In our layered application, we are accessing database via WCF calls. We are creating and disposing contexts per request. Also we are using POCO approach.
My question is, in pure POCO model (completely persistent ignorant POCOs) is it possible to track the changes, while we are creating and disposing context per request (as previous context is disposed in that service call)? If yes how EF handles this situation? As far as I can see 2 mechanisms (snapshot based change tracking and notification based change tracking with proxies) will not be able to handle this? If not, how should we handle context so that we are able to track the changes?
I'd say:
Do not use self-tracking entities in a pure SOA environment:
The self-tracking entities only work when your clients use
the generated proxy classes.
When you're doing SOA by the book, you cannot expect your clients
to be .Net, or even more, .Net 4.0; Which is the only scenario
in which self-tracking entities will work. Your services will be
useless to any other clients.
Just My 2 cents,
Regards,
Koen
Self-Tracking Entities does indeed solve this problem if you are capable of sharing the Model with the client as opposed to using metadata generated by the reference.
Abstract the STEs and reference them from the client, you will have access to tracking disconnected from the context.
Unfortunately you won't find a simple solution to this in Entity Framework v1.0.
There has been much discussion and little resolution. It is one of the many known problems with EF v1.0 and one way or another you will end up having to write lot's of code to handle this.
In .NET 4.0 the ADO.NET team have introduced Self-Tracking Entities to tackle this very problem.
Related
The OP in this question asks about using an WCF/OData as an internal data access layer.
Arguments of using WCF/OData as access layer instead of EF/L2S/nHibernate directly
The resounding reply seems to be don't do it. I'm in similar position to the OP, but have a concern not raised in the original question. I'm trying to develop (natively) for a lot of different platforms but want to keep as much of the data and business logic server side as possible. So I'll have iOS/Android/Web (MVC)/Desktop applications. Currently, I have a single WinForms applications with an ORM data access layer (LLBLGen Pro).
I'm envisioning moving most of my business / data access logic (possibly still with LLBLGen or other ORM) behind a WCF / OData interface. Then making all my different clients on the different platforms very thin (basically UI and WCF calls).
Is this also overengineered? Am I missing a simpler solution?
I cannot see any problem in your architecture or consider it overengeenered as a OData is a standard protocol and your concept conforms the DRY principle as well.
I change the question: Why would you implement the same business logic in each client to introduce more possible bugs and loose the possibility to fix the errors at one single and centralized place. Your idea makes you able to implement the security layer only once.
OData is a cross-platform standard and you can find a OData libraries for each development platform (MSDN, OData.org, JayData for JavaScript). Furthermore, you can use OData FunctionImports/Service methods and entity-level methods, which will simplify your queries.
If you are running multiplatform development, then you may find more practical to choose platform-agnostic communication protocol, such as HTTP, rather than bringing multiple drivers and ORMs to access your data Sources directly. In addition since OData is a REST protocol, you don't need much on the Client side: anything that can format OData HTTP requests and parse HTTP responses. There are however a few aspects to be aware of:
OData server is not a replacement for an SQL database. It supports batches but they are not the same as DB transactions (although in many cases can be used to model transactional operations). It supports parent-child relations but it does not support JOINs in classic SQL sense. So you have to plan what you expose as OData entity. It's too easy to build an OData server using WCF Data Services wrapping EF model. Too easy because People often expose low Level database content instead of building high level domain types.
As for today an OData multiplatorm clients are still under development, but they are coming. If I may suggest something I am personally working on, have a look at Simple.Data OData adapter (https://github.com/simplefx/Simple.OData, look at its Wiki pages for examples) - it has a NuGet package. While this a Client Library that only supports .NET 4.0, part of it is being extracted to be published as a portable class Library Simple.OData.Client to support .NET 4.x, Windows Store, Silverlight 5, Windows Phone 8, Android and iOS. In fact, if you check winrt branch of the Git repository, you will find a multiplatform PCL already, it's just not published on NuGet yet.
I want to know if using Self Tacking Entities (in Entity Framework) is recommended with WCF services? If yes, then can you guide me to a tutorial which may guide how to do that?
Actually, I am going to develop a WPF application using Prism with MEF and MVVM. I have decided to use Entity Framework. I want suggestions and advices regarding this approach.
Any help will be appreciated.
I want to know if using Self Tacking Entities (in Entity Framework) is
recommended with WCF services?
It depends who you ask. If you ask MS they will tell you Yes because they simply don't have anything better to offer. STEs were response to this very old MS Connect suggestion. The problem is that EF itself has terrible bad support for merging changes between two entity graphs (you must do it completely yourselves) and developers working on MS platform (sometimes including me) share some common behaviors:
They are lazy to develop their own solution to problem and they expect some magic directly in APIs provided by MS.
Most of the time they are not trained / skilled / competent in the technology they have to use, because they have to move to a new one too often.
The only APIs they know are part of .NET Framework. They don't look for other options neither they compare features.
First two points are result of MS strategy where RAD become synonym for designer (or newly also T4 templates).
I share #Richard opinion about STEs. I would add one additional drawback of STEs - they move large datasets between participants. If you decide to get an entity graph from the server, change a single entity in the graph and push data back they will transfer again the whole graph. Transferring only changed entities results in fighting with STE's core logic. I'm also afraid that they track changes completely on per entity level instead of per property level. In case of modification to entities with large binary or string data it can result in transferring too much unneeded data between the service and the database and between the service and the client.
Anyway for a simple application with low data traffic and small entities they can do a good job and allow you building your application quickly but without strict separation of concerns. You will get entities from service and bind them directly to WPF UI and they will be able to track changes for you. Later you will push entities back to service and they will be able to persist changes. Your client and service will be tightly coupled but in some scenarios it can be good enough.
I would avoid self tracking entities in general - I blogged about it here.
Create your own DTOs and use them to manage the transfer of data - then biuold your POCO objects in the service and use them with entity framework for persistence
If you want self tracking then there is a slightly cleaner approach here
There seems to be quite a bit of information regarding using NHibernate and WCF Web Services but I'm struggling to find a definitive guide on how to implement the two technologies together in a efficient, thread safe way.
Specifically I want to grab the ISession object and uses that to get and save data through my existing repositories. My Business Objects, Unit Tests and ASP.NET Web Application all use the NHibernate framework and it works just great (it's my first hobby project using an ORM). My big question is how to combine this great framework with WCF Web Services.
I've read that version 3.0 NHibernate has NHibernate.Context.WcfOperationSessionContext but I'm unsure of it's implementation (see this question). From what I understand, one option is to store the ISession object in the OperationContext?
Can anyone point me in the direction of a implementation example?
Many thanks.
Here is a post describing, in detail, all the steps for registering and using the WcfOperationSessionContext. It also includes instructions for using it with the agatha-rrsl project.
WCF and Nhibernate work together in Sharp Architecture project. You can have a look at their implementation
I am going to use Entity Framework and WCF in my application. The suggested practice, as I saw, is using POCO with Entity Framework and also using POCO classes as DataContracts. That is actually what POCO and Attributes are used for, -if I am not wrong.
However I am asked to use seperate classses for Entity Framework POCO's and WCF DataContracts. And to use a mapper between POCO's and DataContracts. Like, Foo and FooContract with same properties.
I am on the first approachs side but I wonder if the second approach (seperate classes approach) provides flexibility to the application or is it just a waste of effort.
I will be grateful if you can share your thoughts and experiences about using seperate classes for POCO and DataContracts, pros and cons about that.
Having separate classes for your POCOs and your Contracts will allow you to create Message Oriented services rather than RPC Style services.
Having Message Oriented services will allow your services to be more flexible, do more work, and be less tied to the objects that each service uses.
Message Based services also fall more in line with the spirit of Service Oriented Architectures. You can read more about Message Oriented services at Wikipedia.
I would also suggest picking up Service-Oriented Architecture: Concepts, Technology & Design by Thomas Erl if you are interested in the principles behind good service design.
Having different data classes at persistence layer and contract level gives you the most flexibility. For example, you may not want to expose all your persistent fields over a contract or you may want to expose different hierarchy of data over a contract etc. It also allows to change both independently of each other.
It may seem at first that using different classes at both level is duplication - but over long term, efforts are not so much (compared to flexibility that you get). You may get tempted to use same classes and develop different one when need arises but issue with that approach is that within short time frame, your services get tightly coupled with data classes rather than information/data that services should be exposing/working with.
I agree with #JustinNiessner and the best guidance I have found for architecting .NET applications using SOLID principles is a series of posts by .Net Junkie and the associated codeplex project. Clearly stated and informative, well worth reading.
I'm looking at new architecture for my site and was wondering if pairing NHibernate with a web service core is a good idea. What I want to do is make my webservice the core of my business, from the site front ends to the utilties I write. I'm trying to make all of my UIs completely ignorant of anything but my service API's.
In a simple strawman experiement, I'm running into issues with Serialzing my Iesi ISets....this is causing me to rethink the strategy altogether.
I know I could just develop a core Library (dll) and reference that in each of my applications, but maintaining that dll's version over a minimum of 6 applications seems like it's going to cause me much pain.
With NHibernate, what are the pro's and con's of those two approaches?
I see no problem in using NHibernate and webservices together - I just don't think it's a good idea to send the entities themselves over "to the other side".
A better approach is to use a set of DTOs that are made for the service - then you won't be running into issues like that of serializing unknown types and such.
You can use a library like AutoMapper to do the mapping from the entities to the DTOs.
There's a lot of stuff written about this, some of it:
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/FirstLaw.html
http://ayende.com/Blog/archive/2009/05/14/the-stripper-pattern.aspx
http://elegantcode.com/2008/04/27/dtos-or-serialized-domain-entities/
DTOs vs Serializing Persisted Entities
As a side note for the service it self, you could design wise use an approach like Davy Brion describes here: http://davybrion.com/blog/2009/11/requestresponse-service-layer-series/
I don't know NHibernate, but want to remind you that you should be using WCF for new web service development, unless you are stuck in the past (.NET 2.0). Microsoft now considers ASMX web services to be "legacy technology", and you can imagine what that means.