I have an application that I'm building and for the moment, I built some web services using ASMX. In the end, the application will be deployed on azure. The web services are really simple in that all they do is call a class in the AppCode folder that handles all the work.
Is it going to be better/easier/faster/more performant to move my web services to WCF or to Web API?
Thanks for your suggestions.
PS: I want to add that the web services will need to work in HTTPS. At the moment, they're on HTTP because I'm in development mode.
One-liner: if you have already got a working code and it is risky to move it to another technology stay with the working code.
Depends who is answering.
Web API embraces HTTP and gives you flexibilities not possible with ASMX and WCF. If you care about HTTP, content-negotiation, media types and you need your service to be called from any client (including AJAX) then Web API.
If you need to be able to use WS* security standards (e.g. using X509 certificates, ADFS, etc), possibly change your binding, serve to different clients using different bindings, extensibility, etc use WCF.
If you already have a working code, and all you care about is RPC and your clients are always going to use ASMX then stick with ASMX.
Performance
No benchmark but my gut feeling, in descending order: Web API, ASMX, WCF
Easier
In descending order: ASMX (since you know it), Web API, WCF
Faster development
If you know them all, Web API and ASMX then WCF
PS: it is good to pick up new technologies. The way things are going (and since you are already moving to Azure) it is important to invest on new technologies.
Related
I need advise on the architecture of my new application. In the environment I work in, we normally create Win based apps and these compose a UI layer, Business Layer, WCF Service Layer, and Data Access Layer. These are on a 3 tier architecture with Services Server, Database Server and clients machines accessing the application via Citrix on an Application Server. I just created a web aplpication and my admin has suggested this should be hosted on a separate web server, my question is, is there a need for my web application to use a WCF Service Layer, since it can be hosted on the same application server? Basically, do websites need to use wcf/service layers and what are the benefits?
1.
Read this:
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/10746/Dude-where-s-my-business-logic
My advice:
At the least, you should use WCF, and use "named pipes". You can deploy both the Host (WCF) and the Client (Asp.Net website) on the same machine.
The Asp.Net website will be the "client" and access the service.
Then, if you ever want to horizontally scale, all you have to do is change the .config settings to use a different protocol besides named-pipes.
Aka, you'll have the "logical separation", even if you deploy both on the same physical machine(s).
They (websites, any project) don't "need" to do anything.
You can write inline sql code behind buttons on webforms if you want.
But its not maintainable. And its not scalable. And it is probably foolish.
But putting in the time to SOA a mid to large sized application is worth the effort in the beginning, IMHO.
This is a question without a concrete possible answer, do you need a wcf? well that depends on the requirements and the architecture you want to put in place.
based on the small context you provide maybe you can get some the following benefits
WCF Provide state for operations
Fast processing (binary serialization)
WCF are more likely 'to be testable' than legacy asmx web services
You can access the same backend you built for your desktop applications
regarding if than can be accessed from the same server, the short answer is yes (obviously you need to measure your server capabilities)
I've done some app's that doesn't use a wcf at all, and other that use it for certain operations you can take a look to this SO answer to get a good example where a wcf could be a good candidate in an app.
Some time ago, about 2 years ago, I was working on web portal that was developed in .NET 2.0. and had plenty of asmx pages.
The other day, one of my coleagues that was more adept at ASP .NET said: "ASMX is old and ugly, we shoud rewrite it". So we did it, as far as I remember we moved to ashx handler.
But now, as I'm preparing to pass 70-515, I came across one some materials that still suggest to learn asmx services (with respect to AJAX). So is that approach still valid in new ASP .NET 3.5/4.0 web projects? If so, then when & where should I use it?
Or perhaps 2 years ago, I was soo ignorant, that we used some kind of old version of asmx and we moved to new asmx.
P.S. As I was entering tag "asmx" I saw a message: "asmx is obsolete" : https://stackoverflow.com/tags/asmx/info
If you can work with WCF then yes the ASMX services are obsolete because the WCF can fully replace them with more performance and flexibility (multiple binding), functionality. If you can write a WCF service then if you will be requested to create an ASMX service for some reason there will be no problem for you to do it.
And moving from ASMX to ASHX was not a smart move because they are not for replacing each other.
Oddly we moved from ASMX to WCF and then back to ASMX. WCF has quite a few downsides, most of all is cross-platform compatibility issues. If everyone consuming your service is on .NET this isn't an issue, but not all other frameworks have supported the full stack, and frequently they just can't do what WCF produces. We also found that dealing with security and testing was a pain in WCF. If your webservice is marked secure, it has to be secure in WCF, even in your testing environment, which means getting actual SSL certs for each developer. A tremendous pain to be sure.
ASMX and WCF are technologies to build web services in .NET. WCF was introduced in .NET 3.0. Its goal is to provide a standard abstraction over all communication technologies and is a recommended way of implementing web services in .NET.
What are the differences between WCF and ASMX web services?
ASHX is a way to write HTTPHandlers in .NET. For more information on what are HTTPHandler
http://forums.asp.net/t/1166701.aspx/1
ASMX services are supported in .NET. However migrating to WCF is recommended. Also, you should write all new services in WCF.
Yes, asmx is obsolute with WCF service. you can use asmx when you are working with < 4.0 aspx.
ashx will not be exact replace of asmx.
If you have coding format issue / standard / plenty of code then you can go with MVC Web API 2 (4.0 itself). but compare to WCF you must ensure what will be the recipient's response expectation
("WCF is the evolution of the web service(ASMX) and support various protocols like TCP, HTTP, HTTPS, Named Pipes, MSMQ. but Web api only for HTTP(s)").
I can't find anything on the implementation of service discovery for the ASP.NET Web API. For a new project I need to make a decision between WCF and Web API. The service element will be consumed by a variety of clients, mobile, client-side JavaScript but also an ASP.NET website.
For the website the convenience of being able to generate a client against a WCF service is obviously a plus. I am not that familiar with RESTful web services but I see that there is Web Application Description Language (WADL). Maybe it is my ignorance but surely it is a good thing to be able to advertise the correct way to consume your service?
My main question: is there anything that generates a WADL or similar for WEB API?
Secondary question: this tool looks like it generates a client based on a WADL, is there anything else that makes life easy keeping a client up to date with a RESTful web service?
There is a considerable amount of work going in there. It is not finished but watch the space.
Having a look here (and newer Yao posts):
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/yaohuang1/archive/2012/05/21/asp-net-web-api-generating-a-web-api-help-page-using-apiexplorer.aspx
Also
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/yaohuang1/archive/2012/06/15/using-apiexplorer-to-export-api-information-to-postman-a-chrome-extension-for-testing-web-apis.aspx
I blogged an approach to generating WADL with ASP.NET Web API here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/stuartleeks/archive/2014/05/20/teaching-asp-net-web-api-to-wadl.aspx
I'm looking to make a RESTful API on ASP.NET for a website. My problem is that I need it to be integrated into the website and not as a separate project.
I understand that WCF makes this really easy and its the ideal way to do it, but I don't think you can combine a WCF Service Project and a ASP.Net Website, Is this correct?
Is there a way we can do this using a webservice (asmx) file (since I know that asmx services use SOAP no?)
The reason I need this to be in the same project is that the customer will be able to purchase ssl for their domain (which the website is going to use) and I need to make the API secure as well, but the customer should not be asked to purchase two ssl or even a wildcard one.
Knowing this, is there a better easier way of doing this using WCF?
Take a look at the new MVC4 Beta, it's set to go live sometime between March and April this year and should be able to accommodate your requirement to build a RESTful web service alongside a web application. I haven't spent too much time with MVC4 to go into the details, but it's definitely worth a look. Links: Get MVC4; MVC4 and WebAPI blog.
Hope this helps!
You can use ASPNET MVC to build an API along with your website.
See How can I implement a site with ASP.NET MVC without using Visual Studio? for some details on building a basic MVC site.
ASPNET MVC services can respond in JSON or XML, or both.
There will be no special requirement for two SSL certs.
I have an ASP.NET MVC 3 application that exposes both WCF REST services. I'm using .NET 4. You'll have to pay attention to how you configure your routing. For example, my WCF services are prefixed with something like "api/v1/" while all other requests are handled by ASP.NET MVC 3.
I had a problem because IIS refused to serve some "localhost" requests (like when your MVC 3 controllers try to consume your WCF rest services). That was solved by adding an entry to my hosts file. Also be aware of this when implementing an OAuth 2.0 Resource Server or Authorization Server.
Using WCF for REST services works ok in .NET 4, but the JSON serialization sucks big time. There are issues with default dates and it is rather slow. You may want to look at using a different serializer. With WCF you sacrifice some flexibility for some features you get for free.
ASP.NET MVC 4 (and the WEBAPI) is still in BETA, so I'd avoid that for a project with a short term release date.
I'd actually use NancyFX. Setting up routes is super-easy, and it comes with built in XML and JSON serializers that act based on the data in the headers.
Is there a business case for using WCF WITHIN your web application (ASP.NET/SQL Server)?
I'm not talking about a service to be consumed by others, but rather a service to be consumed WITHIN the web app. So far, the only use for web services WITHIN the web app I came up with is when I need to call the database from the client (through AJAX).
Please don't give me the copy/paste lesson on web services, all I'm looking for is a CONCRETE EXAMPLE of WCF benefiting the web application, and NOT the other apps consuming the services.
Quick clarification: by "web application" I mean a self-contained CRM of sorts. It does a lot, but it DOES NOT talk to any external apps/db's, and DOES NOT need to have service points open for other apps to consume.
We have a Windows service that gathers live data from the web. Because the data is ephemeral (it's only really valid for around 3 minutes), there's no point in recording it in a database. To retrieve data, the Windows service offers a (TCP transport) WCF interface which is only exposed to the web-server, from which our web-app requests data.
I think it very much depends on how you define "application".
If you're talking about a single web application then with the exception of provision ajax data as you've already noted I'm struggling to think of a generic reason why you'd want to as a web service (even more so for WCF) is just an exposed API and if you're in the application surely it would be better (in all kinds of senses) to go straight to the API without the additional overhead of wrapping and unwrapping the calls and the data - which is pretty much redundant.
On the other hand if by "application" you mean an assembly of "stuff" that delivers a solution to a set (or even various sets) of end users then yes, of course... there is definitely a case where the flexbility of having components communicate via services outweights the overhead issue. Where it gets grey is if there is an assumption that a single application will (or at least might) later become multiple applications wired together - but if you're not doing it now then you're just causing yourself pain you don't need so shouldn't bother. If you need to split it deal with that as a self contained exercise as and when you need to split it.
One concrete example from my practice: On one web site we use actively tables which are implemented with respect of jqGrid plugin to jQuery. The contain of grids will be loaded per ajax. So the most pages of the web site are very simple and have clear XHTML code. The business logic with the interface to the database is inside of WCF service. Inside of WCF service we get data also from other information stores of the organization. In the same way if one will need later to have an input from our project the WCF service will be perfect.
So the usage of WCF WITHIN in our web application helps to archive clear interface, clear separation business logic from the HTML markup and better testability (with utit tests integrated in Visual Studio).