I am having a hard-time implementing the workaround to the problem with disposing Cache mentioned in this thread MemoryCache Empty : Returns null after being set.
My latest attempt has the following code to get an instance, wrapped as suggested, in a using statement to suppress the cache from being disposed:
private static CacheDl _instance;
public static CacheDl Instance
{
get
{
if (_instance == null)
{
using (ExecutionContext.SuppressFlow())
{
_instance = new CacheDl();
}
}
return _instance;
}
}
private static ObjectCache Cache { get { return MemoryCache.Default; } }
Of course this doesn't work.. I have also tried wrapping the Cache 'getter' in something similar but still no deal.
I have also tried specifying a large pollingInterval to suppress the behavior altogether and still no success.
private ObjectCache _cache;
private ObjectCache Cache
{
get
{
using (ExecutionContext.SuppressFlow())
{
return _cache ?? (_cache = new MemoryCache("my-cache", new NameValueCollection { { "pollingInterval", "30:00:00" } }));
}
}
}
You guessed it, no luck. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
By the way, I have already requested the mentioned Fixpack from Microsoft but not yet heard anything back after 4 hours having submitted the request..
Honestly, I would really prefer that this would be rolled up into an official Windows Update so we wouldn't have to hack around to get this working on non-.NET 4.5 systems.
Update:
Specifically, I would like to know how I am meant to implement the recommended work-around. Can someone please show an example of how this can be implemented?
I am working on this same problem. In my case the problem seems to be the cache is disposed on the AppDomain's UnhandledException event. See the source snippet of MemoryCache here.
As you can see, it disposes itself. My solution is to wrap my cache access in a class that can subscribe to this event and initialize a new cache when the old one gets disposed. This solution seems to work for me but it does feel rather hack-y.
The cache will still be cleared unexpectedly on the UnhandledException event, but at least this way you are able to start over using a new cache.
public class MyCacheWrapper
{
private MemoryCache cache;
public MyCacheWrapper()
{
cache = new MemoryCache("settings");
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.UnhandledException += (sender, args) =>
{
if(args.IsTerminating)
cache = new MemoryCache("settings");
};
}
}
Note also that you can also use this class to dispose and recreate the cache when you wish to clear it, because MemoryCache's Trim() method does not work properly.
Ended up sorting this out with configuration settings to extend the Cache polling interval sufficient enough that the application pool will recycle before the interval is reached. Had tried doing this in code when constructing a Cache instance but that didn't work out..
A comment on the relevant Connect issue mentions this as workable hack if you can control your application pool, while another mentions this on the social.msdn forum.
Connect Issue
social.msdn
The configuration setting which increases the polling interval by 30 hours:
<system.runtime.caching>
<memoryCache>
<namedCaches>
<add name="Default"
cacheMemoryLimitMegabytes="0"
physicalMemoryLimitPercentage="0"
pollingInterval="30:00:00" />
</namedCaches>
</memoryCache>
</system.runtime.caching>
Related
We recently upgraded Microsoft's Unity in our project from version 3.5.1404 to 5.8.6. With only a few minor adjustments in our code this upgrade seemed to go pretty easy. It resolves all our registered instances without a problem. However, we also use Unity's Interception-mechanism to cache some results that a method returns in AOP-style. This cache mechanism is broken since the upgrade and we can't figure out why. Apparently, our attributes are no longer called when a decorated method is called.
It currently works as follows. We register the interception like this:
var container = new UnityContainer();
container.RegisterType<IService, Service>(some_lifetime);
container.AddNewExtension<Interception>();
container.Configure<Interception>()
.SetInterceptorFor(typeof(IService), new InterfaceInterceptor());
In the Service class, which implements IService we have a method that is decorated with a custom Cache attribute, like this:
public class Service : IService {
[Cache(..)]
public Result SomeMethod() {
// Some code
}
}
And lastly, our custom Cache attribute which inherits from Unity's HandlerAttribute:
public class CacheAttribute : HandlerAttribute
{
// ctor
public override ICallHandler CreateHandler(IUnityContainer container)
{
return new CacheCallHandler(container, and, some, more);
}
}
When method SomeMethod used to be called with version 3.5.1404 the attribute was called first, but since 5.8.6 it no longer calls this attribute. The code however, does compile. The changes we had to make to make it compile are mostly changes in usings. Like Microsoft.Practices.Unity.InterceptionExtension which changed to Unity.Interception.PolicyInjection.Policies.
We can't figure out why this mechanism is no longer working. And even after extensive research on the internet, we can't find a way to get this to work. Any suggesties would therefore be greatly appreciated!
I got in your exact same situation while trying to refresh some legacy code. I got it working with:
Changing:
config.SetInterceptorFor(myType, new InterfaceInterceptor()); for
config.SetInterceptorFor(myType, new TransparentProxyInterceptor());
Registering the class that inherits from HandlerAttribute
Container.RegisterType<MyHandlerAttribute>(new PerRequestLifeTimeManager());
Register each type to intercept with special InjectionMembers:
Container.RegisterType<MyClassToBeIntercepted>(
new Interceptor<TransparentProxyInterceptor>(),
new InterceptionBehavior<PolicyInjectionBehavior>()
);
So I created a class to hold user settings and i'm saving it as a JSON string so that I can modify it whenever I please without doing migrations every time I add one setting.
Anyways everything is working wonderful, well until, exception, I look further into it, and I've found things about it being thread safe but I don't really understand what they mean, how is my simple function that accesses entity identity dbcontext, not thread safe?
public static AppUserSettings GetUserSettings(this IIdentity identity)
{
var user = IdentityDbContext.Users.Find(identity.GetUserId());
return user.SettingsClass != null ? JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<AppUserSettings>(user.SettingsClass) : new AppUserSettings();
}
and the sister function:
public static void SetUserSettings(this IIdentity identity, AppUserSettings toSaveUserSettings)
{
var user = IdentityDbContext.Users.Find(identity.GetUserId());
user.SettingsClass = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(toSaveUserSettings);
DatabaseUtil.SaveChanges(IdentityDbContext);
}
Any help is appreciated, if need be I can attach other classes and/or snippets, but I feel like it is largely a Identity/Entity issue.
I have an ASP.NET application with NHibernate, for some reason few developers forgot to close the sessions in some pages (like 20 I think), I know that the best solution is to go through each page and make sure the sessions are closed properly, but I can't do that kind of movement because the code is already on production. So I was trying to find a way to get all the opened sessions in the session factory and then close it using the master page or using an additional process but I can't find a way to do that.
So, is there a way to get all the opened sessions? or maybe set the session idle timeout or something, what do you suggest?. Thanks in advice.
As far as I know, there is no support for getting a list of open sessions from the session factory. I have my own method to keep an eye on open sessions and I use this construction:
Create a class with a weak reference to a ISession. This way you won't interupt the garbage collector if sessions are being garbage collected:
public class SessionInfo
{
private readonly WeakReference _session;
public SessionInfo(ISession session)
{
_session = new WeakReference(session);
}
public ISession Session
{
get { return (ISession)_session.Target; }
}
}
create a list for storing your open sessions:
List<SessionInfo> OpenSessions = new List<SessionInfo>();
and in the DAL (data access layer) I have this method:
public ISession GetNewSession()
{
if (_sessionFactory == null)
_sessionFactory = createSessionFactory();
ISession session = _sessionFactory.OpenSession();
OpenSessions.Add(new SessionInfo(session));
return session;
}
This way I maintain a list of open sessions I can query when needed. Perhaps this meets your needs?
Help me solve next problem.
I have ASP .NET MVC2 application. I run it on IIS 7.5. In one page user clicks button and handler for this button sends request to server (jquery.ajax). At server action in controller starts new thread (it makes long time import):
var thread = new Thread(RefreshCitiesInDatabase);
thread.Start();
State of import is available in static variable. New thread changes value of variable in the begin of work.
User can check state of import too with the help of this variable, which is used in view. And user sees import's state.
When I start this function few minutes everything is okey. On page I see right state of import, quantity of imported records is changed, I see changes in logs. But after few minutes begin troubles.
When I refresh page with import state sometimes I see that import is okey but sometimes I see page with default values about import (like application is just started), but after that again I can see page with normal import's state.
I tried to attach Visual Studio to IIS process and debug application. But when request comes to controller sometimes static variables have right values and sometimes they have default values (static int has 0, static string has "" etc.).
Tell me what I do wrong. May be I must start additional thread in other way?
Thanks in advance,
Dmitry
I add parts of code:
Controller:
public class ImportCitiesController : Controller
{
[Dependency]
public SaveCities SaveCities { get; set; }
//Start import
public JsonResult StartCitiesImport()
{
//Methos in core dll, which makes import
SaveCities.StartCitiesSaving();
return Json("ok");
}
//Get Information about import
public ActionResult GetImportState()
{
var model = new ImportCityStatusModel
{ NowImportProcessing = SaveCities.CitiesSaving };
return View(model);
}
}
Class in Core:
public class SaveCities
{
// Property equals true, when program are saving to database
public static bool CitiesSaving = false;
public void StartCitiesSaving()
{
var thread = new Thread(RefreshCitiesInDatabase);
thread.Start();
}
private static void RefreshCitiesInDatabase()
{
CitiesSaving = true;
//Processing......
CitiesSaving = false;
}
}
UPDATE
I think, I found problem, but still I don't know how solve it. My IIS uses application pool with parameter "Maximum Worker Processes" = 10. And all tasks in application are handled by few processes. And my request to controll about import's state always is handled by different processes. And they have different static variables. I guess it is right way for solving.
But I don't know how merge all static values in one place.
Without looking at the code, here are the obvious question. Are you sure your access is thread safe (that is do you properly use lock to update you value or even access it => C# thread safety with get/set) ?
A code sample could be nice.
thanks for the code, it seem that CitiesSaving is not locked properly before read/write you should hide the instance variable behind a property to handle all the locking. Marking this field as volatile could also help (see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa645755(v=vs.71).aspx )
i try to put a lock to a static string object to access to cache,, the lock() block executes in my local,but whenever i deploy it to the server, it locks forever. i write every single step to event log to see the process and lock(object) just causes the deadlock on the server. The command right after lock() is never executed as the i dont see an entry in the event log.
below is the code:
public static string CacheSyncObject = "CacheSync";
public static DataView GetUsers()
{
DataTable dtUsers = null;
if (HttpContext.Current.Cache["dtUsers"] != null)
{
Global.eventLogger.Write(String.Format("GetUsers() cache hit: {0}",dtUsers.Rows.Count));
return (HttpContext.Current.Cache["dtUsers"] as DataTable).Copy().DefaultView;
}
Global.eventLogger.Write("GetUsers() cache miss");
lock (CacheSyncObject)
{
Global.eventLogger.Write("GetUsers() locked SyncObject");
if (HttpContext.Current.Cache["dtUsers"] != null)
{
Global.eventLogger.Write("GetUsers() opps, another thread filled the cache, release lock");
return (HttpContext.Current.Cache["dtUsers"] as DataTable).Copy().DefaultView;
}
Global.eventLogger.Write("GetUsers() locked SyncObject"); ==> this is never written to the log, so which means to me that, lock() never executes.
You're locking on a string, which is a generally bad idea in .NET due to interning. The .NET runtime actually stores all identical literal strings only once, so you have little control over who sees a specific string.
I'm not sure how the ASP.NET runtime handles this, but the regular .NET runtime actually uses interning for the entire process which means that interned strings are shared even between different AppDomains. Thus you could be deadlocking between different instances of you method.
What happens if you use:
public static object CacheSyncObject = new object();