I have a Windows application in .Net 2.0 that uses several levels of configuration files. For reasons out of my control, the application consists of a Windows app (.exe) project and several DLLs, each of which has its own app.config file.
I have successfully figured out how to read the config file for each DLL, using (in C#)
ConfigurationManager.OpenMappedExeConfiguration("my DLL's config file path", ConfigurationUserLevel.None);
This works just fine - I can confirm that I get a Configuration object from this method when pointed to the file path name of my DLL's configuration file ("foo.dll.config"). However, when I try to access a custom configuration section, I get an exception saying that the data type for my custom configuration section cannot be found.
What else do I need to do to get the typing information available to my code when loading a configuration file in this manner?
It's unfortunate but true: the way to handle this is to copy the configuration from the .dll.config files into the applications' config file. The only exception has something to do with the Settings system used in Windows Forms. I think that does the OpenMappedConfiguration for you, but I'm not sure.
I've never known why they didn't unify this in .NET 2.0 and solve the problem. Maybe I should ask.
Earlier in the day, I asked a question like this as relates to WCF, in the Oslo Forum on MSDN (http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/oslo/thread/c93ee7f3-4f9b-4044-b1f0-43ad72fb508d). As I was searching for a blog post or some other answer (as I said above, "maybe I should ask"), the answer to my Forum post arrived.
Long story short, and somewhat tongue-in-cheek, the answer is: they didn't fix this in .NET 2.0 because they were waiting for Oslo to solve the problem.
Without trying to avoid downvotes by making sense out of that, I'll just mention: Oslo will encourage models of applications and application components to be stored in a central repository. That will include models of per-instance configuration. The theory is that all such data would be stored in a single repository (at least per-system). So, no more question of where the configuration file is located it's all in one place. No more question of finding the assembly containing the configuration section metadata - the metadata is stored in the repository along with the configuration data.
Ask me tomorrow, and I may feel differently, but right now, I may be picking up the Oslo religion...
Related
Hi I am trying to set up a dotnet core library app that requires certain information from a appsettings.json to run. I understand how to have an application use the appsettings.json file via the builder etc. However I also want my library to use this file for its own configuration. Obviously the consuming app would have to know the settings to have in the appsettings.json file but for my purposes that is not a problem. Does anyone have an example of this working? What I have found so far are not that great and involve loading the appsettings.json every time we instantiate the configuration class in the library. There must be a better way than this.
That's exactly Options are created for!
You should not read settings file - DI will give you strongly-typed class/struct with parameters you need. Loaded from all configured sources (appsettings.json, environment variables etc), and updated automatically (if required/configured).
Check this documentation - sample is pretty short and copy-pasting it here isn't wise.
My client insists not to store prone-to-change configuration settings in the Web.Config file for our webservice (WCF). His reasoning is that he will have to deploy the application every time he wants to change this or that setting in the configuration file. He, then, told me to store this configuration information in the database because, he says, that way one can change it whenever one needs without re-deploying the whole application, and because it is a more central place if we ever need to have more than one instance of the service running.
Of course I find this argument and reasoning plainly wrong. However, I would like to provide him with clear evidence in that he his mistaken. Can anyone please point me out a source or two I may site to show him that changes in Web.Config are automatically propagated to the runtime and that he doesn't need to do any kind of re-deployment?
Straight from MSDN on ASP.NET Configuration.
ASP.NET Configuration Overview
ASP.NET detects any changes to the configuration files and then
automatically applies those changes to the affected applications,
restarting the applications in most cases.
See How to: Transform Web.config When Deploying a Web Application Project
Has any put much thought into this? Personally, I think managing endpoints in configuration files are a pain. Are there any pros/cons to doing one over the other?
Only points in favour of configuration files from me.
Managing endpoints in configuration files mean that you don't have to update your application if (or perhaps I should say when) the endpoints change.
You can also have several instances of the application running with different endpoints.
I tend to like the config approach myself too, other than the config file can get pretty big.
The one thing I have noticed with WCF configuration is that there is a lot of stuff that you can do from code that you can't do in XML config without adding your own custom extensions. In other words, doing config in code will allow more flexibility, of course you could also just code your own extensions and use those from configuration.
However, do note that there is what I would consider a 'bug' in Visual Studio that if you start making your own extensions and including them in XML, then VS won't like your config file any more and will tag them as errors, and then if you try to add a new service through the wizards, it will fail to add the endpoint to the configuration.
This is sort of a followup to my own answer:
After months of having everything in xml configuration, I'm changing everything to construct the endpoints and bindings in code. I found a really good case for having it in code;
When you want to have a deployable / sharable .dll that contains WCF clients.
So for example if you have a CommonClients.dll that contains all your WCF interfaces and contracts to communicate with some remote server, then you don't want to also say "here is 100 lines of xml that you also have to drop into your app.config for every client to make it work". Having it all constructed in code works out much better in this case.
There is also a "feature" of .NET 3.5 where if you have some wcf extensions, you have to specify the fully qualified assembly name. This means that if your assembly containing the extensions changes the version nnumber, you have to go change the assembly name in the config file too. It is supposedly fixed in .NET 4 to use a short assembly name and not require the full name.
Offhand, an endpoint in a config file doesn't need to be recompiled when it's changed. This also means that you just need to update your config file when moving an application from Development to UAT to Production.
If your just coding something for your own use at home, then there's no real difference. However in a business environment, having the enpoint defined in your config file saves all sorts of headaches.
When using an app.config, your application does not need to be recompiled to adjust to a change. Also it can be resused in multiple situations with the exact same code. Finally, hardcoding your endpoints (or anything subject to change) is poor coding practice. Don't fear the configuration file, it's declarative programming. You say, "I want to use this endpoint." and it does the work for you.
I generally do programmatic configuration, as I don't want to expose my applications internal structure the the user. The only thing I keep configurable is service address, but even this I keep in userSettings section, not system.ServiceModel.
I prefer and recommend the configuration file approach. It offeres a lot of flexibility by allowing to make change to your server without the need to recompile the applcation.
If you need security, you can encrypt the config file.
The biggest worry with plain config files could be that it can be accidentally (or on purpose) modified by the end user causing your app to crash. To overcome this you could make some tests in code to check the configuration is ok in the config file and if not, initialize it programatically to some defaults. I presented how you could do that in another answer to this question.
It's just a question of how much flexibility you need.
Usually I prefer the config file approach.
Check out the .NET StockTrader app. It uses a repository to store config data and has a separate app to manage the configuration. The setup and structure is pretty advanced and there's a fair bit of head scratching for anyone like me that only has the basics of WCF configuration so far, but I would say it's worth a look.
Where would you write an error log file, say ErrorLog.txt, in Windows? Keep in mind the path would need to be open to basic users for file write permissions.
I know the eventlog is a possible location for writing errors, but does it work for "user" level permissions?
EDIT: I am targeting Windows 2003, but I was posing the question in such a way as to have a "General Guideline" for where to write error logs.
As for the EventLog, I have had issues before in an ASP.NET application where I wanted to log to the Windows event log, but I had security issues causing me heartache. (I do not recall the issues I had, but remember having them.)
Have you considered logging the event viewer instead? If you want to write your own log, I suggest the users local app setting directory. Make a product directory under there. It's different on different version of Windows.
On Vista, you cannot put files like this under c:\program files. You will run into a lot of problems with it.
In .NET, you can find out this folder with this:
Environment.GetFolderPath(Environment.SpecialFolder.LocalApplicationData)
And the Event Log is fairly simple to use too:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.diagnostics.eventlog.aspx
Text files are great for a server application (you did say Windows 2003). You should have a separate log file for each server application, the location is really a matter of convention to agree with administrators. E.g. for ASP.NET apps I've often seen them placed on a separate disk from the application under a folder structure that mimics the virtual directory structure.
For client apps, one disadvantage of text files is that a user may start multiple copies of your application (unless you've taken specific steps to prevent this). So you have the problem of contention if multiple instances attempt to write to the same log file. For this reason I would always prefer the Windows Event Log for client apps. One caveat is that you need to be an administrator to create an event log - this can be done e.g. by the setup package.
If you do use a file, I'd suggest using the folder Environment.SpecialFolder.LocalApplicationData rather than SpecialFolder.ApplicationData as suggested by others. LocalApplicationData is on the local disk: you don't want network problems to stop you from logging when the user has a roaming profile. For a WinForms application, use Application.LocalUserAppDataPath.
In either case, I would use a configuration file to decide where to log, so that you can easily change it. E.g. if you use Log4Net or a similar framework, you can easily configure whether to log to a text file, event log, both or elsewhere (e.g. a database) without changing your app.
The standard location(s) are:
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\MyApp
or
C:\Documents and Settings\%Username%\Application Data\MyApp
(aka %UserProfile%\Application Data\MyApp) which would match your user level permission requirement. It also separates logs created by different users.
Using .NET runtime, these can be built as:
AppDir=
System.Environment.GetFolderPath(Environment.SpecialFolder.CommonApplicationData)
or
AppDir=
System.Environment.GetFolderPath(Environment.SpecialFolder.ApplicationData)
followed by:
MyAppDir = IO.Path.Combine(AppDir,'MyApp')
(Which, hopefully, maps Vista profiles too).
Personally, I would suggest using the Windows event log, it's great. If you can't, then write the file to the ApplicationData directory or the ProgramData (Application Data for all users on Windows XP) directory.
The Windows event log is definitely the way to go for logging of errors. You're not limited to the "Application" log as it's possible to create a new log target (e.g. "My Application"). That may need to be done as part of setup as I'm not sure if it requires administrative privileges or not. There's a Microsoft example in C# at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/307024.
Windows 2008 also has Event Log Forwarding which can be quite handy with server applications.
I agree with Lou on this, but I prefer to set this up in a configuration file like Joe said. You can use
file value="${APPDATA}/Test/log-file.txt"
("Test" could be whatever you want, or removed entirely) in the configuration file, which causes the log file to be written to "/Documents and Settings/LoginUser/Application
Data/Test" on Windows XP and to "/Users/LoginUser/AppData/Roaming/Test on Windows Vista.
I am just adding this as I just spent way too much time figuring how to make this work on Windows Vista...
This works as-is with Windows applications. To use logging in web applications, I found Phil Haack's blog entry on this to be a great resource:
http://haacked.com/archive/2005/03/07/ConfiguringLog4NetForWebApplications.aspx
%TEMP% is always a good location for logs I find.
Going against the grain here - it depends on what you need to do. Sometimes you need to manipulate the results, so log.txt is the way to go. It's simple, mutable, and easy to search.
Take an example from Joel. Fogbugz will send a log / dump of error messages via http to their server. You could do the same and not have to worry about the user's access rights on their drive.
I personally don't like to use the Windows Event Log where I am right now because we do not have access to the production servers, so that would mean that we would need to request access every time we wanted to look at the errors. It is not a speedy process unfortunately, so your troubleshooting is completely haulted by waiting for someone else. I also don't like that they kind of get lost within the ones from other applications. Sure you can sort, but it's just a bit of a nucance scrolling down. What you use will end up being a combination of personal preference coupled along with limitations of the enviroment you are working in. (log file, event log, or database)
Put it in the directory of the application. The users will need access to the folder to run and execute the application, and you can check write access on application startup.
The event log is a pain to use for troubleshooting, but you should still post significant errors there.
EDIT - You should look into the MS Application Blocks for logging if you are using .NET. They really make life easy.
Jeez Karma-killers. Next time I won't even offer a suggestion when the poster puts up an incomplete post.
I cannot use the Resource File API from within a file system plugin due to a PlatSec issue:
*PlatSec* ERROR - Capability check failed - Can't load filesystemplugin.PXT because it links to bafl.dll which has the following capabilities missing: TCB
My understanding of the issue is that:
File system plugins are dlls which are executed within the context of the file system process. Therefore all file system plugins must have the TCB PlatSec privilege which in turn means they cannot link against a dll that is not in the TCB.
Is there a way around this (without resorting to a text file or an intermediate server)? I suspect not - but it would be good to get a definitive answer.
The Symbian file server has the following capabilities:
TCB ProtServ DiskAdmin AllFiles PowerMgmt CommDD
So any DLL being loaded into the file server process must have at least these capabilities. There is no way around this, short of writing a new proxy process as you allude to.
However, there is a more fundamental reason why you shouldn't be using bafl.dll from within a fileserver plugin: this DLL provides utility functions which interface to the file servers client API. Attempting to use it from within the filer server will not work; at best, it will lead to the file server deadlocking as it attempts to connect to itself.
I'd suggest rethinking that you're trying to do, and investigating an internal file-server API to achieve it instead.
Using RFs/RFile/RDir APIs from within a file server plugin is not safe and can potentially lead to deadlock if you're not very careful.
Symbian 9.5 will introduce new APIs (RFilePlugin, RFsPlugin and RDirPlugin) which should be used instead.
Theres a proper mechanism for communicating with plugins, RPlugin.
Do not use RFile. I'm not even sure that it would work as the path is checked in Initialise of RFile functions which is called before the plugin stack.
Tell us what kind of data you are storing in the resource file.
Things that usually go into resource files have no place in a file server plugin, even that means hardcoding a few values.
Technically, you can send data to a file server plugin using RFile.Write() but that's not a great solution (intercept RFile.Open("invalid file name that only your plugin understands") in the plugin).
EDIT: Someone indicated that using an invalid file name will not let you send data to the plugin. hey, I didn't like that solution either. for the sake of completness, I should clarify. make up a filename that looks OK enough to go through to your plugin. like using a drive letter that doesn't have a real drive attached to it (but will still be considered correct by filename-parsing code).
Writing code to parse the resource file binary in the plugin, while theoratically possible, isn't a great solution either.