In ServiceStack application, I have Funq configured to inject a session per request like this:
container.Register<NHibernate.ISessionFactory>(sessionFactoryForDB1);
container.Register<NHibernate.ISession>(c => c.Resolve<NHibernate.ISessionFactory>()
.OpenSession())
.ReusedWithin(Funq.ReuseScope.Request);
My service looks like this, and it works just fine:
public class MyNhAwareService : Service
{
public ISession Session { get; set; }
public object Any(DoSomething request)
{
...
}
}
Now, the problem comes in when I want to add a second NHibernate database into the mix with its own session factory:
container.Register<NHibernate.ISessionFactory>(sessionFactoryForDB1);
container.Register<NHibernate.ISession>(c => c.Resolve<NHibernate.ISessionFactory>()
.OpenSession())
.ReusedWithin(Funq.ReuseScope.Request);
// add a different session factory
container.Register<NHibernate.ISessionFactory>(sessionFactoryForDB2);
I've been experimenting with a variety of ways Funq can be used, and I thought I had found the way forward when I discovered the 'RegisterNamed()" method, but that still doesn't help, as I can't use anything except TryResolve() from within my service.
This seems like it should be possible, but I'm beating my head against the wall trying to work it out...Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
You have a couple ways of going about this.
Option 1: Unique Interfaces
This option is to create a distinct interface for each NHibernate database so that they can be uniquely resolved by Funq.
For example:
interface FactoryA : NHibernate.ISessionFactory
{
}
interface FactoryB : NHibernate.ISessionFactory
{
}
You could then proceed as you are now. The same applies for the session. See here for a little more detail about the process:
How to register multiple IDbConnectionFactory instances using Funq in ServiceStack.net
Option 2: Named Instance
This option I am less familiar with, but you can name your instances using Funq:
container.Register<NHibernate.ISessionFactory>("FactoryA",sessionFactoryForDB1);
And then in your service, resolve it thusly:
ServiceStackHost.Instance.Container.ResolveNamed<NHibernate.ISessionFactory>("FactoryA");
This option uses Service Location, which I personally find less attractive.
Related
I'm attempting to add caching to our IS4 implementation using their Caching methods. However, my implementation does not appear to be having any impact on the speed of login or the number of queries hitting my database per login (which I would expect caching to reduce both).
The changes I made to implement caching are as follows:
Added the following to Startup.cs ConfigureServices
Updated the services.AddIdenttiyServer() call to include the lines:
.AddInMemoryCaching()
.AddClientStoreCache<IClientStore>()
.AddResourceStoreCache<IResourceStore>()
.AddCorsPolicyCache<ICorsPolicyService>();
Updated ConfigureServices to also have the following:
services.AddScoped<ICorsPolicyService, DefaultCorsPolicyService>();
services.AddScoped<IClientStore, ClientStore>();
services.AddScoped<IResourceStore, ResourceStore>();
That appeared to be the only things I needed to implement, and while the application runs normally, the caching does not seem to be doing anything. What am I missing?
Basically you need to do 2 things:
First implement the IClientStore:
public class ClientStore : IClientStore
{
private readonly IClientService clientService;
public ClientStore(IClientService clientService)
{
this.clientService = clientService;
}
public Task<Client> FindClientByIdAsync(string clientId)
{
var client = this.clientService.GetById(clientId);
return Task.FromResult(client);
}
}
The ClientService is my implementation for getting the client from the db, so there you need to put your own.
Then in the Startup.cs you need:
services.AddIdentityServer(options =>
{
options.Caching.ClientStoreExpiration = new TimeSpan(0, 5, 0);
})
.AddInMemoryCaching()
.AddClientStoreCache<ClientStore>()
.// More stuff that you need
This is for the Client Caching but for the Cors and the ResourceStore is quite the same.
I think that you are missing the options.Caching.ClientStoreExpiration part. Start from there.
Hope that this helps.
PS: Forgot to mention - you don't need to explicitly inject your implementation of the IClientStore. By adding it to the .AddClientStoreCache<ClientStore>() it gets injected. But (as in my example) if you have other services, used by the store, you need to inject them.
There is no standard way to cache users.
It caches only:
Clients - AddClientStoreCache
Resources - AddResourceStoreCache
CorsPolicy - AddCorsPolicyCache
More details you can get from documentations
I have an ASP.NET MVC application using StructureMap.
I have created a service called SecurityContext which has a static Current property. A simplified version looks like this:
public class SecurityContext : ISecurityContext
{
public bool MyProperty { get; private set; }
public static SecurityContext Current
{
get
{
return new SecurityContext() { MyProperty = true };
}
}
}
I've hooked this up in my StructureMap registry as follows:
For<ISecurityContext>().Use(() => SecurityContext.Current);
My understanding of this Linq expression overload of the Use method is that the returned concrete object is the same for the entire HTTP request scope.
However, I've set up a test case where my context interface is injected in two places, once in the controller's constructor and again using the SetterProperty attribute in the base class my view inherits from.
When debugging I observe the Current static method being hit twice so clearly my assumptions are wrong. Can anyone correct what I'm doing here? The reason I want this request-scoped is because I'm loading certain data into my context class from the database so I don't want this to happen multiple times for a given page load.
Thanks in advance.
The default lifecycle for a configuration is Transient, thus each request for an ISecurityContext will create a new instance of SecurityContext. What I think you want is to use the legacy HttpContext lifecycle.
Include the StructureMap.Web nuget package. Then change your configuration to the following:
For<ISecurityContext>()
.Use(() => SecurityContext.Current)
.LifeCycleIs<HttpContextLifecycle>();
More information on lifecyles can be found here.
The HttpContextLifecycle is obsolete, however I do not know if or when it will be removed. The StructureMap team does recommend against using this older ASP.Net lifecycle. They state in the documentation that most modern web frameworks use a nested container per request to accomplish the same scoping. Information about nested containers can be found here.
I don't know if the version of ASP.Net MVC you are using is considered a modern web framework. I doubt it is because ASP.Net Core 1.0 is the really the first in the ASP.Net line to fully embrace the use of DI. However, I will defer to #jeremydmiller on this one.
Trying to implement Dependency Injection in an ASP.Net Web API project.
I would like to be able to inject an instance of Account into some of my services.
The Account instance should be created with the users Guid and this is not known until runtime.
So in my service I have:
public TransactionService(Account acc)
{
_account = acc;
}
And in my application startup I can do this - where container is a new UnityContainer:
container.RegisterType<Instanet.Engine.Account>(new InjectionConstructor(new Guid("xxxxxx")));
This, of course, isn't any good as it would be using the same Account for every user/request etc.
If I try to use something like :
container.RegisterType<Instanet.Engine.Account>(new InjectionConstructor(GetTheUsersID()));
... where GetTheUsersID() needs to either examine a cookie or the ASP.Net Identity request it's of course not available in the app startup.
So - Where/How (in simple terms please, this DI stuff is hurting my brain) do I implement this so I can inject an instanced Account into any of the services that may need it.
You generally don't want to mix state and behavior for components that get resolved via the container--DI should be used for components that can be modeled as pure services.
That said, sometimes it makes sense to wrap global or context-specific state in a service component.
In your case, if you only need the UserId locally in a one or more services (in other words, not passing it from one service to another). You mentioned being able to get the UserId from a cookie, so maybe it would look something like:
public class CookieService : ICookieService
{
public int GetCurrentUserId()
{
//pseudo code
return HttpContext.Current.GetCookie["UserId"];
}
}
Now you can inject ICookieService where a UserId is needed.
More complex cases may require an Abstract Factory:
http://blog.ploeh.dk/2012/03/15/ImplementinganAbstractFactory/
If there is only one Account instance possible for the session, then I would create an Account instance in the bootstrap code before all your services are running.
Then you can populate the guid and all other data in your account instance, and register the initialized instance of Account class in Unity via container.RegisterInstance method.
Later it will resolve to what you need.
Does it help?
I am working on a webapi project and using Unity as our IOC container. I have a set of layered dependencies something like the following:
unityContainer.RegisterType<BaseProvider, CaseProvider>(new HierarchicalLifetimeManager());
unityContainer.RegisterType<IRulesEngine, RulesEngine>();
unityContainer.RegisterType<IQuestionController, QuestionController>();
unityContainer.RegisterType<IAPIThing, WebAPIThing>();
Now the constructor for BaseProvider accepts an int as a parameter which is the Case identifier. WebAPIThing takes a BaseProvider in its constructor. Normally in a non web scenario I would inject the case id using something like:
public static IAPIThing GetIAPIThing(int caseId)
{
return CreateUnityContainer().Resolve<IAPIThing >(new ParameterOverride("caseId", caseId).OnType<CaseProvider>());
}
But that only works when I explicitly call that method. In a Web API scenario I am using a
config.DependencyResolver = new UnityDependencyResolver(unityContainer); to resolve my api controllers.
I would guess I will still need to influence how the DependencyResolver resolves that BaseProvider object at runtime.
Anyone had to do something similar?
EDIT 1
I have tried using the following which appears to work:
unityContainer.RegisterType<BaseProvider>(
new HierarchicalLifetimeManager()
, new InjectionFactory(x =>
new CaseProvider(SessionManager.GetCaseID())));
You are trying to inject a runtime value (the case id) into the object graph, which means you are complicating configuration, building, and verification of the object graph.
What you should do is promote that primitive value to its own abstraction. This might sound silly at first, but such abstraction will do a much better job in describing its functionality. In your case for instance, the abstraction should probably be named ICaseContext:
public interface ICaseContext
{
int CurrentCaseId { get; }
}
By hiding the int behind this abstraction we effectively:
Made the role of this int very explicit.
Removed any redundancy with any other values of type int that your application might need.
Delayed the resolving of this int till after the object graph has been built.
You can define this ICaseContext in a core layer of your application and everybody can depend on it. In your Web API project you can define a Web API-specific implementation of this ICaseContext abstraction. For instance:
public class WebApiCaseContext : ICaseContext
{
public int CurrentCaseId
{
get { return (int)HttpContext.Current.Session["CaseId"];
}
}
This implementation can be registered as follows:
unityContainer.RegisterType<ICaseContext, WebApiCaseContext>();
UPDATE
Do note that your own new CaseProvider(SessionManager.GetCaseID()) configuration does not solve all problems, because this means that there must be a session available when verifying the object graph, which will neither be the case during application startup and inside a unit/integration test.
I would like to be able to add subscriptions to additional message types living on potentially different servers to my application at runtime. What I'm trying to achieve is a Monitoring application where I can add/remove subscriptions at runtime. Is this possible? How do I get a reference to the current UnicastBus mappings?
Here is what I'm doing so far, but I believe this will overwrite any mappings currently in existence.
MessageEndpointMappingCollection mappings = new MessageEndpointMappingCollection();
mappings.Add(new MessageEndpointMapping()
{
Messages = m.MessageType.ToString(),
Endpoint = m.QueueName
});
IComponentConfig<UnicastBusConfig> busConfig = config.Configurer.ConfigureComponent<UnicastBusConfig>(ComponentCallModelEnum.None);
busConfig.ConfigureProperty(u => u.MessageEndpointMappings, mappings);
Yves used this code in his Azure samples (to be found in NSB samples collection)
using NServiceBus.Config;
using NServiceBus.Config.ConfigurationSource;
namespace OrderService
{
class ConfigOverride : IProvideConfiguration<UnicastBusConfig>
{
public UnicastBusConfig GetConfiguration()
{
return new UnicastBusConfig
{
MessageEndpointMappings = new MessageEndpointMappingCollection
{
new MessageEndpointMapping { Messages="MyMessages", Endpoint="orderserviceinputqueue" }
}
};
}
}
}
The best way to approach this would be to implement IConfigurationSource and provide your own configuration. Then you could cherry pick what you would like to load from the config file (if anything) and what you would like to specify yourself at runtime.
I would reflect the DefaultConfigurationSource class or refer to this gist for guidance.
In a project, I am currently involved with, we are doing some content-based routing to dynamically subscribed/unsubscribed agents by keeping track of them in our own routing table.
We have wrapped the IBus in a decorator (by using Windsor's support of decorators, as described <plug>here</plug>), that sees if the message implements a special IRoutableMessage interface, that allows the decorator to route the message by explicitly specifying the destination endpoint via bus.Send(destinationEndpoint).
This was a little bit complex to get right, and I would recommend going with NServiceBus' built-in routing as far as possible. But is is possible to explicitly route messages to any endpoint.
If you are looking into monitoring, check out the NSBManager repository. This takes the opposite approach and lets the endpoints register with the manager.