i am developing the wcf services in .net framework 4.0.for to host the service in server what are the minimum requirements of the system i.e minimum iis version etc.
what are the minimum requirements the system should have?
WCF is part of the .NET Framework as of 3.0. I would assume that any Windows system that can run .NET 3.0 should be able to run WCF. Having said that, a little googling provides the following information:
For minimum requirements, I would say (based on experience and some googling):
Windows XP SP2/Windows Server 2003 R2/SP1
IIS 5.1
WCF System Requirements
However, with versions of IIS prior to version 7.0 - the absence of WAS will prevent you from using any of the non-HTTP bindings. This could be a significant limitation, depending on what bindings you intend the service to use.
Hosting in Internet Information Services
Related
I am developing some kind of communication and data-interchange system to use in various applications that my company is producing. There will be SignalR hub for messaging and WCF service for file streaming.
I was thinking of developing a Hub library in .NET 4.5. Also I plan to enable Hub hosting in some windows process and IIS.
Thing that bothers me is that I have to support Windows XP clients, so I cannot use .NET 4.5 for developing a client library.
My question is: Are there bad effects of providing a .NET 4.0 client library for all clients, even though there are more clients with Windows 7 or Windows 8? My concern is about performance and features - am I going to lose any of that if I go with .NET 4.0 client?
I've been working with WCF fairly extensively for over two years now and have almost always taken the "lazy" route and deployed everything through IIS. Some of the reading I've done lately is starting to trend to where developers are using custom hosts in windows services or as console applications. Is there major benefits to switching over to that paradigm or is my current strategy of hosting everything in IIS give me everything I need to do WCF services?
When you go the self-hosting route, you limit the scalability & reliability options of your services. If scalability isn't a concern, you still need to consider all the service monitoring functionality that you'd have to create to be sure your services are running reliably.
If I had to pick two reasons to prefer IIS hosting over self-hosting they would be the flexibility of the WAS service instantiation model for IIS 7.x and the Windows Server AppFabric features for WCF 4.
If you're using a pre-WAS version of IIS (5 or 6), Windows services may be your best (only?) good bet for hosting WCF services that communicate via named pipes or netTCP (anything other than HTTP).
In the 3rd Edition of Programming WCF Services (link), Lowy suggests using Windows Server AppFabric in some situations, and suggests self hosting in a few cases - when you need to use the service bus and IIS 7.5 is not available, for example. Pages 22 and 23 show a couple of simple charts to help determine when to use self hosting over IIS, WAS or AppFabric. I think the first chapter (maybe more) is available for free if you get a Kindle sample.
Other than these scenarios, I'm not sure why you'd ever want to chose any sort of self-hosting over WAS. I'm curious to see if anyone presents good reasons.
we are currently on windows server 2008 R2, IIS 7.5 and we are going to open some of our data via WCF services.
To do that, we are planing to host our services on IIS but I heard that it is not a good idea for WCF services.
The problem with the WAS is that it is general purpose hosting engine. it's actually unaware that it's actually hosting a WCF service or a website (as far as I know)
I heard that we can install an extension to the WAS called the Windows Server AppFabric.
does anybody have any experience on
AppFabric?
should my app have to use so called
'Service Bus' to use AppFabric?
should I go ahead and definitely
install it?
at most basic level, how and where
can I install it? does it require
any licence?
Thanks in advance.
I don't think IIS us a bad idea - many developers use IIS to host their WCF services. IMHO you'd only use what you need, so if all you need is a hosting framework, then IIS is a very good option for WCF services. It is (almost) unaware that it's hosting a WCF service, but that in the majority of the cases isn't an issue.
Windows Server AppFabric as it's currently released provides three capabilities: a distributed caching system (so if you need to scale out your service you can use this cache to share state among the nodes); a packaging / deployment interface (in which you can package a project and deploy it a little easier in IIS); and a management / monitoring interface (where you can monitor the instances of WCF and Workflow services which are running in your machine).
Answers to your questions:
Yes, some people have experience with it :)
No, the application doesn't have to use it. You'd only use the ServiceBus if you need its functionality (relay)
Only if you need it. If you don't need caching or the monitoring capabilities, for example, then I'd say you don't need it. I've found in the past that the least number of components I have in my system, the less likely it is to break.
Go to http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsserver/ee695849.aspx. And AFAIK you don't need any license, but you can check on the download page to see if it has more information.
There is no real common reason why not to host a service in IIS/WAS.
If you want to absolutely, totally 100% make sure that your service is continuously running some process, such as a continuous loop or polling monitor, and if any interruption no matter how brief is a major issue, then you'd want to look at alternative hosts.
Win Server AppFabric is most useful for WF Service hosting and caching. Note however that Win Server AppFabric + Win Server Service Bus 1.0 represents the first steps in convergence between the Azure platform and the Windows Server private platform.... In other words, whichever of the two ways you choose, that's what is going to be earning your bread and butter in 5 years time.
Simple question -> for dedicated website hosting, do i need to download and install the full ASP.NET 4.0 package, or just the client.
I understand the client is required for end users who need the .NET framework for their windows form applications.
But i'm not sure for a web hosting sceanrio.
Also, don't worry about talking about x86 or x64 - i understand the differences with the packages, etc.
The ASP.Net runtime is only included with the Full installation.
(This is one of the biggest savings of the client profile; ASP.Net is large)
Yes you would need the full. The client profile specifically excludes ASP.NET.
I'm trying to develop and deploy a WCF service using VS2008 and Vista home premium. I don't have IIS running and understand I don't need to if I manually configure the WCF app ... using netsh.exe I believe.
Can anyone give me clear guidance on how to go from the development project in VS2008 to a useable service?
Many thanks.
A WCF service needs a host to run. As IIS is out of the question you have a couple of possibilities left:
Write a Windows NT service and host it there
Write a managed application which will host your service (less robust)
As far as netsh.exe is concerned I don't see much relevance with WCF.