I am writing an application that has one Windows Service that needs to communicate with another Windows Service. The "target" service will accept a request from the "source" service and will perform a task. The "source" service will not wait for a response, so the request should return as soon as possible.
The plan was to have the "target" service host a WCF service which the "source" will communicate with. Once the request is received I need to communicate with the host Windows Service to tell it to do the work. I was thinking that the "target" WCF service would put a message on a MSMQ which the "target" Windows service will monitor. Once this is done the WCF service can return back to the caller.
Does this sound like a sensible approach for allowing a WCF service to tell a hosting Windows Service to perform a task?
Kind Regards
Michael
Allow me to disagree. Based simply on what you've described, using MSMQ to communicate between the "target" WCF service and the hosting Windows service seems extremely heavyweight to me. MSMQ allows different processes to communicate in a failsafe manner. In your case, the WCF service is hosted in the same process as the Windows service. Thus, while MSMQ as a commmunication mechanism between the two would work, it's not necessary.
Additionally, using the MSMQ binding between the "target" WCF service and the "source" WCF service makes sense if the two WCF services are not always running at the same time. For example, if the "target" WCF service is not always running, the MSMQ binding would allow the "source" WCF service to still send tasks. These tasks would be stored in the MSMQ to be retrieved when the "target" WCF service begins running. However, it sounds like both services will be running, so I can't see the need for the MSMQ binding.
For selecting WCF bindings, refer to this SO post.
C# - WCF - inter-process communication
Let me address one other thing. When your "target" WCF service receives a task request from the "source," simply communicating the task back to the Windows service is not going to do anything in and of itself. The Windows service is running, yes, but it does not have a thread of execution that you can leverage. The point is that in order to make task processing asynchronous, you'll need to start a thread to manage the task(s). I would suggest leveraging the ThreadPool to do this.
Hope this helps.
Yeah, that is a good approach. MSMQ is perfect for this task - the source service can send a request to the target by putting a message on the queue via WCF. MSMQ is good anytime you want to send a request to a service for asynchronous processing, especially if you don't need to get a response back. If you do need a response, you can setup the source as a WCF service as well, and the target can send a message back if needed. There are several different ways to accomplish this with the MSMQ binding.
#Matt
Thanks for your help.
After thinking about it a bit more and see how your approach would make things easier to setup and use. I need to have the "target" service send the outcome of the work back to the "source", so I will probably use nettcp and use a callback. The plan then is to setup a new thread, do the work and once its finished send a response back to the "source".
#Andy
Thanks for you help.
I took a look at msmq, but seeing as I would probably have to setup a new thread once I receive the message I might as well let the web service do the work.
Related
On WCF callbacks, one doubt is still nagging in my mind, The callback happens only when the client makes a call to the server. Don't we have a mechanism that the client registers with the service, and after a while something happens at the server and the service notifies all the connected clients. In COM we do this by generating a COM exe server and keeping a list of all connected clients and trigger an event whenever the COM exe server deems necessary and that will end up as a callback at the client end.
Are you really looking for a messaging implementation like MSMQ?
Using MSMQ, you can setup your client to be a subscriber to your server's "messages". The server in turn is your publisher and it will produce the effect you seem to desire.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms711472(v=vs.85).aspx
You want to look at Duplex WCF bindings...
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms731064(v=vs.110).aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms752254.aspx
Another framework you may want to evaluate is NServiceBus ...
http://docs.particular.net/NServiceBus/how-pub-sub-works
I have a WCF service that all clients connect to in order to get notifications \ reminders (using a CALLBACK interface they implement). Currently the WCF service is self-hosted, but the plan is to have it hosted in a Windows Service.
The WCF service has a 'Publish', 'Subscribe' and 'Unsubscribe' operations.
I need to have a background worker thread of some sort poll an SQL server database table constantly [every XXX minutes], and look for certain 'reminder' rows. Once it finds them - it should notify all the connected clients.
I thought of 2 ways of achieving this.
.
METHOD A :
Have a separate EXE project (don't want it to be a console, so what should it be - a Windows Service ?) that will start and run a background thread. The background thread will connect to the 'Reminder' service as one of its clients. The background thread will poll the database, and once it finds something - it will send a 'Publish' message to the WCF service, that will make the WCF service send the reminder to all the subscribed clients.
.
METHOD B :
Somehow make the background thread run within the WCF service project, and when it detects a new reminder row in the database, somehow make it 'signal' the WCF service with the info, and the WCF service will then send this info to all subscribed clients.
.
Which method is better ? Any other suggestions ?
If this is a long running process, a windows service is the perfect solution.
Your main Win Service thread will be polling the DB, queuing the results into some kind of supplier/consumer thread safe collection.
You can host a WCF service within the win service, which can then consume (remove) any results from the queue and pass them back to the client as requested (calls into the WCF will come in on their own thread)
This is a pretty common architecture, and not difficult to implement.
Method A:
If you were to create two separate hosts (i.e. one for the WCF service and one for the "Polling" service) then you really have only one option to make it all work nicely.
Windows Service communication is very limited (without the help of a service endpoint, e.g. WCF). Therefor, if you were to host your "Polling" service in a Windows Service, you must couple it with a WCF service anyway.
It is then feasible to host both services together in one Windows Service and by manually instantiating the WCF host and passing into the constructor a "Polling" service.
protected override void OnStart(string[] args)
{
//...
// This would be you "polling" service that would start a background thread to poll the db.
var notificationHost = new PollingService();
// This is your WCF service which you will be "self hosted".
var serviceHost = new WcfService(notificationHost);
new ServiceHost(serviceHost).Open();
//...
}
This is far from ideal because you need to communicate via events between the two services, plus your WCF service must run on singleton mode for manual instantiation to work... So this leaves you with...
Method B:
If you were to host the "Polling" services inside your WCF service, you are going to run into a number of issues.
You need to be aware of the number of instances of the "Polling" services that gets created. If your WCF service has been configured to be instantiated for every session, you could end up with too many "Polling" services and that may end up killing your db/servers.
To avoid the first issue, you may need to set a singleton WCF service, which may lead to a scaling issue in the near future where one WCF service instance is not enough to handle the number of connection requests.
Method C:
Given the drawbacks in Method A and B, the best solution would be to host two independent WCF services.
This is your regular service where you have subscriber/unsubscribe/publish.
This is your polling singleton service with subscribe/unsubscribe.
The idea is that your regular service, upon receiving a subscriber will open a new connection to your polling service or use an existing one (depending on how you configure your session) and wait for a reply. Your polling service is a long running WCF service that polls your db and publish the notification to its subscribers (i.e. the other WCF host).
Pros:
You are assured that there will be only one polling service.
You could scale your solution to host the regular service in IIS and the polling service in Windows Service.
Communication limitations is minimal between the two services and no need for events.
Test each service interdependently through their interfaces.
Low coupling and high cohesion between the services (this is what we want!).
Cons:
More services means more interfaces and contracts to maintain.
Higher complexity.
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 create a service which can process queued requests on a configured time interval. For example go to the web and get financial data from a site the requires we limit requests to once per second. I am new to WCF and I am not sure if (1) WCF with MSMQ a proper choice for implementing this? and (2) if so what is the best mechanism for enforcing the interval? a thread wait? a timer (not sure how that would work).
There's nothing built into WCF that would allow you to handle this explicitly, so you'd still need to do all the work yourself.
While your service could certainly process requests from MSMQ, the MSMQ listeners in WCF will pick and process messages as soon as possible; you can't configure them to process messages every X seconds only (you could fake it given the right tools, but seems to me it wouldn't be all that great).
One option if your delay between processing requests isn't very short, would be to use an intermediate queue to hold pending requests. That is, whatever sends the real requests writes them to a queue nobody is directly listening to (queue A), while your WCF service listens on a differet queue (queue B). Then, have something else (could be as simple as a script run from task scheduler) that runs once every X seconds/minutes/whatever and moves just 1 message from queue A to queue B, thus triggering the actual WCF service to run.
WCF and MSMQ are a great team! Definitely worth checking out.
The part that WCF doesn't provide out of the box is the "check every x seconds". The best approach here would be to host your WCF service inside a Windows NT Service, and have a timer inside the NT Service that goes to check the MSMQ queue only once every x seconds. Shouldn't be too hard to implement, really. The beauty is: you can very easily self-host a WCF Service inside a NT Service - just a few lines of code, and you get complete control over what's happening, and when. See the MSDN docs on How to Host a WCF service in a managed application for details.
Resources:
Tom Hollander's blog post series on MSMQ, WCF, IIS: Getting them to play nice
Motley Queue: MSMQ and WCF Getting Started
SOAizing MSMQ with WCF (and why it's worth it)
Or you could just use a window service to consume the messages instead. If you are not using the WCF functionality of consuming a message as soon as it is posted, then you probably have no reason to use wcf in the first place
Is there any standard way of implementing some sort of a write-through buffer for a WCF call? I need a mechanism to be able to write to a bufffer or cache which gets persisted and then writes it to the service. If the service is down the call will be transfered when the service is up and running again. I know you can use WCF over MSMQ which does exactly what I need, but I wounder if there is another way of doing this, so I don't need to deploy MSMQ to the client.
Best regards,
Michael
The problem is that MSMQ is designed to do this - if you want to do this without MSMQ then you must implement your own queuing mechanism that functions like MSMQ and deploy that to the client.