Develop Reference

How to inject dependencies from IHostedService before creating scope

I have a multi tenant system with background job. The tenancy details are stored in database and based on the tenant adding request in service bus, I want to resolve the dependencies based on tenant.
For this I would have to add dependencies to service collection before creating scope. When trying to inject IServiceCollection, it gives me error.
I am looking for the best way to inject dependencies from HostedService
public async Task MessageHandler(object sender, Message message)
{
// Inject dependencies
services.AddScoped<IMyService,Myservice>(); // No way to get services here
using (var scope = serviceProvider.CreateScope())
{
var ... = scope.ServiceProvider.GetService<...>();
//...
}
}

I had a similar need a while back. I created my own service bus handler.
You could try something like the below, where you inject a service (here as an example I'm using IMessageService) to the ServiceeBusHandler that itself has a dbcontext injected.
Then where ever you implement IServiceBusHandler you can specify for which tenant (and their queues) you want the connection built.
public class ServiceBusHandler : IServiceBusHandler
{
private readonly ServiceBusSender _serviceBusSender;
private readonly IMessageService _messageService;
public ServiceBusHandler(
ServiceBusSender serviceBusSender,
IMessageService messageService)
{
_serviceBusSender = serviceBusSender;
_messageService = messageService;
}
public async Task PublishMessageAsync<T>(T message)
{
var jsonString = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(message);
var serviceBusMessage = new ServiceBusMessage(jsonString);
await _serviceBusSender.SendMessageAsync(serviceBusMessage);
}
internal static IServiceBusHandler Create(ServiceBusSender sender)
{
return new ServiceBusHandler(sender);
}
}
public class ServiceBusHandlerFactory : IServiceBusHandlerFactory
{
private readonly IAzureClientFactory<ServiceBusClient> _serviceBusClientFactory;
public ServiceBusHandlerFactory(
IAzureClientFactory<ServiceBusClient> serviceBusClientFactory)
{
_serviceBusClientFactory = serviceBusClientFactory;
}
public IServiceBusHandler GetClient(string tenantId)
{
var tenantDetails = _messageService.GetTenantDetails(tenantId); // Call to your DB to get details about the Tenant
var client = GetServiceBusClient(tenantDetails.QueueName);
var sender = client.CreateSender(tenantDetails.QueueName);
return ServiceBusHandler.Create(sender);
}
protected virtual ServiceBusClient GetServiceBusClient(string queueName)
{
var client = _serviceBusClientFactory.CreateClient(queueName);
return client;
}
}

What you are trying to achieve is to change the set of registrations after the Container was built. MS.DI does not support this, and while historically, more mature DI Containers tended to support this behavior, most modern DI Containers stopped supporting this, because there are too many negative consequences in allowing this. Autofac, for instance, obsoleted its Update method in 2016 and described the issues with updating the Container in details. Ninject has gone through a similar process, although development stopped before the final release that removed the possibility to update the Container. The Simple Injector DI Container never supported updating, and its documentation has some clear texts that describe what the issue is.
You might find a DI Container that supports this, but I would urge you to abbondon this path, because of the negative consequences that it can (and probably will) cause, as the previous links described.
Instead, you will have to find a different way to get tenant-specific behavior, with one single set of registrations. The trick here, typically lies in creating a Proxy implementation of your IMyService that can forward the call to the correct tenant implementation.
This might look something like this:
public class ProxyMyService : IMyService
{
public IMyService Service { get; set; }
// IMyService methods
public void SomeMethod() => this.Service.SomeMethod();
}
This proxy class can be registered at startup, together with other IMyService implementations, as follows:
services.AddScoped<IMyService, ProxyMyService>();
services.AddTransient<MyServiceTenant1>();
services.AddTransient<DefaultMyServiceTenant>();
With this, your hosted service can become the following:
private ProxyMyService service;
public MyHostedService(IMyService service)
{
this.service = (ProxyMyService)service;
}
public async Task MessageHandler(object sender, Message message)
{
using (var scope = serviceProvider.CreateScope())
{
var p = scope.ServiceProvider;
var proxy = (ProxyMyService)p.GetRequiredService<IMyService>();
proxy.Service = IsTentant1
? p.GetRequiredService<MyServiceTenant1>()
: p.GetRequiredService<DefaultMyServiceTenant>();
var ... = p.GetRequiredService<...>();
//...
}
}
A more evolved solution would entail a Proxy implementation that allows to switch between tenant-specific implementations internally. That would likely mean moving part of the logic that's currently inside MessageHandler into the ProxyMyService.
Do notice that the solutions I suggested do not require an abstract factory. Abstract factories are typically not needed.

How to use DI in WPF to having a new istance without ask to container

i'm trying to develop from scratch a WPF app with the use of Simpleinjector as a IOC container.
I'm new on this topic and i have some issue regards lifetime of object and hot use them correctly.
I started the app by following the WPF integration guide on simpleinjector manual.
But i don't understand how to receive a new instance every time a service needed it
As i ask in my previous post i need to receive a new unitOfWork every time a service need it.
as #Steven say on my previous post
Do note that transient means "allways a new instance is resolved when it is requested from the container." If you're not requesting it again, you will be operating on the same instance, which might explain the ObjectDisposedException.
In the other post i found a solutin but i think it's a little bit over-complicated and it's to create a factory and inject this instead of the instance because i want to call the container.getInstance only on the startup method and not on the service by passing the container as a dependency
It's the only way i have to achieve this or there is something that i don't understand on how to develop in DI way?
Example of code:
public class HeaderViewModelFactory : IWpfRadDispenserViewModelFactory<HeaderviewModel>
{
private readonly ProductionService _service;
public HeaderViewModelFactory(ProductionService service)
{
_service = service;
}
public HeaderviewModel CreateViewModel()
{
return new HeaderviewModel(_service);
}
}
public class HeaderviewModel : ViewModelBase
{
private readonly ProductionService _service;
public HeaderviewModel(ProductionService service)
{
_service = service;
CreateData();
}
private void CreateData()
{
_service.CreateTestCycle();
}
}
public class CycleService : GenericDataService<Cycle>
{
private readonly IUnitOfWork<WpfRadDispenserDbContext> _uowContext;
public CycleService(IUnitOfWork<WpfRadDispenserDbContext> uowContext)
: base(uowContext)
{
_uowContext = uowContext;
}
public void CreateTestCycle()
{
var cycleDataService = new GenericDataService<Cycle>(_uowContext);
var vialDataService = new GenericDataService<Vial>(_uowContext);
Cycle c = new Cycle();
c.BatchName = "test";
Vial v = new Vial();
v.Name = "Test Vial";
c.Vials.Add(v);
_uowContext.CreateTransaction(IsolationLevel.ReadCommitted);
try
{
vialDataService.Create(v);
_uowContext.Persist();
var list = vialDataService.GetAll();
cycleDataService.Create(c);
_uowContext.Persist();
_uowContext.Commit();
}
catch (Exception e)
{
Console.WriteLine(e);
_uowContext.RollBack();
throw;
}
finally
{
_uowContext.Dispose();
}
}
}
private static Container Bootstrap()
{
// Create the container as usual.
var container = new Container();
// Register your types:
// Register your windows and view models:
container.Register<WpfRadDispenserDbContextFactory>(Lifestyle.Transient);
container.Register<IUnitOfWork<WpfRadDispenserDbContext>,WpfRadDispenserUOW>();
container.Register(typeof(CycleService));
container.Register<IWpfRadDispenserViewModelFactory<ProductionViewModel>,
ProductionViewModelFactory>(Lifestyle.Transient);
container.Register<IWpfRadDispenserViewModelFactory<AnagraphicViewModel>,
AnagraphicsViewModelFactory>(Lifestyle.Transient);
container.Register<IWpfRadDispenserViewModelFactory<HeaderviewModel>,
HeaderViewModelFactory>(Lifestyle.Transient);
container.Register<IViewModelAbstractFactory,
ViewModelAbstractFactory>(Lifestyle.Transient);
container.Register<INavigator, Navigator>(Lifestyle.Transient);
container.Register<MainWindowViewModel>();
container.Register<MainWindow>();
//container.Options.EnableAutoVerification = false;
//container.Verify();
return container;
}
in this way every time i create a new viewmodel i receive the same service and ovviously the dbcontext it's not present anymore because disposed.
This is not the rela code but only an example that i made to understand how DI works.

Using Abstract Factory pattern is the most common and recommended approach. Using the container in your application directly is widely considered an anti-pattern, like the Service Locator (Service Locator is an Anti-Pattern) for a very good reason.
Abstract factory allows instantiation of objects without introducing a tight coupling to the actual implementation that knows how to create specific instances.
Most IoC frameworks support this pattern natively. Most of the time they provide the generic interface for the factory. You register the instance (the product) with the container and the framework will export a ready-to use factory for you. You add the dependency to this framework interface to your object e.g. constructor. Then you register the generic factory interface. The framework will automatically create the instance of the factory and inject it into the relevant instances e.g., via constructor.
I am not too familiar with Simple Injector, but the framework really keeps things simple. There is no such code generation.
But the pattern is very simple (that's why this is so easy to automate) and in no way complicated.
Example
The interface required to dynamically create the instances of type TInstance:
interface IFactory<TInstance>
{
TInstance Create();
}
The implementation of this factory:
class SaveItemFactory : IFactory<ISaveItem>
{
ISaveItem Create() => new SaveItem();
}
The type that needs to create a dependency dynamically:
interface IItemManager {}
class ItemManager : IItemManager
{
IFactory<ISaveItem> SaveItemFactory { get; }
public ItemManager(IFactory<ISaveItem> itemFactory) => this.SaveItemFactory = itemFactory;
public void SaveData(object data)
{
ISaveItem saveItem = this.SaveItemFactory.Create();
saveItem.SetData(data);
}
}
Configure the container:
public void Run()
{
var container = new SimpleInjector.Container();
container.Register<IFactory<ISaveItem>, SaveItemFactory>(Lifestyle.Singleton);
container.Register<IItemManager, ItemManager>(Lifestyle.Singleton);
IItemManager itemManager = container.GetInstance<IItemManager>();
itemManager.SaveData("Some Data");
}

Catel with Ninject

Our company is using Ninject for DI. I have to create a WPF App with MVVM and want to use Catel.
Because our services which have the DB DataContext are injected with Ninject, I don't know where to start.
I've started with a prepared skeleton project.
This is what App.xaml.cs contains:
public partial class App : Application
{
public IKernel Container;
protected override void OnStartup(StartupEventArgs e)
{
base.OnStartup(e);
ConfigureContainer();
ComposeObjects();
Current.MainWindow.Show();
}
private void ConfigureContainer()
{
var modules = new INinjectModule[]
{
new ServiceModule()
};
Container = new StandardKernel(modules);
}
private void ComposeObjects()
{
Current.MainWindow = Container.Get<MainWindow>();
Current.MainWindow.Title = "DI with Ninject";
}
}
The ServiceModule is inherited from NinjectModule.
With that code I can use this constructor of my MainWindow:
public MainWindow(IAuthenticationService authenticationService)
{
InitializeComponent();
ViewModel = new MainWindowViewModel(authenticationService);
DataContext = ViewModel;
}
The IAuthenticationService is injected via App.xaml.cs and Ninject. In my opinion this solution is hard to maintain, because if I need a new service, I have to add it to the constructor of my MainWindow.
Now I need the same thing to work with Catel, but I haven't found something in the documentation.
EDIT:
I've found on the documentation that I can register an external IoC container.
How do I create my own component (doc: Replacing the default components) which works with the Ninject's standard kernel?
Also is this a good approach of DI or are there better solutions?

Please see the recommended approach on how to replace the default IoC components:
https://catelproject.atlassian.net/wiki/display/CTL/Replacing+the+default+components
To create your own component, let the Ninject kernel implement the right interface (for example, IDependencyResolver or IServiceLocator) and all should be set.

How to configure unit tests with an IoC container in ASP.NET?

I have configured Unity in my ASP.NET application and the configuration is loaded when the first request is received in Application_BeginRequest. then the Unity container is stored in the Global.ascx as a property so that my other class can access it:
public static IUnityContainer ContainerHolder { get; set; }
IUnityContainer IContainerAccessor.Container
{
get { return ContainerHolder; }
}
ContainerHolder, holds the container instance across application and Container property allows access to this property in each session.
Then I have a UnityLocator class which enables me access this property across the application:
public static class UnityLocator
{
private static IUnityContainer Container
{
get
{
return ((IContainerAccessor)HttpContext.Current.ApplicationInstance).Container;
}
}
}
Everything works fine!
I have also a method to access the instance from Unity:
UnityLocator.GetInstance<IThemeManager>();
protected Repository(ICustomCacheManager customCacheManager)
{
this.Cache = customCacheManager;
}
protected Repository()
: this(UnityLocator.GetInstance<ICustomCacheManager>())
{
}
this has been used in my app so that I can retrieve an existing instance from Unity so that I can inject it to other classes. For example my view (asp.net page) injects this to its Presenter class as a dependency.
Now, I'd like to configure my Unit tests to run.
How could I do that?! global.ascx doesn't exist there obviously so I thought I should create a BaseTest class and let all my tests inherit it. then at the constructor of this BaseTest class, I build up my instances. Is it the right way to do it?
How to configure unit tests with Unity now?
Thanks
UPDATE:
UnityLocator.GetInstance added.

You shouldn't worry about accessing your IoC container. That is a violation of Unit Tests.
Unit tests you should not worry about any concrete implementation or dependency (other than the class under test).
To me, having your IoC globally available is a bad design choice. You should have your dependencies injected via properties or constructors.

Probably using the global application class for storing the service locator was not a good idea. Why don't you use the built-in ServiceLocator class? It is available from anywhere in the code and doesn't depend on global application / HttpContext.
Whether or not using the container in unit tests is another story. Personally I am not against it as long as you put stub implementations of your services into the container.
Edit: the way to configure your container using ServiceLocator:
private void ConfigureUnity()
{
UnityServiceLocator locator = new UnityServiceLocator( ConfigureUnityContainer() );
ServiceLocator.SetLocatorProvider( () => locator );
}
private IUnityContainer ConfigureUnityContainer()
{
IUnityContainer container = new UnityContainer();
// this loads container's configuration, comment or uncomment
container.LoadConfiguration();
return container;
}
You can then access the container from within the locator like:
var container = ServiceLocator.Current.GetInstance<IUnityContainer>();

In your page, try doing things like this:
public class DepartmentReportPage : Page
{
private readonly DepartmentReportPresenter _presenter;
public DepartmentReportPage()
{
this._presenter =
UnityLocator.GetInstance<DepartmentReportPresenter>();
this._presenter.View = this;
}
}

dependency injection alternatives

I am looking at depency injection, I can see the benefits but I am having problems with the syntax it creates. I have this example
public class BusinessProducts
{
IDataContext _dx;
BusinessProducts(IDataContext dx)
{
_dx = dx;
}
public List<Product> GetProducts()
{
return dx.GetProducts();
}
}
The problem is that I don't want to write
BusinessProducts bp = new BusinessProducts(dataContextImplementation);
I would continue to write
BusinessProducts bp = new BusinessProducts();
because I feel the first alternative just feels unatural. I dont want to know what the BusinessProduct "depends" on to get the products, also I feel it makes my code more unreadable.
Is there any alternatives to this approach as I would like to keep my original syntax for creating objects but I would like to still be able to fake the dependencies when unit testing or is it this dependecy injection frameworks can do for me?
I am coding in c# but alternatives from other languages is welcome

I use a factory for my context and inject it, providing a suitable default if the provided factory is null. I do this for two reasons. First, I use the data context as a unit of work scoped object so I need to be able to create them when needed, not keep one around. Second, I'm primarily using DI to increase testability, with decoupling only a secondary consideration.
So my business products class would look like:
public class BusinessProducts
{
private IDataContextFactory DataContextFactory { get; set; } // my interface
public BusinessProducts() : this(null) {}
public BusinessProducts( IDataContextFactory factory )
{
this.DataContext = factory ?? new BusinessProductsDataContextFactory();
}
public void DoSomething()
{
using (DataContext dc = this.DataContextFactory().CreateDataContext())
{
...
}
}
An alternative to this would be to make the factory property publicly settable and inject an alternate factory by setting the property. Either way if you want to keep the null constructor, you'll need to provide a default.

You can create a factory. DI containers are best for wirings that happen at setup-time - not at runtime (As this looks to be a case of). Factories can be implemented in different ways, depending on how pluggable it needs to be, and how many places you need to use it.

I would usually have an empty constructor which uses a solid instance( or an instances created by IoC), amd one with DI. i.e.
public class BusinessProducts
{
IDataContext _dx;
BusinessProducts()
{
_dx = new SolidDataContext();
}
BusinessProducts(IDataContext dx)
{
_dx = dx;
}
}
This way you can use DI for overriding the default instance in unit testing testing.

Your feelings, while valid, are misplaced.
The Dependency Injection pattern is a direct application of the Inversion of Control principle.
This means that, instead of your class controlling the instances of other classes it consumes, that relationship is inverted and the dependencies are provided to it.
As such, your classes naturally expose their dependencies via constructor arguments or properties. Showing disdain for this structure says you haven't truly grokked the pattern.

There are two distinct cases here:
In production code you will never write
new BusinessProducts(dataContextImplementation)
because dependency injection will normally be creating the full object hierarchy for you. This is the "viral" nature of dependency injection patterns, they tend to take over full control of your service creation.
In unit test code you will normally be creating this yourself, but quite often you will be supplying a mock object or a stub implementation of dataContextImplementation. So normally you will be injecting an object that does not have a large number of subsequent dependencies.

http://springframework.net/ and http://structuremap.sourceforge.net/Default.htm are probably the mostly used DI frameworks for .NET based languages and will both do what you need.

Generally the framework itself will have the logic to build up the entire object tree. For example, instead of
new SomeObjectO(diContext)
you would call the framework like this:
DIFramework.GetNew<SomeObjectO>();
or
DIFramework.Get<SomeObject>();
Another interesting framework to take a look at if you would like to learn about DI and the process is Microsoft's Unity and Object Builder projects.

If you really do not like injecting this instance in the constructor, you might try to use the CommonServiceLocator with your favourite compatible .NET depedency injection framework. This would allow you to write code like this:
public class BusinessProducts
{
IDataContext _dx;
BusinessProducts()
{
_dx = Microsoft.Practices.ServiceLocation.ServiceLocator.Current.GetInstance<IDataContext>();
}
public List<Product> GetProducts()
{
return dx.GetProducts();
}
}
However, please beware that this is not what most people would expect when they know that you use a dependency injection framework. I think that it is much more common to use a dependency injection framework and letting it create all objects for you.
BusinessProducts bp = Microsoft.Practices.ServiceLocation.ServiceLocator.Current.GetInstance<BusinessProducts>();
If you would like to avoid the dependeny injection framework path, using a factory is probably the best way to go.

There's a technique called poor man's DI that looks like this
public class BusinessProducts
{
IDataContext _dx;
BusinessProducts() : this(new DataContext()) {}
BusinessProducts(IDataContext dx)
{
_dx = dx;
}
public List<Product> GetProducts()
{
return dx.GetProducts();
}
}
This is not ideal since it ties you to the implementation but its a good stepping stone towards decoupled code. this is similar to #tvanfosson but a lot simplier.
I second the recommendation for Windsor

My code will reference Microsoft Unity but I am sure it is pretty applicable to all DI frameworks. If you're using DI correctly you never need to call new BusinessObject(new dataContext) the DI association will handle it all for you.
My example will be a little bit long since I will paste in some code I use for running a Model View Presenter website fully DI loaded by Unity. (If you want the full source check out my blog and download it from my Assembla SVN server)
Load the container (can be in code like I prefer or using configuration)
protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Application.GetContainer()
// presenters / controllers are per request
.RegisterType<IEmployeeController, EmployeeController>(new ContextLifetimeManager<IEmployeeController>())
//Data Providers are Per session
.RegisterType<IEmployeeDataProvider, EmployeeDataProvider>(new SessionLifetimeManager<IEmployeeDataProvider>())
//Session Factory is life time
.RegisterType<INHibernateSessionManager, NHibernateSessionManager>(new ContainerControlledLifetimeManager());
}
Custom HTTP module calls Unity BuildUp Method for each page during the OnPreRequest invocation.
private static void OnPreRequestHandlerExecute(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var handler = HttpContext.Current.Handler;
HttpContext.Current.Application.GetContainer().BuildUp(handler.GetType(), handler);
// User Controls are ready to be built up after the page initialization is complete
var page = HttpContext.Current.Handler as Page;
if (page != null)
{
page.InitComplete += OnPageInitComplete;
}
}
Page container presenter decorated with [Dependency] attribute
public partial class Employees : Page, IEmployeeView
{
private EmployeePresenter _presenter;
[Dependency]
public EmployeePresenter Presenter
{
set
{
_presenter = value;
_presenter.View = this;
}
}
}
Presenter with InjectionConstructor method
public class EmployeePresenter : Presenter<IEmployeeView>
{
private readonly IEmployeeController _controller;
[InjectionConstructor]
}
public EmployeePresenter(IEmployeeController controller)
{
_controller = controller;
}
Controller follows suit
public class EmployeeController : IEmployeeController
{
private readonly IEmployeeDataProvider _provider;
[InjectionConstructor]
public EmployeeController(IEmployeeDataProvider DataProvider)
{
_provider = DataProvider;
}
}
Same with provider
public class EmployeeController : IEmployeeController
{
private readonly IEmployeeDataProvider _provider;
[InjectionConstructor]
public EmployeeController(IEmployeeDataProvider DataProvider)
{
_provider = DataProvider;
}
}
Lastly the session manager, which contains only a regular constructor.
public class NHibernateSessionManager : INHibernateSessionManager
{
private readonly ISessionFactory _sessionFactory;
public NHibernateSessionManager()
{
_sessionFactory = GetSessionFactory();
}
}
So what happens when a page request is started the BuildUp() method is called on the page by the HttpModule. Unity then sees the Property marked with the Dependency attribute and will check it's container to see if inside it exists an EmployeePresenter object.
Since there is no such object in the container it will then try to create an EmployeePresenter. Upon inspection to create the class it sees inside the Presenter it requires a constructor that needs a IEmployeeController injected into it. Since the container actually has a manager for the controller it will see if an instance of it exists in the container which on the beginning of the page request doesn't exist, so it will go to instantiate the controller.
Unity will then see the controller requires a IEmployeeDataProvider injected into it, and it will continue on this process until it finally gets to the point where the Provider needs the session manager injected. Since the session manager has no more need for injection Unity will then create an instance of the session manager store it in the container for it's given ContainerLifeTimeManager, inject it into the Provider and store that instance, and so on down to where it finished creating a EmployeePresenter dependency for the page.

you can also look at windsor for IoC .