I have a web service that executes a task that may take hours to finish (asynchronously)
I would like to share the status of that task by all the clients that connects to the server (I'm using a web application for this)
For example, the first client that calls the page http://localhost/process.aspx
will instantiate the web service and it will call a method to start executing the task. A percentage number will be displayed showing the status of completion. I can do this by polling the web service using AJAX.
If there is another client that tries to opens that page, it should get the same percentage information so no new instances of the web service are created.
How is the best way of doing this?
I thought about different solutions but sooner or later I find new problems.
These are some of the possible alternatives:
Create an static object of the Web service.
Create the object in the global.asax file.
Do you guys have any other ideas? I'm not too familiar designing web sites and this is driving me crazy. I would appreciate if you guys could provide some code snippets.
Thanks
The issue is ensuring that the information pertaining to the single instance of a process is stored in exactly one place.
Your initial thinking can be applied, for instance, by using the Application object, but that will break down in a clustered IIS scenario.
I am not posative that a database is the absolute best solution, but I believe it would give you what you want.
If 100 clients try to start the process at the same time, only one can succeed, right? The databases locking facility will help you make that happen.
There's a method (I'm assuming WCF for the web service) that allows you to have exactly one instance of the service run... link
I think this is what you are trying to accomplish.
Assuming I have understood your requirements correctly. Your webservice should not be creating the instance of the “worker” object.
Your webservice request should log to either a database (as the other poster noted) or a messagequeue of somesort. At this point your “worker” processer (probably some type of service) should take over the job as it requires.
Basically you want to break up your application into something like this
| Webservice | ---------- | Datastore |-----------| Worker |
Any further requests regarding the batch should be managed by the webservice querying the datastore.
Remember webservices are NOT DESIGNED TO DO WORK.
Related
I've created web application that has a sub that builds a contacts list. This sub fetches phone numbers and email address from a contacts db based on ids that are provided by a user. At it's fastest, the application will process about four ids per second. With 200-300 ids at any given time, the completion time is long.
Time is not really the problem, it's end user status updates. I've created a very crude web service that reads the "CurrentRecordNumber" that is stored in a session variable as the app loops through the ids. I intend to use javascript to call the webmethod from the app periodically to update status.
My problem is that when debugging, the webmethod call will complete successfully, but not until the app is finished processing.
This seems like a very simple problem. I must not be using the right terms because my results seem overly complicated.
I'm very new to asynchronous features of ASP.NET so please forgive. I have, however, written some Winforms that incorporate multiple threads so I have a basic understanding of threading.
This is due to the way ASP.NET treats session. You haven't said whether you are using webforms or MVC, but MVC has a quick workaround for this.
First, the problem:
SessionState is designed to be accessed by one request at a time, in the order received by the server. Think of this as a queue at the bank with only one bank teller available. The first person in line is the first to be helped (though this is on a per-session basis, not a per-user).
ASP.NET locks all other requests that require SessionState from executing until the previous one is done.
I haven't tried to correct this problem in web forms, but the easiest way I know of would be to not require SessionState on your progress check.
In MVC, there's a SessionState attribute that can be applied to the controller or method, indicating that there's no chance of a call to that method overwriting SessionState. As long as your call is read-only, you can make your controller code use this attribute to allow multiple async requests simultaneously:
<SessionState(SessionStateBehavior.ReadOnly)>
Public Class MyController
We have a flex application that connects to a proxy server which handles authentication. If the authentication has timeout out the proxy server returns a json formatted error string. What I would like to do is inspect every URLRequest response and check if there's an error message and display it in the flex client then redirect back to login screen.
So I'm wondering if its possible to create an event listener to all URLRequests in a global fashion. Without having to search through the project and add some method to each URLRequest. Any ideas if this is possible?
Unless you're only using one service, there is no way to set a global URLRequest handler. If I were you, I'd think more about architecting your application properly by using a delegate and always checking the result through a particular service which is used throughout the app.
J_A_X has some good suggestions, but I'd take it a bit farther. Let me make some assumptions based on the limited information you've provided.
The services are scattered all over your application means that they're actually embedded in multiple Views.
If your services can all be handled by the same handler, you notionally have one service, copied many times.
Despite what you see in the Adobe examples showing their new Service generation code, it's incredibly bad practice to call services directly from Views, in part because of the very problem you are seeing--you can wind up with lots of copies of the same service code littered all over your application.
Depending on how tightly interwoven your application is (believe me, I've inherited some pretty nasty stuff, so I know this might be easier said than done), you may find that the easiest thing is to remove all of those various services and replace them by having all your Views dispatch a bubbling event that gets caught at the top level. At the top level, you respond to that event by calling one instance of your service, which is again handled in one place.
You may or may not choose to wrap that single service in a delegate, but once you have your application archtected in a way where the service is decoupled from your Views, you can make that choice at any time.
Would you be able to extend the class and add an event listener in the object's constructor? I don't like this approach but it could work.
You would just have to search/replace the whole project.
I'm inheriting a legacy project, and there's a page that calls a method that makes a web service call. Load and performance testing has detected that this page sometimes takes a really long time to close, but usually it's fine, and if there is one hanging, all other requests for that page hang until the first one resolves, and then they all resolve.
I think this might have something to do with the web service being instantiated and not disposed, but I don't know how I can be more sure. I tried to add a delegate to the Dispose method but that doesn't seem to ever fire. (I'm not sure it would without Dispose being called explicitly, but that doesn't really matter.)
So what can I look for on the production server or any deployed environment to watch those requests pile up and go out (or get handled in an orderly manner, if they aren't the problem)?
You might consider using a tool like .NET Memory Profiler. You can use it to attach to your running application, and it can find and report all undisposed objects.
I think they have a free two week trial.
In your web app code, you could write to a log (event log, text file) right before you send a request, and again right after you get the response. Include some identifying information about the request. Add timestamps.
If you only want to use this while debugging, wrap it in #debug.
Or if you want to test in release mode, you could put a boolean in appSettings in web.config so you could turn the logging off and on.
Other than using a web service, is there anyway to call a method in a web app from a windows application? Both run on the same machine.
I basically want to schedule a job to run a windows app which updates some file (for a bayesian spam filter), then I want to notify the web app to reload that file.
I know this can be done in other ways but I'm curious to know whether it's possible anyway.
You can make your windows app connect to the web app and do a GET in a page that responds by reloading your file, I don't think it is strictly necessary to use a web service. This way you can also make it happen from a web browser.
A Web Service is the "right" way if you want them to communicate directly. However, I've found it easier in some situations to coordinate via database records. For example, my web app has bulk email capability. To make it work, the web app just leaves a database record behind specifying the email to be sent. The WinApp scans periodically for these records and, when it finds one with an "unprocessed" status, it takes the appropriate action. This works like a charm for me in a very high volume environment.
You cannot quite do this in the other direction only because web apps don't generally sit around in a timing loop (there are ways around this but they aren't worth the effort). Thus, you'll require some type of initiating action to let the web app know when to reload the file. To do this, you could use the following code to do a GET on a page:
WebRequest wrContent = WebRequest.Create("http://www.yourUrl.com/yourpage.aspx");
Stream objStream = wrContent.GetResponse().GetResponseStream();
// I don't think you'll need the stream Reader but I include it for completeness
StreamReader objStreamReader = new StreamReader(objStream);
You'll then reload the file in the PageLoad method whenever this page is opened.
How is the web application loading the file? If you were using a dependency on the Cache object, then simply updating the file will invalidate the Cache entry, causing your code to reload that entry when it is found to be null (or based on the "invalidated" event).
Otherwise, I don't know how you would notify the application to update the file.
An ASP.NET application only exists as an instance to serve a request. This is why web services are an easy way to handle this - the application has been instantiated to serve the service request. If you could be sure the instance existed and got a handle to it, you could use remoting. But without having a concrete handle to an instance of the application, you can't invoke the method directly.
There's plenty of other ways to communicate. You could use a database or some other kind of list which both applications poll and update periodically. There are plenty of asynchronous MQ solutions out there.
So you'll create a page in your webapp specifically for this purpose. Use a Get request and pass in a url parameter. Then in the page_load event check for this paremter. if it exists then do your processing. By passing in the parameter you'll prevent accidental page loads that will cause the file to be uploaded and processed when you don't want it to be.
From the windows app make the url Get request by using the .Net HttpWebRequest. Example here: http://www.codeproject.com/KB/webservices/HttpWebRequest_Response.aspx
I have an ASP.NET application that starts a long running operation during the Event Handler phase in the ASP.NET Page life cycle. This occurs when the end user pushes a button a bunch of queries are made to a database, a bunch of maps are generated, and then a movie is made from jpeg images of the maps. This process can take over a minute to complete.
Here's a link to the application
http://maxim.ucsd.edu/mapmaker/cbeo.aspx
I've tried using a thread from the threadpool, creating and launching my own thread and using AsyncCallback framework. The problem is that the new thread is run under a different userid. I assume the main thread is run under ASPNET, the new thread is run under AD\MAXIM$ where MAXIM is the hostname. I know this because there is an error when it tries to connect to the database.
Why is the new thread under a different userid?
If I can figure out the userid issue, what I'd like to do is check if the movie making process has finished by examining a Session variable in a Page_Load method, then add a link to the page to access the movie.
Does anyone have any good examples of using concurrency in a ASP.NET application that uses or creates threads in an EventHandler callback?
Thanks,
Matt
Did you read this?: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163725.aspx
Quoting one relevant portion from that link (you should read the whole thing):
A final point to keep in mind as you build asynchronous pages is that you should not launch asynchronous operations that borrow from the same thread pool that ASP.NET uses.
Not addressing the specific problem you asked about, but this is likely to come up soon:
At what point is this video used?
If it's displayed in the page or downloaded by the user, what does the generated html that the browser uses to get the video look like? The browser has to call that video somewhere using a separate http request, and you might do better by creating a separate http handler (*.ashx file) to handle that request, and just writing the url for that handler in your page.
If it's for storage or view elsewhere you should consider just saving the information needed to create the video at this point and deferring the actual work until the video is finally requested.
The problem is that the new thread is run under a different userid. I assume the main thread is run under ASPNET, the new thread is run under AD\MAXIM$ where MAXIM is the hostname.
ASPNET is a local account, when the request travels over a network it will use the computer's credentials (AD\MAXIM$).
What may be happening, is that you're running under impersonation in the request - and without in the ThreadPool. If that's the case, you might be able to store the current WindowsIdentity for the request, and then impersonate that identity in the ThreadPool.
Or, just let the ThreadPool hit the DB with Sql Authentication (username and password).