; set; }
// ...
}
Injecting the settings:
public class SomeClass
{
private readonly SomeSettings settings;
public SomeClass(IOptions<SomeSettings> options)
{
this.settings = options.Value;
}
}
Registering the settings:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
// ...
services.Configure<SomeSettings>(Configuration.GetSection("SectionNameHere"));
}
Using Options pattern is recommended way to deal with configuration in .NET Core.
I have a StructureMap container already set up (in a separate project) like so:
public class Container
{
public static StructureMap.Container Current { get; private set; }
public static void InitIoC()
{
var container = new StructureMap.Container(
c =>
{
c.For<AppSettings>().Singleton();
c.For<ILogger>().Use<Logger>();
c.For<IReminderService>().Use<ReminderService>();
...
}
}
}
I would like this configuration to be used in .NET Core 2.0 Web API.
In my Startup.cs I have to do this to make it work:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddMvc();
services.Add(ServiceDescriptor.Transient(typeof(ILogger), typeof(Logger)));
... // rewriting what is already configured
}
How can I simply inject this same configuration into WebAPI?
You can try this:
public IServiceProvider ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddMvc();
//Create StructureMap container
var container = new Container(); //This is Structuremap's container class, not your custom class
container.Configure(config =>
{
//Add in your custom structuremap registry
config.AddRegistry(new Container());
//Push the .net Core Services Collection into StructureMap
config.Populate(services);
});
//Register dependencies
services.ConfigureDependencies();
//Return the service provider
return container.GetInstance<IServiceProvider>();
}
I don't know if it's necessary but you can change your Container class be like:
public class Container: Registry
{
public Container()
{
c.For<ILogger>().Use<Logger>();
c.For<IReminderService>().Use<ReminderService>();
//More mappings
}
}