I am already using the standard WebAPI and returning JSON objects to my client. Now I saw an application that returned OData.
Can someone explain if there is any reason for me to use OData if I do not want to query my data from anything other than my own client running in the browser. Are there advantages that I could get through using OData ?
If you are only using your data in your own browser application, there is only few advantages to use OData in your situation:
OData is able to provide metadata about your service interface that can be used to generate client code to access the service. So if you have lots of client classes that you need to create, this could speed up your process. On the other hand, if you can share your classes between the server and an ASP.NET based client or if you only have a few classes, this might not be relevant in your situation.
Another - bigger - advantage in your situation is the support for generic queries against the service data. OData supports IQueryable so that you can decide on the client side on how to filter the data that the service provides. So you do not have to implement various actions or use query parameters to provide filtered data. This also means that if you need a new filter for your client, it is very likely that you do not have to change the server and can just put up the query on the client side. Possible filters include $filter expressions to filter the data, but also operations like $skip and $top that are useful when paging data. For details on OData and queries, see this link.
For a complete overview about OData and Web API see this link.
Here are few advantages of OData.
OData is a open protocol started by Microsoft is based on Rest Services so we can get data base on URL.
It suppport various protocol like http,atom,pub and also support JSON format.
No need to create proxy classes which we used to do it in web service.
You will able to write your own custom methods.
It is very light weight so the interaction between client and server will be fast compared to web service and other technologies.
Very simple to use.
Here are few reference links.
http://sandippatilprogrammer.wordpress.com/2013/12/03/what-is-odata-advantages-and-disadvantages/
http://geekswithblogs.net/venknar/archive/2010/07/08/introduction-odata.aspx
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/why-microsofts-open-data-protocol-matters/12700
I agree with the answers already posted, but as an additional insight...
You mentioned that:
... if I do not want to query my data from anything other than my own
client running in the browser...
You may not wish to run it normally through anything but your own cilent, but using oData you could use other querying tools for debugging. For example LinqPad allows you to use oData endpoints (such as that provided by stackoverflow).
It's probably not a good enough reason to implement oData if you don't have another reason to do so, but it's an added bonus.
Related
So I've this Microservice architecture where there is an ApiGateway, 2 microservices i.e., Configurations. API and API-1. The Configuration. API is mainly responsible to parse the JSON request and
access the DB and update Status tables, also to fetch required data, it even adds up more values to the JSON request and send it to the API-1. API-1 is responsible to just generate report based on the json passed.
Yes I can merge the configurations. API to the API-1 and make it a single service/container but the requirement is not to merge and create two different components i.e., 1 component purely based on
fetching the data, updating the status while the other just to generate the reports.
So here are some questions:
: Should I use gRPC for the configuration.API or is there a better way to achieve this.
Thank you.
RPC is a synchronous communication so you have to come up with strong reason to use it in service to service communication. it brings the fast and performant communication on the table but also coupling to the services. if you insist use rpc it is better to use MASSTRANSIT to implement the rpc in less coupled way. however in most cases the asynchronous event-base communication is recommended to avoid coupling (in that case look at CAP theory, SAGA, circuit breaker ).
since you said
but the requirement is not to merege and create two different
components
and that is your reason and also base on the fact
also to fetch requried data, it even adds up more values to the JSON
request and send it to the API-1
i think the second one makes scenes more. how ever i cant understand why you change the database position since you said the configuration service is responsible for that.
if your report service needs request huge data to generate report you have to think about the design. there is no more profile on you domain so there cannot be an absolute answer to this. but consider data reduce from insertion or request or some sort of pre-calculation if you could and also caching responses.
I am trying to see if there is a way to get the ComponentPresentations by passing the list of ComponentIDs in one single API instead of passing each one in a loop. In my case all the DCPs are using the same template as well.
When I checked the API I could not find any method which could accept the list of tcmids or something in those lines. The use case I am trying to solve is getting all the DCPs in one single API call vs. looping through 10-15 (in my case) and get each DCP independently which is not effective when the first time we hit the broker db.
I was able to get the same using OData web service, but we not yet ready to use the Odata. Not sure if Odata and broker API are slightly different, but could not find any documentation that explain API vs Odata difference in capabilities from query point.
Any help will be appreciated.
ENV: Tridion 2011 SP1, Java API.
OData and Broker API are very different. If you want information on OData I'd recommend checking here and here.
No, you can't do that operation through the Content Delivery API. With a properly configured cache you will be hitting the database only once per component presentation, so the impact is minimized...
I'm very new at WCF (and .NET in general), so I apologize if this is common knowledge.
I'm designing a WCF solution (currently using Entity Framework to access the database). I want to grab a (possibly very large) set of data from the database, and return it to the client, but I don't want to serialize the entire set of data over the wire all at once, due to performance concerns.
I'd like to operation to return some sort of object to the client that represents the resulting data and I'd like to deal with that data on the client, being able to navigate through it backwards and forwards and retrieve the actual data over the wire as needed.
I don't want to write a lot client code to individually find out what rows meet my search criteria, then make separate calls to get each record if I can help it. I'm trying to keep the client as simple as possible.
Ideally, I'd like to write the client code similar to something like the below pseudocode:
Reference1.Service1Client MyService = new Reference1.Service1Client("Service1");
DelayedDataSet<MyRecordType> MyResultSet = MyService.GetAllCustomers();
MyResultSet.First();
while (!MyResultSet.Eof)
{
Console.Writeline(MyResultSet.CurrentRecord().CUSTFNAME + " " + MyResultSet.CurrentRecord().CUSTLNAME);
Console.Writeline("Press Enter to see the next customer");
Console.Readline();
MyResultSet.Next();
}
Of course, DelayedDataSet is something I just made up, and I'm hoping something like it exists in .NET.
The call to MyService.GetAllCustomers() would return this DelayedDataSet object, with would not actually contain the actual records. The actual data wouldn't come over the wire until CurrentRecord() is called. Next() and Previous() would simply update a cursor on the server side to point to the appropriate record. I don't want the client to have any direct visibility to the database or Entity Framework.
I'm guessing that the way I wrote the code probably won't work over WCF, and that the functions like CurrentRecord(), Next(), First(), etc. would have to be separate service contract operations. I guess I'm just looking for a way to do this without having to write all my own code to cache the results on the server, somehow persist the data sets server side, write all the retrieval and navigation code in my service library, etc. I'm hoping most of this is already done for me.
It seems like this would be a very commonly needed function. So, does something like this exist?
-Joe
No, that's not what WCF is designed to do.
In WCF, the very basic core architecture is that you have a client and a server, and nothing but (XML-)serialized data going between the two over the wire.
WCF is not a remote-procedure call method, or some sort of remote object mechanism - there is no connection between the client and the server except the serialized message that conforms to the service (and data) contracts defined between the two.
WCF is not designed to handle huge data volumes - it's designed to handle individual messages (GetCustomerByID(42) and such). Since WCF is from the ground up designed to be interoperable with other platforms (non - .NET, too - like Java, Ruby etc.) you should definitely not be using heavy-weight .NET specific types like DataSet anyway - use proper objects.
Also, since WCF ultimately serializes everything to XML and send it across a wire, all the data being passed must be expressible in XML schema - which excludes interfaces and/or generics.
From what I'm reading in your post, what you're looking for is more of a "in-proc" data access layer - not a service level. So if you want to keep going down this path, you should investigate the repository and unit-of-work patterns in conjunction with Entity Framework.
More info:
MSDN: What is Windows Communication Foundation?
WCF Essentials—A Developer's Primer
Picture of the very basic WCF architecture from that Primer - there's only a wire with a serialized message connecting client and server - nothing more; but serialization will always happen
I'm wondering which is better approach from performance point of view, is it better to use one web-service method to load data by passing Database Table name and keys or is it better to use separate method for each database table! knowing that i'm using .net asmx through ajax requests.
it's obvious that one method is better from OO perspective since it have one function type 'data loading' but what about performance? does IIS affected by that or not? also is it better to make multi web-services 'asmx files' or just one!
I really dont think that creating separate methods for handling data fetch different tables is necessary. The performance gain\loss that u r likely to experience by passing an additional table name param to your webservice call would be too small to even consider unless your table names are really huge, which i dont think is the case.
The only reason i would even consider doing some thing like this is if i have nothing else to do in terms of performance improvement or if being forced to do it ;-).
If you really want to optimize your request size try
serializing your input params using JSON (if you are not doing it already)
use a cookieless domain for your webservice
hope this helps
I don't think the service level should have any knowledge of database tables, just like you ideally don't want to see data access code in a controller action or ASPX's code behind.
Personally, I prefer to organize my services to match my domain model.
If I have Customer, Order, and Item classes, for example, I would have corresponding Customer.asmx, Order.asmx, and Item.asmx services to expose selected methods within those classes.
Services are typically responsible for exposing business functionality through a contract. I realize ASMX services really had not concept of "Contracts" in their broadest sense, however you think of it as a set of operations supported by the service. What is your goal here, do you want to expose tabular data as a service ?
Service technology on the Microsoft stack has come a long way from ASMX. Perhaps an obvious question, have you looked at WCF Data Services?
Links:
Exposing Your Data as a Service (WCF Data Services)
Getting Started with WCF Data Services
I used to create normal webservices in my websites, and call these services from javascript to make ajax calls.
Now i am learning about Ado Data Services,
My question is:
Does this Ado Data Services can replace my normal webservice in new sites i will create?
And if Yes,
Can i put these Ado Data Services in a separate project "local on the same server" and just reference from my website? "to use the same services for my websites internal use and also give the same services to other websites or services, the same as twitter for example doing"
depends what you want to do , I suggest you read my conversation with Pablo Castro the architect of Ado.Net Data Services
Data Services - Lacking
Here is basically Pablo's words.
I agree that some of these things are quite inconvenient and we're looking at fixing them (e.g. use of custom types in addition to types defined in the input model in order to produce custom result-sets). However, some others are just intrinsic to the nature of Data Services.
The Data Services framework is not a gateway to a database and in general if you need something like that then Data Services will just get in the way. The goal of Data Services is to create a resource model out of an input data model, and expose it with a RESTful interface that exposes the uniform interface, such that every unit of data in the underlying model ("entities") become an addressable resource that can be manipulated with the standard verbs.
Often the actual implementation of a RESTful interface includes more sophisticated behaviors than just doing CRUD over the data under the covers, which need to be defined in a way that doesn't break the uniform interface. That's why the Data Services server runtime has hooks for business logic and validation in the form of query/change interceptors and others. We also acknowledge that it's not always possible or maybe practical to model absolutely everything as resources operated with standard verbs, so we included service operations as a escape-hatch.
Things like joins dilute the abstraction we're trying to create. I'm not saying that they are bad or anything (relational databases without them wouldn't be all that useful), it's just that if what's required for a given application scenario is the full query expressiveness of a relational database to be available at the service boundary, then you can simply exchange queries over the wire (and manage the security implications of that). For joins that can be modeled as association traversals, then data services already has support for them.
I guess this is a long way to say that Data Services is not a solution for every problem that involves exposing data to the web. If you want a RESTful interface over a resource model that matches our underlying data model, then it usually works out well and it will save you a lot of work. If you need a custom inteface or direct access to a database, then Data Services is typically not the right tool and other framework components such as WCF's SOAP and REST support do a great job at that.