i have a API which is hosted using Remoting for security and creating a business logic which is shared among all my other applications
now i want to convert this API into WCF do i need to rewrite it or is there any option available
Some great resources out there on the web for this topic:
From .NET Remoting to the Windows Communication Foundation (WCF)
Migrating .NET Remoting to WCF (and even ASMX!)
And a lot more - just Google or Bing for them!
Given that your application is "layered" - so the business logic resides in its own classes - this should be fairly straightforward.
Good places to start to learn WCF are MSDN here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms734712.aspx and the "fish book", "Programming WCF Services", here: http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9780596526993.do
Related
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 These attempts have all been superseded by the ASP.NET Web API.)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.
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 have not worked on Web Services, but now I am planning to work on WCF Services in my next web application project. Do we need to have prior working experience on Web Services to work on WCF ?
can we start learning/working on WCF directly with out working experience in Web Services ?
You do not need any prior experience in web services to use WCF, though it would of course help in some situations. Having said that, WCF does have a learning curve (like everything), so you should consider going through some training, like the excellent Pluralsight training.
In addition to some sort of training, a must have resource for WCF in my opinion is Juval Lowy's book, Programming WCF Services.
Good luck!
What do you mean by Web Services? Do you mean ASP.NET Web Services (ASMX)? If so, you don't need experience with them to learn WCF.
WCF is API for creating web services (and remote services generally) so once you start learning WCF you will start learning how to create and work with web services.
I think yes. It should not be a problem to write a WCF service even if you do not have web service development background. At least, I did not have this experience at the beginning :). I have posted a link to good WCF book at:
Recommended beginner's learning resources for WCF
I'm building a workflow app to investigate the technology. I can't decide whether to go for a web service (and a technology with which I'm basically familiar) with WebServiceInputActivity's or WCF and ReceiveActivity's (and a new technology that I'll have to learn).
Are there any major reasons to go either way?
Clarification:
Are there any major (architectural) reasons relating specifically to WF to go either way? I appreciate the input of the respondants, so far, but they focus on WCF rather than what the implications are for my workflow and its lifetime, maintainability, performance, expandability, etc. if I choose WebServices or WCF.
WF and WCF are very much hand in hand in .net 4. I'd definitely suggest the latter.
No doubt, it is WCF. Migrating ASP.NET Web Services to WCF
SUMMARY: Windows Communication
Foundation (WCF) provides a unified
framework for rapidly building
service-oriented applications that
makes it easy to build and consume
secure, reliable, and transacted Web
services. WCF’s single programming
model unifies the capabilities in
ASMX, WSE, Remoting, COM+, and MSMQ;
therefore developers need to learn
only one programming model.
Agree with the others here that you should go with WCF.
Just thought to add one more point, that just because you use WCF does not mean that you cannot access existing web services. You can use a WCF client with basichttpbinding, to access existing non WCF web services.
You are making a mistake to call ASMX web services "web services" and suggesting that WCF can't be used to make web services. A WCF service using basicHttpBinding is exactly like an old ASMX service.
The best reason to use WCF instead of ASMX is that Microsoft has now stated that ASMX is a "legacy technology", and that they will not be fixing bugs in it.
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.