I have seen examples, sample codes etc for self hosting WCF services within a console app, windows service etc.
My question is, how will this work in production? Will it be efficient? Will it scale?
I m not sure, how it will work, so other question is, will that be single threaded? multi threaded? do i need to manage the multi threading? appdomains?
I prefer hosting with command line, windows service for application related reasons.
My question is,
Will it be efficient? Will it scale?
Yes and yes. But for really large scale apps you should still consider IIS (+WAS).
so other question is, will that be single threaded? multi threaded?
That is determined by the configuration.
Will it be efficient?
It depends on the service implementation, on the maximum number of requests it is able to manage within a specific time-frame. Efficiency is a relative measure: let's assume your service is able to process 20 messages/sec, if your requirement is to be able to process 10 messages/sec, then your service is efficient. But if the requirement is 30, then it is not.
Will it scale?
Once again, it is not related to hosting. Are your services stateless? if not then, they probably won't scale much since load balancing is not possible.
Will it be manageable ?
Probably not:
- you need to have a user logged on the server to run the app
- it does not auto-start with the server
- it cannot auto-restart on failure
- it does not create instances of the service pro-actively
- it does not provide (without custom code) a way to check the service health
Single instance ? Multiple threads ?
If your service does not maintain state between calls per client, then configure it as "one instance per call and no multithreading" -> No concurrency, high throughput
If your service does maintain state, then configure it as "one instance per session and multithreading" to allow a client to perform concurrent calls. Be careful about concurrency issues and protect your resources.
If your service does not maintain state per client but keeps some global data stored for all calls, consider the "single instance per service and multithreading". Keep in mind the possible concurrency issues. In that you might as well use "one instance per call" and keep the global storage out the service.
A Windows service hosting a WCF endpoint is fine for small services that aren't going to be hit often; you don't have to mess with IIS (which can be a REAL pain IMO). However, there will only be one listener listening, so it's not recommended for a service that is likely to be hit from several places at once (use IIS for that; it sets up an app pool that can handle many simultaneous requests). This model is good for one-on-one interop between two machines; you might set up the service host on a "set and forget" box living out in a warehouse somewhere, and call it to perform simple but custom tasks like rebooting, log dumps, etc.
Avoid having any user app (console or otherwise) host a service endpoint, except for initial proof-of-concept testing. In addition to the single-listener drawback, a user app MUST be run in the context of a logged-in user (not the service users, which are "logged in" as part of Windows startup), and must have custom "keepalive" monitoring; with a service, Windows can be told to simply restart it if it crashes, while it doesn't give a toss about a user app crashing other than to prevent that program taking down the whole OS (and to ask the user if they want to report the crash).
Related
How to host a Windows Service in IIS and keep that service runing like it is running on Windows?
Could I use some feature from WCF service?
I've not access to the Windows itself, only to IIS. Inside that service I'll create a thread which at scheduled time will process some data.
In short, you can't.
A more detailed answer is that there are 2 problems:
IIS worker processes are launched only when a HTTP request comes in. This means you can't start your service with the system.
IIS worker processes are recycled (i.e. restarted) on several conditions. For example, a worker process is restarted if no HTTP request comes in for a long time. This means you can't control when your service is shut down, unless you have access to application pool recycling configuration. Keep in mind that the recycling logic only ensures that all pending HTTP requests are complete, but does not await all background threads to complete.
You can come with a partial solution this way:
Create a WCF service method that checks if your long-running thread is alive and if not, starts it.
Create a very simple windows service that periodically (once in 5 seconds) calls that method. Deploy the service somewhere, e.g. on your own machine.
The only question that remains is: do you really need to avoid windows services? Could you find a place to host the service? There are some use cases when a windows service is the best or even the only way.
You cant, in a nut shell.
However you can make use of the health monitoring API specifically the heartbeat functionality. see:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.management.webheartbeatevent.aspx
for details on the class you will need to implement to be called when there is work to do
also this answer on SO might help
Understanding heartbeat in ASP.NET health monitoring
Once you have implemented a webheartbeatevent derived class you can check your db or what ever you want to check if there is work to do.
A better solution IMHO is to scrap the service entirely and redesign the system to be 100% web based, as services become a deployment and maintenance nightmare. as i assume you are now finding out...
We want to synchronize the data in our application with the data of an external service. (Such as accountancy software. This synchronization should be executed every night and when the customer wants to.
I am aware that long running threads don't belong in web applications and this synchronization should be executed within an external windows service. But the downside of this method is, that is becomes harder to deploy / maintain, since the application can be installed on the customer's webserver too.
Is it possible to completely integrate this synchronization with just the use of a class library project withing my solution, which will start up at the Application_Start event?
Since your application is hosted on IIS, it's maintained by the application pool process. If you create additional module for your task, it will be running within context of the same process. You have to be sure this process is still working in the middle of the night, when application is not used, in order to perform the synchronization you want. You can use Quartz.NET to schedule your sync task.
But still, I think much better idea is to perform the synchronization from windows service. Service should communicate with the application for example by using database, where it logs its current activity. It gives you the possibility to monitor of the service state from the web by connecting to such database. I know service forces some additional administration effort, but it will be much more reliable and secure. You can also add service starting possibility from your web application (if pool process user has access rights to windows service) to overcome (or at least minimize) administration effort connecting with restarting your service after some failure.
I've written such functionality, so just to give you an overall look of what I mean by web monitoring of such external service, check the screen below. It can be written with the ajax support to achieve more responsiveness (pooling mechanism), which will be convenient for the end user.
So I created a Windows Service using C# and created an installer in Visual Studio for it. It's set up to run manually as I don't want it running all the time. I then have another application (C# WPF) that should have an option to turn the service on and off (the service itself creates a web service that in turn communicates back to my WPF application). This works fine in Windows XP, but testing it on a Windows 7 machine, it won't start. Surprisingly it does throw an exception and crash, it just does nothing. I believe this is a permissions problem. If I go to the services control panel using the same Windows 7 account, I'm not able to start or stop the service either.
So my question is, is there a way to set my service so that regular user accounts can start and stop it? And is there a way to set my installer to do this automatically.
I don't want my WPF application to have run as administrator!
Whilst I believe that it is possible to secure a service so that regular users can start and stop it, I do not recommend doing so. This will create a lot of complication and is a potential cause for confusion. I always prefer to keep things simple, especially when it comes to installation and security.
So, if we can't let the user start and stop the service we probably need to let the service run all the time. Since you don't want the service to be active all the time I suggest you give the service its own internal Running flag. When this is set true, the service is active and does busy things, otherwise the service remains idle. You can use your preferred IPC mechanism (sockets, named pipes, WCF etc.) to allow the user to toggle this switch.
Windows 8 has a feature to allow services to start on demand, basically in response to some kind of trigger. But for Windows 7, your only real option is to set it to start automatically on startup. You could set it to start delayed, so that its not adding to the time it takes windows to start.
Regular users cannot start and stop services.
EDIT: Reading the link in the comment above it sounds to me as that is a blanket ability for users to start and stop services. I think the question here is about how to do this for a particular service.
Also, while it may be possible to set the service to run as that particular user, it really means it only works for that particular user and other users on the work station would not be able to use the application as they'd not be able to start or stop the service, assuming that the service running as a user implies that the user may control it, which may not be the case.
Also in reading the comments and other answer, I'm left to wonder if the service can be used by any user which can run the application. That is, if user A logs on to the work station and starts this app (and thus the service), locks it and walks away, what happens when use B logs on and tries to run the same service? Can the service support multiple users at the same time, or will funny things begin to happen if the service is utlized by the application running multiple times.
This really sounds like what is desired is for a background to be started when the application starts. This thread (or threads) would do the work of the service, and by their nature would end when the application ends. Of course more detail in the question would help give a better answer.
Of course if it is appropriate as a service, I see no reason not to have a service with a worker thread that sleeps, and another timer thread that acts as a producer that checks if there's work to do.
I have a data loading application that has to be executed multiple times per day at irregular intervals. I am planning to write a service to kick off the downloads and import the data to a database server. Are there advantages to using a standard service over a webservice or vice versa?
I think you're missing the point here.
Web Services typically are used for a form of communication or remote execution. You call a remote function on a web-service to either adjust the behavior of the machine it's running on or to retrieve data from it.
Windows Services are background processes that run on a machine without any "logged on user" being required. They can perform tasks and do things while the user is at the login screen, or do elevated operations. You can talk to services to adjust their behavior or retrieve information, but it's general purpose is different than a webservice.
The biggest notable difference here is that web-services must be called, they don't run on their own.
For your application I would suggest using a Windows (Standard) Service, as you can have it execute code once per day. I would only use a web-service if you've got something else to automate the calls to the web-service and you require a response from the server detailing it's execution result (success/fail/warning/etc...)
You could also consider writing a normal (windows or console) application that is triggered by a Windows Scheduled Task. What you've described doesn't necessarily sound like something that would require a service.
Sounds like a good use of a windows service to me. Off the top of my head, I'd use a windows service if:
1. Work is performed on a scheduled basis (regular or irregular intervals) in the background;
2. No interaction is needed - work is just done in the background and kicks off based on polling or some other type of trigger (message dropped in queue, database value trigger, scheduled timespan, etc.);
3. Needs to be monitored (either starts/stops along with logging) and you can take advantage of WMI, perfmon and event log with little effort.
A web service is better for tasks that are interactive (like if you wanted to initiate the download based upon a request received).
Sounds like a windows service is the approach you should take.
Hope this helps. Good luck!
If "irregular interval" does mean, the application is invoked by another application, I would use a web service.
If the action is scheduled, I would use a windows service.
If you are working with SQL Server (scheduled or not), I would also consider SQL Server Integration Services.
Scenario: A WCF service receives an XDocument from clients, processes it and inserts a row in an MS SQL Table.
Multiple clients could be calling the WCF service simultaneously. The call usually doesn't take long (a few secs).
Now I need something to poll the SQL Table and run another set of processes in an asynchronous way.
The 2nd process doesn't have to callback anything nor is related to the WCF in any way. It just needs to read the table and perform a series of methods and maybe a Web Service call (if there are records of course), but that's all.
The WCF service clients consuming the above mentioned service have no idea of this and don't care about it.
I've read about this question in StackOverflow and I also know that a Windows Service would be ideal, but this WCF Service will be hosted on a Shared Hosting (discountasp or similar) and therefore, installing a Windows Service will not be an option (as far as I know).
Given that the architecture is fixed (I.E.: I cannot change the table, it comes from a legacy format, nor change the mechanism of the WCF Service), what would be your suggestion to poll/process this table?
I'd say I need it to check every 10 minutes or so. It doesn't need to be instant.
Thanks.
Cheat. Expose this process as another WCF service and fire a go command from a box under your control at a scheduled time.
Whilst you can fire up background threads in WCF, or use cache expiry as a poor man's scheduler those will stop when your app pool recycles until the next hit on your web site and the app pool spins up again. At least firing the request from a machine you control means you know the app pool will come back up every 10 minutes or so because you've sent a request in its direction.
A web application is not suited at all to be running something at a fixed interval. If there are no requests coming in, there is no code running in the application, and if the application is inactive for a while the IIS can decide to shut it down completely until the next request comes in.
For some applications it isn't at all important that something is run at a specific interval, only that it has been run recently. If that is the case for your application then you could just keep track of when the table was last polled, and for every request check if enough time has passed for the table to be polled again.
If you have access to administer the database, there is a scheduler in SQL Server. It can run queries, stored procedures, and even start processes if you have permission (which is very unlikely on a shared hosting, though).
If you need the code on a specific interval, and you can't access the server to schedule it or run it as a service, or can't use the SQL Server scheduler, it's simply not doable.
Make you application pool "always active" and do whatever you want with your threads.