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.
Related
Description
I am curious about how a DNX load balanced setup will work. I am accustomed to working with an ARR (Application Request Routing)/Server Farm setup with IIS like this. Typically there is nothing done on the code side with the ARR/Server Farm setup. However, with the cross platform support that DNX provides, while getting rid of IIS, this sort of load balanced setup seems like it will now need to be handled in the code. Or at least in my case I would be responsible for code deploys as opposed to a Network Admin that would install updates. The closest that I could find is session management. Can you do load balancing with this, potentially, I just do not see it there yet.
Functional Impact
Decide to download a third party ARR, use MS ARR, or Role your own ARR?
What I need
I would like to keep this from "I like this best" responses as much as possible and see responses that are "Here is why you need this" or "Here is why I found this to work well". I know that dnx is a new environment, but the experience of setting up LB servers in OSX and Linux is not. With the move to cross platform, I do not expect that the MS ARR will work on OSX or Linux. I am not very familiar with those OS's so I do not know where to begin.
Question(s)
1) Is the https://github.com/aspnet/Session/ project (or another project) expected to contain an ARR?
If no on 1
2) Is there an ARR that is cross platform (Windows, OSX, Linux)?
There's no out-of-the-box load balancer for ASP.NET 5.
Your solution is the right one, add a load balancer in front of DNX. On Windows you can use IIS, on cross plat you can use something like ngnix
No changes and no support for in-app.
ASP.NET 5 is not where this should be going. IIS will still exist and the ARR module is a part of IIS itself. Not the app.
On the page itself it says:
Works With: IIS 7, IIS 7.5, IIS 8, IIS 8.5, IIS 10
As for supporting different kind of servers? I don't see why not since the ARR module is basically just a reverse-proxy.
Nothing need to change. You can even compile to CoreCLR and have it hosted on a farm of Linux machines with Apache but have an IIS server with the ARR Module set in Reverse-Proxy to forward load balance the requests.
So we have developed an application that uses the .net 4.0 full(extended) libraries. Our workstations only have .Net 4.0 client on them. Our applications and infrastructure teams are wary about having us deploy .Net 4.0 full to all the workstations and wants to take some time to discuss and test.
Is there some way to deploy the extra .Net Extended dlls with our application so we can go around this?
No, you cannot supplement with just the dlls. All you can do is update to the full profile or find the features in your app that require the full profile and re-write them to avoid that requirement.
There's actually not that much difference between the two profiles. See the answers to this question for a more complete explanation:
Client Profile vs Full
That means that you may have an easier time than you think either re-writing the app to avoid the features, or convincing your staff to update the profile deployed to the workstations. It's likely just some advanced WCF features or a type provided with ASP.Net (like HttpUtility) that you're missing.
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
How can you detect whether a PC has the .Net 4 Full Profile installed, as opposed to the .Net 4 Client Profile?
Here are the registry keys. Also if your application is targeting the full .NET 4.0 profile and this profile is not installed you will probably not go as far as checking the registry keys because your application won't run at all. So this check is better to be done when deploying the application on the client machine as part of the setup and deployment project. You could use a launch condition:
I am just curious to know the reason why it's not possible to host an ASP.Net web service other then IIS ? While in WCF it's possible to host a service in IIS, WAS or any console application.
Please clear the doubt..
ASP.NET is actually not specifically bound to IIS. The .NET Framework includes an HttpRuntime which may be used to write a custom hosting platform. You could easily write a console application, like you can for WCF, that will provide the ASP.NET runtime without IIS.
Technically speaking, you could also write an Apache module that hooked into either a separate .NET process hosting the ASP.NET HttpRuntime, or possibly hook directly into a .NET assembly. I don't know much about writing extensions to Apache, however assuming you can bridge the Apache unmanage to .NET managed gap, you would be able to host ASP.NET in Apache (which should be possible, you might need a native & managed C++ library to mediate.)
Microsoft's .NET framework is amazingly extensible. You can pretty much achieve whatever you set your mind to, if you have the will and the time (and perhaps the funds.) However, the .NET platform does encapsulate an immense amount of functionality, and it is up to Microsoft to choose how they spend their money. Naturally, they have their own business to worry about, and I would not expect them to expend tremendous amounts of money giving a leading edge to their competitors (it would be bad business, and quite a disappointing competitive practice, if you ask me.)