I have a web app, that consumes a web service. The main page runs a search - by passing parameters to a particular web service method, and I bind the results to a gridview.
I have implemented sorting and paging on the grid. By putting the datatable that the grid is bound to in the viewstate and then reading / sorting / filtering it as necessary - and rebinding to the grid.
As the amount of data coming back from the web service has increased dramatically, when I try to page/sort etc I receive the following errors.
The connection was reset
The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.
I have searched around a bit, and it seems that a very large viewstate is to blame for this.
But surely the only other option is to
Limit the results
Stick the datatable in the session rather than the viewstate
Something else I am unaware of
Previously I did have the datatable in the session, as some of this data needed to persist from page to page - (not being posted however so viewstate was not an option). As the amount of data rose and the necessity to persist it was removed, I used the viewstate instead. Thinking this was a better option than the session because of the amount of data the session would have to hold and the number of users using the app.
It appears maybe not.
I thought that when the viewstate got very big, that .net split it over more than one hidden viewstate field, but it seems all I'm getting is one mammoth viewstate that I have trouble viewing in the source.
Can anyone enlighten me as to how to avoid the error I'm getting? If it is indeed to do with the amount of data in the viewstate?
It sounds like your caching the whole dataset for all pages even though you are only presenting one page of that data. I would change your pagination to only require the data for the current page the user is on.
If the query is heavy and you don't want to have to be constantly calling it over and over because there is a lot of paging back and forth (you should test typical useage pattern) then I would implement some type of caching on the web service end to cache page by page (by specific user if the data is specific to a user) and have it expire rather quick (eg a few minuites).
I think you need to limit the total amount of data your dealing with. Change your code to not pass back extra data that might never be needed is a good place to start.
EDIT: Based on your comments:
You can't change the web service
The user can manipulate the query by filtering or sorting
There is a large amount of data returned by the web service
The data is user specific
Well I think you have a perfect case for using the Session then. This can be taxing the the server with large amounts of users and data so you might want to implement some logic to clear the data from the Session and not wait for it to expire (like on certain landing pages you know the user will go when they are done, clear the session data).
You really want to get it out of the ViewState beacuse it is a huge bandwidth hog. Just look at your physical page size and that data is being passed back and forth with every action. Moving it to the Session would eliminate that bandwidth useage and allow for you to do everything you need.
You could also look at the data the web service is bringing back and store it in a custom object that you make as 'thin' as possible. If your storing a DataSet or a DataTable in your Session, those objects have some extra overhead you probably don't need so store the data as an array of some custom thin object and just bind to that. You would need to map the result from the WS to your custom object but this is a good option you cut down on memory useage.
Let me know if there is something else I am missing.
I wouldn't put the data in either the view state or the session. Instead store the bare minimum information to re-request the dataset from the web service and store that (in either view state or session, or even on the URL). Then call the web service using that data and reaction the data on each request. If necessary, look to use some form of caching (memCache) to improve performance.
Related
This is my first post/question so please let me know if/how I can improve it. I found similar questions but nothing quite covered this.
When you store to InProc session you're just storing a reference to the data. So, if I have a public property foo, and I store it in Session("foo") = foo, then I haven't really taken up any additional memory (aside from the 32/64 bits used by the pointer)?
In my case, we are currently reloading foo on every page of our website, so if I were to instead store it in session, then it should be taking the same about of space, but not needing to reload on every page. I'm seeing a lot of people say not to store large objects in session, but if that large object already exists, what difference does it make to have a pointer to it? Of course I would remove the object from session the moment it was no longer needed.
The data we are trying to store is an object specific to the user's current work, but not user data. As an analogy, say the user was a car dealer, and he is looking at all the data for a particular customer. We have multiple pages for this customer, and we want to keep all the customer info loaded on each page, All the customer data is stored in a single xml data column in a SQL table, which we parse on every page.
We have tried binary serialization instead of parsing xml, so we could store with session in state server mode, but we found the performance to actually be worse.
We are running on a single web server.
First off, no. When you store something in the session state all the data required to store that object is consumed by the website process(s). Just because .NET treats variables like references doesn't mean it actually uses less memory than a no-GC language. It just means that copying that variable around is done efficiently without using reference operators or pointers.
Your question is a bit vague, but you have a few options for persisting data:
1) Send the data to the client as JSON and store it on the browser if it should be per-user and is needed more on the client side than the server side. You can then send pieces of the data with different requests if you need to (put it in hidden fields if you have to use ASPX web forms).
2) Store it in the session state if it is a small bit of per user data.
3) Store it in the ASP.NET cache if it is large and common to all users, see here (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/6hbbsfk6.aspx).
4) If it is large and user-specific that is used primarily on the server then you have more of a performance problem. You should see if you can break out any user specific stuff from static stuff. If you do that and its still large then a database may not be a bad solution. If you are already using DB calls in your application then looking up this data on every request won't cause too much overhead and you won't have to regenerate it from scratch (You should only do this if the data takes a considerable time to generate as a DB call could be slower than just regenerating the data itself). I recommend writing some sort of middleware (HttpModule or OwinMiddleware) that uses whatever user Identity you use for auth to look up the data and then set it on the HttpContext.Current.Items collection. This way the data is usable for the entire request and you can add logic in the middleware to figure out when to set it.
I would think that having a large chunk of user-specific data would be a red flag as user data should just be a list of what the user can/can't do and what their preferences are.
If this is static data then its super simple. The application cache is what you want. The only complications would be if you have multiple servers that need synced data.
I have a this asp.net page which upon first time load:
1: Make a DB call and get data - XML string (this chunk can go beyond 100kb). And this DB call is a bit expensive takes about 5-10 secs.
2: I loop through this XML and create a Custom Collection with values from XML. Then Bind it to a Repeater Control.
Now the repeater control has one text input. User is free to enter values in one or more or all TBs or leave all blank. Then then hit Save button.
On Save Postback, I will have to loop through all rows in the Repeater, Collect all the rows that has some input in the and generate an XML using the initial values and this new input value and Save it to DB.
Problem:
So I will need reference to all the initial XML values. I can think of these options and looking for inputs on selecting a best one.
1: ViewState: Store my Collection or XML string in ViewState - I'm sure it is will be too huge
2: Session: Use Session to store Collection of xml string - Again
3: DB Call: Make a DB call to get the data again - as I said it is kind of expensive call and my DBA is asking me to avoid this
4: HiddenField: Store the essential data from XML in to HiddenField and use that for Save manipulation. i.e. in each repeater item find all the hiddenfields
Which one is best in terms of better request response and less resource utilization on server?
Or is there a better way I am missing?
PS: Have to use ASP.NET 2.0 WebForms only.
Update1:
I tried the following with ViewState:
1: Store entire xml string: ViewState length = 97484 and FireBug shows pagesize - 162Kb
2:Store stripped down version of Collection with required only data: ViewState length = 27372 and FireBug shows pagesize - 94Kb and with gzip compression it reduces to 13kb.
With the existing website FireBug shows Size 236Kb.
So definitely option 2 is better and my new version is better then current website.
So any inputs?
A quick question - who is your target audience for this page? If it's an internal website for a company then just storing the data in viewstate might be acceptable. If it's for external people, e.g. potential customers, then speed and performance probably matter to you more.
Viewstate - have you tried adding your XML to viewstate? How much did it increase the page size by? If you're gzipping all of your pages rather than sending them over the wire uncompressed then you could see about a 70% reduction in size - 30kb isn't that much these days...
Session - it is worth remembering that the server can and will drop data from sessions if it runs out of space. They can also expire. Do you trust your users not to log in again in a new tab and then submit the page that they've had open for the last 10 hours? While using session results in less data on the wire you might need to re-pull the data from the db if the value does end up being dropped for whatever reason. Also, if you're in a web farm environment etc there are complications involving synchronizing sessions across servers.
DB Call - can the query be optimised in any way? Are the indices on all the fields that need them? Maybe you and your DBA can make it less painful to pull. But then again, if the data can change between you pulling it the first time and the user submitting their changes then you wouldn't want to re-pull it, I suspect.
Hidden Fields - With these you'd be saving less data than if you put the whole string in Viewstate. The page wouldn't be depending on the state of the webserver like with session and nor would you be racing against other users changing the state of the db.
On the whole, I think 4 is probably the best bet if you can afford to slow your pages down a little. Use Firebug/YSlow and compare how much data is transmitted before and after implementing 4.
One final thought - how are things like this persisted between postbacks in the rest of your webapp? Assuming that you haven't written the whole thing on your own/only just started it you might be able to find some clues as to how other developers in a similar situation solved the problem.
Edit:
there is a load-balancer, not sure how it will play with Session
If you have a load balancer then you need to make sure that session state is stored in a state server or similar and not in the process ("inproc"). If the session is stored on the webserver then option 2 will play very badly with the load balancer.
While I'm not a huge fan of overusing session, this will probably be your best bet as it will be your fastest option from the user's standpoint.
Since session state does have it's own inherit issues, you could load the data you need into session, and if your session drops for whatever reason, just do another database hit and reload it.
I would really stay away from options 1 and 4 just because of the amount of unnecessary data you will be sending to the client, and potentially slowing down their experience.
Option 3 will also slow down the user experience, so I would stay away from that if at all possible unless you can speed up your query time.
I'm looking to build an ajax page; it's a reporting page. By default, load today's report. On the page there's a calendar control and when the user clicks on a date, reload the gridview with the corresponding data. Is it considered good practice to do the following:
1) on the first page load, query the data for the page
2) put the query result in the session object and display it in a gridview
3) if the user requests new data, get new data from the query with different parameters
4) put the result of the second query in the session object and display it
5) if the user then requests the data from the first query, get it from the session object
6) do the sorting and paging with the data held in the session.
Note: the data of each query will contain about 300-500 rows and about 15 columns. I'd like to do all this with ajax calls. What are some suggestions and pitfalls to avoid.
Thanks.
I would use Backbone.js:
Server produces report in JSON format.
Client has a Backbone.js Model for this report, which binds to the JSON endpoint.
Client renders the Report Model as a Backbone view.
Client reloads the report from server only when appropriate.
Reports from previously viewed days will still be around in the client as Backbone Model instances, so you don't need to reload from server unless the user forces. I believe this is your main concern?
You're probably still in the realm of can-do-without-a-client-side-framework, but if you plan on doing more of these pages or getting any more complex, you can go to spaghetti pretty quickly without something like Backbone.js.
PS. I just noticed this is .NET related. I know nothing about .NET so maybe there's a built-in client-side framework that can do something similar.
EDIT (updated after reading comment):
For server-side caching, I think a either a denormalized report table in the DB or a separate dedicated cache store (e.g. memcache) is a better practice than session object.
It depends though. If there was say, 1 possible report per-user per-day, and you didn't have memcache set up, and you don't want to use the DB for whatever reason, then it could make sense to store it in their session object. However, if each day's report is the same for all users, you're now caching it N times instead of 1. It could also be hard to invalidate from an external hook and the user loses their cache when they logout.
So I would probably just have a typical get-or-set pattern to try and load report from cache first, and fallback to DB. Then invalidate/update the cached report only when the user forces, or if data used to create the report has changed. AJAX call requests the report by date or however a report is identified.
Since you are hoping to use the data in Javascript Ajax scenerios it would make the most sense to create a HTTP Handler to query and return the needed data result sets on demand.
Using the session object is not a solution because it cannot be accessed asynchronously. As a result, your page would not be able to query this data to feed back to your Javascript objects (unless you created an HTTP Handler to send it back, but that would be pointless when you could just query the data in the HTTP Handler directly).
You are forgetting about windows. A client isn't a window, a client is a browser it can contain many windows/tabs. You need to make sure you are rendering/feeding the correct window. Usually i handle this by submit hidden values.
Problem is separating resuming a session / Starting a new window.
I wouldn't bother holding more than one copy of the query in the Session. The primary reason you'd want to hold it in Session is to improve the sorting/paging speed, presumably. Users expect those to be relatively fast, but choosing new dates can be slower. Plus, what's the likelihood that they'll really reload the first query?
The other answers raise good pitfalls with storing in Session in general.
Are there any other ViewState alternatives? I've heard a lot Like Session, holding the state of some of the page's controls' state and getting destroyed the moment the user leaves the page.
I know I'm describing ViewState itself, but I'm looking for a pattern of sorts or suggestions so I can avoid ViewState altogether.
An example of how I'm using it is where I'm storing the contents of my grid (A list of ViewModels) to ViewState. This helps to know which entries are dirty, which ones have been modified, their indexes, the currently selected objects, etc.
One of my colleagues has developed a way to store viewstate data in a file. So that, heavy viewstate data are not transmitted between client and server. Just a key (which is the viewstate data file) that represents the viewstate data file is held as a session variable. In our tests, we've found that saving viewstate in file decreased the server response time by decreasing the amount of viewstate (which was very huge then).
In this article under "Keeping View State on the Server", you can find out how that method can be implemented. You can even store viewstate data in a database table, which gives extra flexibilty if your application is on a web farm.
I don't think you are making a case to move away from ViewState.
If you are holding a large amount of data, you'll face issues when persisting it anywhere else. Session? it'll blow your memory consumption, or if its out of process you'll be moving all of that around each time the Session is loaded/written (once per request). You can of course, try to limit the issue by freeing the stored data as soon as possible / like TempData in asp.net MVC.
You can minimize the amount of info you need to store to check for modified records by introducing a timestamp / or record version. This way you can just check if a new version has been added, and show the user both what they tried to save and what someone else saved.
Another option is compressing your ViewState. It still adds bulk to the round trip, but generally it's minimal.
If you're using .Net 4, there are some useful new ViewState additions:
ASP.NET 4.0: more control on viewstate management
You have Session, and you have Cache.
Session is per user, Cache is global.
Do you really need to store all this in ViewState? why can you on submit (but you're very vague in your question so i'm making a few assumptions here) get all the old data from the DB, compare it with your new data, and update what is changed?
How would I store the value of a GridView's selected rows to a session variable?
From the codebehind file you will want to use something like this to access the underlying data item (MyDataItem) from the selected row.
MyDataItem item = (MyDataItem)GridView1.Rows[GridView1.SelectedIndex].DataItem;
Session["myItem"] = item;
Remember though, the gridview is already storing this data for you, so you may just want to access it from the GridView directly whenever you need it.
On a side note: can I stronly advise you NOT to use the session state.
Unless you are using it as a store where data is cached for the current user, which you can retrieve back at any time from e.g. a database.
If not, the "session" will come back and bite you. At some point there will be a user that leaves the browser open for longer time than your session lives (e.g. they get a telephone call, go out to lunch in a hurry, rush of to a meeting...). And when they return, they wish to complete what they are doing. And if you cannot restore all of your session data back at that point, you will either have to redirect your user to start over again (very annoying for your users), or you will have lost some information (very embarrasing), or the worst case, and most common case: your application will no longer work and crash (just plain: very bad).
It is a better approach to define small serializable objects that store your state (query parameters, selected items, etc) and use ASP.NET Viewstate to store that state across page requests. Note that most ASP.NET controls already use the viewstate to store their data. Then disable the Viewstate of your grids in the page, to vastly reduce the amount of data in your viewstate, and request the data upon each request (here it is safe to use the session or ASP.NET cache to improve performance of your application). You will have a much more robust and much more scalable application.
It is more work, but it will pay back very fast, and many times over.
ViewState only scope within one page. It's useful for postback problem, but not for cross-page problems. Session can handle both, but it has some limitations of security, lifetime, transmittion time... Depend on particular sittuation you can pick your right choice.