I am currently designing an application in Symfony2 and had a question around when services are instantiated. Basically, are all services instantiated when the container is configured in the application load cycle or at the point when the service is requested from the container?
I understand you can flag services to be lazy loaded through the proxy manager but I just wanted to know what happens by default.
To add some context, I want to create a factory method that returns different services and am unsure whether to define the services in the service config and fetch them from the container when requested or simply instantiate them in the factory itself.
If Symfony loads all the services when the container is loaded then that's a lot of excessive overheard for what I'm trying to do. Also I'd rather not define concrete classes in the factory method.
Thanks for your help.
Related
I want to locally store data in absence of internet connection and thus am using job scheduler to schedule my syncing. So my service needs access to dao and I am not sure what the correct components needs to be defined for dagger to correctly inject dao inside my service. I do not know how to constructor inject in service either. I think it should not be constructor injected into the service. What is the proper approach? And lastly, which coroutine scope should i be using to access database from service? I also need retrofit api to make network calls. How should i inject them into my jobservice?
I have a situation where I need to manually instantiate some objects in Application_BeginRequest that are dependent on some of the same components that I've registered with Autofac. I'd like to use the same instances of components that I've registered with Autofac with InstancePerLifetimeScope for injection into my MVC and WebAPI controllers. My config for both MVC and Web API works as expected, and an example of a component registration looks like so:
builder.Register(c => new MyDbContext()).AsSelf().InstancePerLifetimeScope();
Now I want to use that same instance in the class I'm instantiating in Application_BeginRequest. I've tried the following methods:
//Tried with MVC controllers
DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<MyDbContext>()));
AutofacDependencyResolver.Current.ApplicationContainer.Resolve<MyDbContext>()));
AutofacDependencyResolver.Current.RequestLifetimeScope.Resolve<MyDbContext>()));
//Tried with Web API controllers
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.DependencyResolver.GetService(typeof(MyDbContext))
But none give me what I'm looking for, even at later points in the request lifecylce (ie, beyond BeginRequest). As an aside, I need this to work with the Web API configuration, but I tried the first 3 methods just to see if I could get any of the resolved instances to match up with what Autofac is injecting.
I have what I believe is a decent understanding of lifetime scopes in Autofac and my assumption is that the instances that are being resolved for my application's controllers are in a child scope that the none of the above 4 methods are pointed towards, but it's fuzzy to me what each of the above methods is trying to do in regard to which scope they are looking at and how they decide. What's even fuzzier is what lifetime scopes Autofac is automatically creating for the components that are ultimately injected into my controllers and when they're created.
Clarification on the points above would be a big bonus, but my primary question here is how do I get Autofac to hand me the same instances of registered components in Global.asax that it resolves for Web API and MVC controllers?
If you read up on this subject, you'll notice that folks mention that in most circumstances for a web application, InstancePerLifetimeScope and InstancePerRequest can be used interchangeably. What they don't mention are the exceptions where these two registrations behave differently. Gerrod has an excellent article on lifetime scopes inside of ASP.NET MVC/Web API applications and how they work in which he elaborates on this piece of info that most omit. Understanding this difference is crucial to this scenario, and his article cleared up any misunderstandings I had in regards to InstancePerLifetimeScope registration in relation to ASP.NET applications. It also made me realize that, because I need to share instances of resolved components across my MVC/Web API controllers and within the global.asax, InstancePerLifetimeScope is no longer a suitable means of registration for this application- I now need to use InstancePerRequest.
As per the docs, InstancePerRequest actually uses InstancePerMatchingLifetimeScope under the hood. What I need is a reference to the child scope that is tagged with "AutofacWebRequest" that lives under the root scope. This is the scope that both my MVC and Web API controllers resolve their dependencies from, since they both use the same tag. So how do I get a reference to that particular scope? This was my solution, and I'd love to know if there's a better way to do it.
First off, I need to change my registration from
builder.Register(c => new MyDbContext()).AsSelf().InstancePerLifetimeScope();
to
builder.Register(c => new MyDbContext()).AsSelf().InstancePerRequest();
Now, after I've built my container I have the following method:
private void SetDependencyResolversForMvcAndWebApi(ILifetimeScope container)
{
container.ChildLifetimeScopeBeginning += CaptureRequestLifetimeScope;
DependencyResolver.SetResolver(new AutofacDependencyResolver(container));
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.DependencyResolver = new AutofacWebApiDependencyResolver(container);
}
The only part that wasn't there before is the event subscription. Everytime my container creates a child scope, my event handler gets called. The event handler looks like this:
private void CaptureRequestLifetimeScope(object sender, LifetimeScopeBeginningEventArgs args)
{
if (args.LifetimeScope.Tag == MatchingScopeLifetimeTags.RequestLifetimeScopeTag)
{
//Get the ILifetimeScope created for components registered with InstancePerRequest
var requestScope = args.LifetimeScope;
//This is the same DbContext instance that will be injected into
//my WebAPI and MVC controllers
var context = requestScope.Resolve<MyDbContext>();
//do the rest of my stuff
}
}
I've tested this by holding onto a reference of the resolved DbContext that's resolved within the CaptureRequestLifetimeScope event handler and comparing it to the DbContext instances that are injected into my Web API and MVC controllers, and they are indeed pointing to the same object.
Well, I think you should try changing .InstancePerLifetimeScope() into .InstancePerRequest();
As Autofac says about InstancePerLifetimeScope:
When you resolve the instance per lifetime scope component, you get a single instance per nested scope (e.g., per unit of work).
So when you do Resolve<MyDbContext>() you are probably doing it in a different Lifetime scope than you controller (I guess it's because you're doing an explicit resolution); that's why you're getting a diffent instance.
InstancePerRequest instead:
Some application types naturally lend themselves to “request” type semantics, for example ASP.NET web forms and MVC applications. In these application types, it’s helpful to have the ability to have a sort of “singleton per request.”
The begin phase of your request is already in the request phase, so you shoud get the same instance there and inside your controllers.
Instance per request builds on top of instance per matching lifetime scope by providing a well-known lifetime scope tag, a registration convenience method, and integration for common application types.
Based on this, probably, you can also go for the .InstancePerMatchingLifetimeScope("myrequest"), but you will have to manually instanciate a Lifetime scope everywhere like this using(var scope1 = container.BeginLifetimeScope("myrequest")); I think is not so practical.
Obviously I suppose you will not use those elements outside of the request scope, or you will get an exception. In that case, you are forced to the MatchingLifetimeScope.
If you need more details, the Autofac guide is extremely clear.
DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<MyDbContext>()));
AutofacDependencyResolver.Current.RequestLifetimeScope.Resolve<MyDbContext>()));
are same. They get current request lifetime scope. If you resolve some instance here, it shares it with cotrollers. (In this stiuation, instance per request and instance per lifetime will be same. Because their lifetime is same).
AutofacDependencyResolver.Current.ApplicationContainer.Resolve<MyDbContext>()));
This wil be resolved from root container. That's why it will create another instance for request lifetime scope. This will not be shared. And this will live in root container. (If you have per request instance, this will give error).
I have tested first one. It shares instance resolved in Application_BeginRequest with mvc controllers but not with Api controllers.
Then I tried to get GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.DependencyResolver.GetRequestLifetimeScope() in Application_BeginRequest it returns null.
I think, if it's api request, Autofac doesn't start request lifetime yet in Application_BeginRequest (May be it's related .net).
So if it's api request and if we can't reach autofac request life time. I don't know how to share this instance with mvc and api controllers which is resolved in Application_BeginRequest.
May be Travis can make it clear.
I have started to go through Symfony2 code, studied a little bit small classes like Pimple and after few hours of examination have come to strange idea. The best start for this is to explain how I understand few terms, so:
Dependency
Something which is needed for another thing to work, like "engine" in "car"
Container
Object or class which is able to store a lot of another objects, like "engine","gearbox" or even "car"
Dependency Injection
Process in which every dependency is injected to object, so if I need "car" I know that I have to inject "engine","gearbox" and a lot of another stuff. Important is, that "car" don't create "engine", but "engine" is put inside "car"
Service Locator
Process in which object asks for another object, for example into the car there is inserted our container, and when car need to start it require from container "engine", so container return him "engine"
When i studied Symphony code, they start with dependency injection, but after some time I realize that when Controller is created, there is injected whole container and then you can use $this->get('serviceName') to get it, so it more looks like service locator, which according to few articles is anti-pattern.
Sow how is it? Is that line between DI and SL so small that it is sometimes broken? Or did I misunderstood something? If I use DI, do I need to insert every service into controller, so I know from outside what I use? Or can controller become in some cases container?
Your understanding of DI is pretty good. And yes, Symfony Controller does implement ContainerAwareInterface, and as you said, has a service locator role. But service locator isn't an anti-pattern. Each pattern has it's proper and improper uses.
Furthermore, Symfony doesn't enforce you in any way to use it's Controller. Your Controller can be a service. Hell, it can even be a function!
Here is one of the reasons why Controllers are implemented as service locators: Performance.
Let's drop car analogy and focus on real case that you'll encounter in 99% of projects: you need CRUD for a resource. Let's say you're building a Todo app and you need a RESTfulish controller to handle CRUD operations for Task Resource.
The least you need to have is a way to read all tasks and a way to add a new task, for that you need two actions: index (commonly named list too), and store (commonly named create too).
Common flow in Symfony would be this, in pseudo code:
indexAction -> getDoctrine -> getTaskRepository -> getAllTasks
storeAction -> getFormFactory -> createForm -> bindRequestDataToForm -> getDoctrine -> saveData
If Controller was a service locator
Index Action
When index action is executed, only service that will be resolved from the container will be ManagerRegistry (in this case Doctrine service). We will then ask it to give us task repository, and we'll do our operation with it.
Store Action
When store action is executed, we will do a bit more work: ask container to give us FormFactory, do some operations with it, and then ask it to give us Doctrine and do some operations with it too.
So summary: when index action is executed, only one service has to be constructed by service container, when update is executed, two will have to be constructed.
If Controller was a regular service
Let's see what our Controller needs. From the section above, we see that it needs FormFactory and Doctrine.
Now, when you just want to call index action to read all tasks from data storage, your controller will have to get instantiated by container. Before it can be instantiated, container needs to instantiate it's dependencies: FormFactory and Doctrine. Then instantiate controller while injecting those two into it.
So, you are calling index action which doesn't need FormFactory at all, but you still have overhead of creating it because it is needed for an action that will not be called at all in that request.
Lazy Services
To reduce this overhead, there is a thing called lazy service. It works by actually injecting a Proxy of your service into the controller. So, as far as controller is concerned, it got FormFactory. What it doesn't know is that isn't real FormFactory but instead a fake object which will delegate calls to real FormFactory code when you call some method on it.
Wrapping it up
Controller doesn't have to be a service locator, but can be. Making it a service locator can be a bit more performant and easier to bootstrap, but hides dependencies. Furthermore, it's a bit harder to test, since you'll need to mock dependency container. Whether you want to make your controllers services, functions or service locators is your choice and Symfony won't enforce you to use any of those ways.
In my experience, extending default Symfony Controller and having controllers be service locators is just fine as long as you don't write your business logic in them, but instead delegate all that work to services, which you get from container. That way, it's really unlikely that you'll have bugs in controller code (as methods will usually consist of 2-3 lines of code) and can get away without testing it.
I'm quite new to Symfony 2 and I'm moving to advanced topics like services. When should an object be a service?
For example, say that you have a facade object for making a call to a REST service. This class needs a username and password. Would it be correct modeling that class as a global service? Even if it's used only in a portion of the whole project?
# app/config/config.yml
parameters:
my_proxy.username: username
my_proxy.password: password
services:
my_proxy:
class: Acme\TestBundle\MyProxy
arguments: [%my_proxy.username%, %my_proxy.password%]
Definition taken from the Symfony2 glossary:
A Service is a generic term for any PHP object that performs a specific task. A service is usually used "globally", such as a database connection object or an object that delivers email messages. In Symfony2, services are often configured and retrieved from the service container. An application that has many decoupled services is said to follow a service-oriented architecture.
I think your example is a perfect candidate for a service.
You don't want to copy construction code to all places you need your API client. It's better to delegate this task to the dependency injection container.
This way it's easier to maintain (as construction happens in one place and it's configurable).
It's also more flexible as you can easily change the API client class without affecting code which uses it (as long as it implements the same interface).
I don't think there's a golden rule. But basically all classes implementing a task are good candidates for a service. Entities on the other hand are not as they're most often just data holders.
I always recommend Fabien's series of articles on the subject: http://fabien.potencier.org/article/11/what-is-dependency-injection
Yes, because this will spare you the configuration part. You're not going to fetch the username and password and give it to the constructor each time you need this class.
Ok, so the problem is:
I've got some 'order' entity, and it has 'status' property. On changing status, i wanted some other objects to be informed of this event, so i've decided to use Observer pattern. One of the observers notifies clients via email. Now i want to render Email text's from some of the twig templates. As i get from the Book, rendering templates in controllers are done with 'templating' service.
So the question as it follows: How can i access 'templating' service in my Observer class?
Specification:
I was advised, to implement my Observer as a service, but i'm not sure 'bout that. I've tried to solve this problem, and here is my options:
Use Registry. Solution that is straight and hard as rail. I guess it misses the whole point of DI and Service Container. Huge plus of this solution, is that i can access all common services from any point of my application.
To pass needed services from the context via constructor, or via setters. This is more like in Sf2 spirit. There comes another list of problems, which are not related to this question field.
Use observers as a service. I'm not really sure 'bout this option 'cos, in the book it is written, that service is a common functionality, and i don't think that observing entity with number of discrete properties is a common task.
I'm looking for a Sf2 spirit solution, which will be spread over whole project, so all answers with an explanation are appreciated.
As with any other service in a Symfony2 project, you can access it from within other classes through the dependency injector container. Basically what you would do is register your observer class as a service, and then inject the templating service into your observer service. See the docs for injecting services.
If you're not familiar with how Symfony handles dependency injection, I'd suggest reading that entire chapter of the documentation - it's very helpful. Also, if you want to find all the services that are registered for application, you can use the console command container:debug. You can also append a service name after that to see detailed info about the service.
Edit
I read your changes to the question, but still recommend going down the DI route. That is the Symfony2 spirit :) You're worried that your observer isn't common enough to be used as a service, but there's no hard rule saying "You must use this piece of code in X locations in order for it to be 'common'".
Using the DIC comes with another huge benefit - it handles other dependencies for you. Let's say the templating service has 3 services injected into itself. When using the DIC, you don't need to worry about the templating service's dependencies - they are handled for you. All you care about is telling it "inject the templating service into this other service" and Symfony takes care of all the heavy lifting.
If you're really opposed to defining your observer as a service, you can use constructor or setter injection as long as you're within a container-aware context.