Since last few months this Asp.Net Web API seems to be an highlighted product from Microsoft. Is it an alternative to WS* Service. How is it different than WCF Service? And where can we see it as a best fit in web application development?
ASP.NET Web API is a framework for building web services that are exposed over HTTP. It is very well suited to (but not limited to) building RESTful web services.
Such web services are an alternative to building a SOAP RPC / WS* web services in that they are simpler, more light weight, and there's less coupling between client and server.
A traditional "WCF Service" supports SOAP RPC as opposed to REST, and these services tend to be complex and to have a tight coupling between client and server. Wide interoperability can become difficult to achieve. However, a traditional WCF Service can communicate over a wide variety of protocols - TCP being a particularly useful one for internal services (services in the same DMZ).
(While WCF is mostly associated with SOAP RPC-style services, there are at least three attempts in WCF to support the building of RESTful web services. These attempts have all been superseded by the ASP.NET Web API.)
ASP.NET Web API is a best fit for producing public facing RESTful web services - aka Hypermedia APIs - over HTTP. To do this, having a good understanding of the REST architectural style is important before you start using the ASP.NET Web API. See such books as "REST in Practice", "The RESTful Web Services Cookbook" and "Building Hypermedia APIs with HTML5 and Node".
Difference between ASP.net Web API and WCF API
Web service is a part of WCF. WCF offers much more flexibility and portability to develop a service when comparing to web service. Still we are having more advantages over Web service, following table provides detailed difference between them.
Related
I am little confused about these two technologies ie WCF REST and asp.net WEB API. Is there any difference between these two? When should use one over the other?
I am little confused about these two technologies ie WCF REST and asp.net WEB API. Is there any difference between these two?
Yes. Both are a means to providing REST-style services however the competing technologies are not created equal.
WCF REST naturally comes from the WCF world which is originally SOAP. WCF REST changes that by providing a rudimentary JSON payload instead of SOAP. However WCF REST is missing certain features and Microsoft has said that newer REST features will only make its way into ASP.NET Web API.
Unlike WCF REST, ASP.NET Web API has been designed from the ground up for REST-style JSON services.
MSDN:
Although WCF provides some support for writing REST-style services, the support for REST in ASP.NET Web API is more complete and all future REST feature improvements will be made in ASP.NET Web API. If you have an existing WCF service and you want to expose additional REST endpoints, use WCF and the WebHttpBinding. - Tell me more
OP:
When should use one over the other?
If your intent is to create SOAP services, or you have an existing WCF service, use WCF with a JSON encoding endpoint.
If your intent is to create REST services, particularly in a new application, then use ASP.NET Web API.
It depends what you want to do for choose one of them
Basically with the WCF you can create service based applications
but with ASP.NET Web Api you can create Restful services based on Http or Https.
REST and WCF are the meanings from different worlds :) REST is a specification (in other words the set of conventions) for developing the web-services. REST doesn't depends on some special technology / platform / framework or language. WCF is Microsoft approach for web-services, natively predifined to develope SOAP-services, which are based on RPC-architecture. RPC (remote procedure call) is an approach to develope web-services as a set of methods with parameters, which are doing some work. REST is more HTTP-oriented and the main concept is to operate with some entities (Representational State Transfer) and perform actions to this entities, but not just call some methods. It is possible to build some REST-service using WCF technology, but in my opinion, WCF isn't a good way for this goal.
I have experience in developing Restful web service using WCF. For the next project, I am considering Web API because that is the latest technology.
During my search, I found that an important reason for Web API recommendation is that it is Restful and can be accessed by HTTP protocol.
But we can also use WCF to create a restful web service that can be consumed even by mobile devices. I understand that to create a restful service using WCF, there is extra configuration involved, but besides that are there any other reasons for preferring Web API over WCF?
In other words, does Web API provide an exact subset of WCF functionality, or is there something you can do with Web API that you cannot do with a WCF service exposed as restful?
I'm planning to develop a pos application for restaurant. Client will be using pc and mobile. Application will be used in local area connection. I'm still considering whether to go with wcf or web api. What are the advantages of using wcf/web api for the type of application i'm building?
Use WCF to create reliable, secure web services that accessible over a variety of transports.
Use ASP.NET Web API to create HTTP-based services that are accessible from a wide variety of clients.
Use ASP.NET Web API if you are creating and designing new REST-style services. Although WCF provides some support for writing REST-style services, the support for REST in ASP.NET Web API is more complete and all future REST feature improvements will be made in ASP.NET Web API.
If you have an existing WCF service and you want to expose additional REST endpoints, use WCF and the WebHttpBinding.
from the official Microsoft Documentation.
Essentially, my take on this is that WCF is much more difficult to work with, and not completely compatible out of the box with many mobile clients, so only use it if you know that it's something you need.
What are the pros and cons of using each technology?
WCF Web Api is now merged into Asp.net
Asp.net web api now supports self hosting.
I still imagine if I want to expose multiple protocol schemas for the same operation I would still lean towards WCF or can Mvc end point do this too?
Also does the new Asp.Net web api expose Wsdl? If not how would the client figure out what operation is available to them?
Arguably the best feature of Mvc is the modelbinder. How robust is the WCF equivalent?
So can someone tell me what advantage does the Asp.net web api bring to the table? WCF seems overwhelmingly the more powerful/scalable choice, imo. About the only thing the Mvc Web Api has over the WCF model is probably ease of development, but that means squat if it ends up being a serious design limitation down the road.
First, I suggest you read my post on the subject:
http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/idof/archive/2012/03/05/wcf-or-asp-net-web-apis-my-two-cents-on-the-subject.aspx
Regarding your WSDL question - since the WebApi does not use SOAP, it does not require a WSDL, and does not export one. You can use Hypermedia to return resources with a list of possible activity URLs (think of it as a self-describing resource)
The choice depends on what we want to do.
ASP.NET Web API is a framework for building non-SOAP based services over HTTP only - so there aren't more transport protocols available using this framework.
WCF / Windows Communication Foundation is a framework for exchanging SOAP-based messages - here we use a lot of transport protocols: HTTP, TCP, Named pipes, MSMQ, etc...
I am not sure about which one has better performance regarding the amount of data, maybe WCF since we can use low protocols. Any comments are appreciated.
The WCF Web API primarily focuses on REST implementations. If you are setting up a REST implementation, the standard WCF bits are a bit of a pain in the rear. If you are setting up RESTful services, you will find the WCF Web API a much nicer experience. If you are setting up SOAP services, then the WCF Web API is not your best friend, and you are better off using WCF for your services.
Use WCF for intranet/B2B sites n Web API for B2C/C2C/internet sites...SOAP/XML is still the standard for intra-businesses communication n it's not going to go away!!!
I am new to WCF and Web Services in general. What are the improvements that WCF brings to the table? Can anyone give a side-by-side example of a traditional web service and the same one written using WCF and point out the differences and advantages?
Duplicate question Moving ASP.net webservices to WCF
EDIT: Think i found the answer you where looking for a side-by-side code based comparison and even better it's from MSDN: Comparing ASP.NET Web Services to WCF Based on Development
There are several related questions:
Difference between aspnet web method and wcf webservice
Benfits of using WCF
Moving aspnet web services to wcf
However you asked for a side by side comparison in which case i think Sam's Wcf vs ASMX blog article is more what you are looking for.
Quoting ad-verbatim (let me know if i should just leave it as a link):
WCF vs. ASMX
Protocols Support
WCF
HTTP
TCP
Named pipes
MSMQ
Custom
UDP
ASMX
HTTP only
Hosting
ASMX
Can be hosted only with HttpRuntime on IIS.
WCF
A WCF component can be hosted in any kind of environment in .NET 3.0, such as a console application, Windows application, or IIS.
WCF services are known as 'services' as opposed to web services because you can host services without a web server.
Self-hosting the services gives you the flexibility to use transports other than HTTP.
WCF Backwards Compatibility
The purpose of WCF is to provide a unified programming model for distributed applications.
Backwards compatibility
WCF takes all the capabilities of the existing technology stacks while not relying upon any of them.
Applications built with these earlier technologies will continue to work unchanged on systems with WCF installed.
Existing applications are able to upgrade with WCF
New WCF transacted application will work with existing transaction application built on System.Transactions
WCF & ASMX Integration
WCF can use WS-* or HTTP bindings to communicate with ASMX pages
Limitations of ASMX:
An ASMX page doesn’t tell you how to deliver it over the transports and to use a specific type of security. This is something that WCF enhances quite significantly.
ASMX has a tight coupling with the HTTP runtime and the dependence on IIS to host it. WCF can be hosted by any Windows process that is able to host the .NET Framework 3.0.
ASMX service is instantiated on a per-call basis, while WCF gives you flexibility by providing various instancing options such as Singleton, private session, per call.
ASMX provides the way for interoperability but it does not provide or guarantee end-to-end security or reliable communication.
WCF is far wider in scope than ASP.Net webservices.
WCF can run in any application. APS.Net webservices only run in IIS.
WCF supports models like ReST, Remoting, SOAP, MSMQ etc. ASP.Net only supports SOAP
WCF is more configurable.
WCF supports a more declarative way of programming. You can get more done with less code.
ASP.NET Web Services are pretty much just that. Web Services. They're SOAP/WSDL based and provide their services only to the web.
WCF Services offer a much more flexible framework. For instance, depending on how the service is defined, it can be a Web Service hosted in IIS which serialized its data via XML and uses the REST model...or it can be a Remote Windows Service that is hosted in it's own process and serializes its data via binary. All of this is achieved using the different Service/Data contracts in WCF.
In short...you can make a WCF service look almost identical to a .NET 2.0 Web Service fairly easily but, with a little work, you can do a WHOLE LOT MORE.