Search Results

Search found 70 results on 3 pages for 'faulted'.

Page 1/3 | 1 2 3  | Next Page >

  • WCF Callback Faulted - what happens to the session?

    - by RemotecUk
    Just trying to get my head around what can happen when things go wrong with WCF. I have an implementation of my service contract declared with an InstanceContextMode of PerSession... [ServiceBehavior(InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.PerSession, ConcurrencyMode = ConcurrencyMode.Multiple)] The calls happen as follows: My client calls the server and calls GetServerUTC() to return the current UTC time of the server. This is a one way call and the server will call the client back when its ready (trivial in this instance to simply return the current time!) The server calls back to the client and for test purposes in the callback implementation on the client I throw an exception. This goes unhandled in the client (for test purposes) and the client crashes and closes down. On the server I handle the faulted event handler on the ICommunicationObject... obj.Faulted += new EventHandler(EventService_Faulted); Questions... Will this kill off the session for the current connection on the server. I presume I am free to do what I want in this method e.g. logging or something, but should I do anything specific here to terminate the session or will WCF handle this? From a best practise view point what should I do when the callback is faulted? Does it mean "something has happened in your client" and thats the end of that or is there something I a missing here? Additionally, are there any other faulted handlers I should be handling. Ive done a lot of reading on WCF and it seems sort of vague on what to do when something goes wrong. At present I am implementing a State Machine on my client which will manage the connection and determine if a user action can happen dependant on if a connection exists to the server - or is this overkill. Any tips would be really appreciated ;)

    Read the article

  • solaris zpool SSD cache device "faulted"

    - by John-ZFS
    I am trying to get over these SATA SSD errors - smartctl command failed to read the SATA SSD - SATA is not supported what could be the reason for errors? does this mean that SSD has reached EOL & needs to be replacement? errors: No known data errors pool: zpool1216 state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices are faulted in response to persistent errors. Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue functioning in a degraded state. action: Replace the faulted device, or use 'zpool clear' to mark the device repaired. scan: scrub repaired 0 in 0h24m with 0 errors on Fri May 18 14:31:08 2012 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM zpool1216 DEGRADED 0 0 0 raidz1-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t10d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t11d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t12d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t13d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t14d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t15d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t16d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t8d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t9d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 logs c9d0 FAULTED 0 0 0 too many errors cache c10d0 FAULTED 0 17 0 too many errors

    Read the article

  • ZFS Recover from Faulted Pool State

    - by nickv2002
    I have a six disk ZFS raidz1 pool and had a recent failure requiring a disk replacement. No problem normally, but this time my server hardware died before I could do the replacement (but after and unrelated to the drive failure as far as I can tell). I was able to get another machine from a friend to rebuild the system, but in the process of moving my drives over I had to swap their cables around a bunch until I got the right configuration where the remaining 5 good disks were seen as online. This process seems to have generated some checksum errors for the pool/raidz. I have the 5 remaining drives set up now and a good drive installed and ready to take the place of the drive that died. However, since my pool state is FAULTED I'm unable to do the replacement. root@zfs:~# zpool replace tank 1298243857915644462 /dev/sdb cannot open 'tank': pool is unavailable Is there any way to recover from this error? I would think that having 5 of the 6 drives online would be enough to rebuild the right data, but that doesn't seem to be enough now. Here's the status log of my pool: root@zfs:~# zpool status tank pool: tank state: FAULTED status: One or more devices could not be used because the label is missing or invalid. There are insufficient replicas for the pool to continue functioning. action: Destroy and re-create the pool from a backup source. see: http://zfsonlinux.org/msg/ZFS-8000-5E scan: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM tank FAULTED 0 0 1 corrupted data raidz1-0 ONLINE 0 0 8 sdd ONLINE 0 0 0 sdf ONLINE 0 0 0 sdh ONLINE 0 0 0 1298243857915644462 UNAVAIL 0 0 0 was /dev/sdb1 sde ONLINE 0 0 0 sdg ONLINE 0 0 0 Update (10/31): I tried to export and re-import the array a few times over the past week and wasn't successful. First I tried: zpool import -f -R /tank -N -o readonly=on -F tank That produced this error immediately: cannot import 'tank': I/O error Destroy and re-create the pool from a backup source. I added the '-X' option to the above command to try to make it check the transaction log. I let that run for about 48 hours before giving up because it had completely locked up my machine (I was unable to log in locally or via the network). Now I'm trying a simple zpool import tank command and that seems to run for a while with no output. I'll leave it running overnight to see if it outputs anything.

    Read the article

  • How do I properly handle a faulted WCF connection?

    - by mafutrct
    In my client program, there is a WCF connection that is opened at startup and supposedly stays connected til shutdown. However, there is a chance that the server closes due to unforeseeable circumstances (imagine someone pulling the cable). Since the client uses a lot of contract methods in a lot of places, I don't want to add a try/catch on every method call. I've got 2 ideas for handling this issue: Create a method that takes a delegate and executes the delegate inside a try/catch and returns an Exception in case of a known exception, or null else. The caller has to deal with nun-null results. Listen to the Faulted event of the underlying CommunicationObject. But I don't see how I could handle the event except for displaying some error message and shutting down. Are there some best practices for faulted WCF connection that exist for app lifetime?

    Read the article

  • WCF: Manually configuring Binding and Endpoint causes SerciveChannel Faulted State

    - by Matthias
    Hi there, I've created a ComVisible assembly to be used in a classic-asp application. The assembly should act as a wcf client and connect to a wcf service host (inside a windows service) on the same machine using named pipes. The wcf service host works fine with other clients, so the problem must be within this assembly. In order to get things work I added a service reference to the ComVisible assembly and proxy classes and the corresponding app.config settings were generated for me. Everything fine so far except that the app config would not be recognized when doing an CreateObject with my assembly in the asp code. I went and tried to hardcode (just for testing) the Binding and Endpoint and pass those two to the constructor of my ClientBase derived proxy using this code: private NetNamedPipeBinding clientBinding = null; private EndpointAddress clientAddress = null; clientBinding = new NetNamedPipeBinding(); clientBinding.OpenTimeout = new TimeSpan(0, 1, 0); clientBinding.CloseTimeout = new TimeSpan(0, 0, 10); clientBinding.ReceiveTimeout = new TimeSpan(0, 2, 0); clientBinding.SendTimeout = new TimeSpan(0, 1, 0); clientBinding.TransactionFlow = false; clientBinding.TransferMode = TransferMode.Buffered; clientBinding.TransactionProtocol = TransactionProtocol.OleTransactions; clientBinding.HostNameComparisonMode = HostNameComparisonMode.StrongWildcard; clientBinding.MaxBufferPoolSize = 524288; clientBinding.MaxBufferSize = 65536; clientBinding.MaxConnections = 10; clientBinding.MaxReceivedMessageSize = 65536; clientAddress = new EndpointAddress("net.pipe://MyService/"); MyServiceClient client = new MyServiceClient(clientBinding, clientAddress); client.Open(); // do something with the client client.Close(); But this causes the following error: The communication object, System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannel, cannot be used for communication because it is in the faulted state. The environment is .Net Framework 3.5 / C#. What am I missing here?

    Read the article

  • WCF SERVICE gives us faulted response

    - by malik
    My service is hosted on IIS7, windows 2008 server with sql server2008 express. I am getting following error when the process takes more than 2 minutes i got this response, i m unable to find out either it is due to sql server time out or wcf time out. my sql server process is also took long. An error occurred while receiving the HTTP response to http://REMOTE/SynchronizationService_test/SyncService.svc. This could be due to the service endpoint binding not using the HTTP protocol. This could also be due to an HTTP request context being aborted by the server (possibly due to the service shutting down). See server logs for more details.

    Read the article

  • List of all states from COMPOSITE_INSTANCE, CUBE_INSTANCE, DLV_MESSAGE tables

    - by Deepak Arora
    In many of my engagements I get asked repeatedly about the states of the composites in 11g and how to decipher them, especially when we are troubleshooting issues around purging. I have compiled a list of all the states from the COMPOSITE_INSTANCE, CUBE_INSTANCE, and DLV_MESSAGE tables. These are the primary tables that are used when using BPEL composites and how they are used with the ECID.  Composite State Values COMPOSITE_INSTANCE States State Description 0 Running 1 Completed 2 Running with faults 3 Completed with faults 4 Running with recovery required 5 Completed with recovery required 6 Running with faults and recovery required 7 Completed with faults and recovery required 8 Running with suspended 9 Completed with suspended 10 Running with faults and suspended 11 Completed with faults and suspended 12 Running with recovery required and suspended 13 Completed with recovery required and suspended 14 Running with faults, recovery required, and suspended 15 Completed with faults, recovery required, and suspended 16 Running with terminated 17 Completed with terminated 18 Running with faults and terminated 19 Completed with faults and terminated 20 Running with recovery required and terminated 21 Completed with recovery required and terminated 22 Running with faults, recovery required, and terminated 23 Completed with faults, recovery required, and terminated 24 Running with suspended and terminated 25 Completed with suspended and terminated 26 Running with faulted, suspended, and terminated 27 Completed with faulted, suspended, and terminated 28 Running with recovery required, suspended, and terminated 29 Completed with recovery required, suspended, and terminated 30 Running with faulted, recovery required, suspended, and terminated 31 Completed with faulted, recovery required, suspended, and terminated 32 Unknown 64 - CUBE_INSTANCE States State Description 0 STATE_INITIATED 1 STATE_OPEN_RUNNING 2 STATE_OPEN_SUSPENDED 3 STATE_OPEN_FAULTED 4 STATE_CLOSED_PENDING_CANCEL 5 STATE_CLOSED_COMPLETED 6 STATE_CLOSED_FAULTED 7 STATE_CLOSED_CANCELLED 8 STATE_CLOSED_ABORTED 9 STATE_CLOSED_STALE 10 STATE_CLOSED_ROLLED_BACK DLV_MESSAGE States State Description 0 STATE_UNRESOLVED 1 STATE_RESOLVED 2 STATE_HANDLED 3 STATE_CANCELLED 4 STATE_MAX_RECOVERED Since now in 11g the Invoke_Messages table is not there so to distinguish between a new message (Invoke) and callback (DLV) and there is DLV_TYPE column that defines the type of message: DLV_TYPE States State Description 1 Invoke Message 2 DLV Message MEDIATOR_INSTANCE STATE Description  0  No faults but there still might be running instances  1  At least one case is aborted by user  2  At least one case is faulted (non-recoverable)  3  At least one case is faulted and one case is aborted  4  At least one case is in recovery required state  5 At least one case is in recovery required state and at least one is aborted  6 At least one case is in recovery required state and at least one is faulted  7 At least one case is in recovery required state, one faulted and one aborted  >=8 and < 16  Running >= 16   Stale In my next blog posting I will walk through the lifecycle of a BPEL process using the above states for the following use cases: - New BPEL process - initial Receive activity - Callback BPEL process - mid-level Receive activity As always comments and questions welcome! Deepak

    Read the article

  • List of all states from COMPOSITE_INSTANCE, CUBE_INSTANCE, DLV_MESSAGE tables

    - by Deepak Arora
    In many of my engagements I get asked repeatedly about the states of the composites in 11g and how to decipher them, especially when we are troubleshooting issues around purging. I have compiled a list of all the states from the COMPOSITE_INSTANCE, CUBE_INSTANCE, DLV_MESSAGE and MEDIATOR_INSTANCE tables. These are the primary tables that are used when using BPEL composites and how they are used with the ECID.  Composite State Values COMPOSITE_INSTANCE States State Description 0 Running 1 Completed 2 Running with faults 3 Completed with faults 4 Running with recovery required 5 Completed with recovery required 6 Running with faults and recovery required 7 Completed with faults and recovery required 8 Running with suspended 9 Completed with suspended 10 Running with faults and suspended 11 Completed with faults and suspended 12 Running with recovery required and suspended 13 Completed with recovery required and suspended 14 Running with faults, recovery required, and suspended 15 Completed with faults, recovery required, and suspended 16 Running with terminated 17 Completed with terminated 18 Running with faults and terminated 19 Completed with faults and terminated 20 Running with recovery required and terminated 21 Completed with recovery required and terminated 22 Running with faults, recovery required, and terminated 23 Completed with faults, recovery required, and terminated 24 Running with suspended and terminated 25 Completed with suspended and terminated 26 Running with faulted, suspended, and terminated 27 Completed with faulted, suspended, and terminated 28 Running with recovery required, suspended, and terminated 29 Completed with recovery required, suspended, and terminated 30 Running with faulted, recovery required, suspended, and terminated 31 Completed with faulted, recovery required, suspended, and terminated 32 Unknown 64 - Normal 0 false false false EN-CA X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} Any value in the range of 32 to 63 indicates that the composite instance state has not been enabled, but the instance state is updated for faults, aborts, etc. CUBE_INSTANCE States State Description 0 STATE_INITIATED 1 STATE_OPEN_RUNNING 2 STATE_OPEN_SUSPENDED 3 STATE_OPEN_FAULTED 4 STATE_CLOSED_PENDING_CANCEL 5 STATE_CLOSED_COMPLETED 6 STATE_CLOSED_FAULTED 7 STATE_CLOSED_CANCELLED 8 STATE_CLOSED_ABORTED 9 STATE_CLOSED_STALE 10 STATE_CLOSED_ROLLED_BACK DLV_MESSAGE States State Description 0 STATE_UNRESOLVED 1 STATE_RESOLVED 2 STATE_HANDLED 3 STATE_CANCELLED 4 STATE_MAX_RECOVERED Since now in 11g the Invoke_Messages table is not there so to distinguish between a new message (Invoke) and callback (DLV) and there is DLV_TYPE column that defines the type of message: DLV_TYPE States State Description 1 Invoke Message 2 DLV Message MEDIATOR_INSTANCE STATE Description  0  No faults but there still might be running instances  1  At least one case is aborted by user  2  At least one case is faulted (non-recoverable)  3  At least one case is faulted and one case is aborted  4  At least one case is in recovery required state  5 At least one case is in recovery required state and at least one is aborted  6 At least one case is in recovery required state and at least one is faulted  7 At least one case is in recovery required state, one faulted and one aborted  >=8 and < 16  Running >= 16   Stale In my next blog posting I will walk through the lifecycle of a BPEL process using the above states for the following use cases: - New BPEL process - initial Receive activity - Callback BPEL process - mid-level Receive activity As always comments and questions welcome! Deepak

    Read the article

  • WCF net.tcp windows service - call duration and calls outstanding increases over time

    - by Brook
    I have a windows service which uses the ServiceHost class to host a WCF Service using the net.tcp binding. I have done some tweaking to the config to throttle sessions as well as number of connections, but it seems that every once in a while my "Calls outstanding" and "Call duration" shoot up and stay up in perfmon. It seems to me I have a leak somewhere, but the code I have is all fairly minimal, I'm relying on ServiceHost to handle the details. Here's how I start my service ServiceHost host = new ServiceHost(type); host.Faulted+=new EventHandler(Faulted); host.Open(); My Faulted event just does the following (more or less, logging etc removed) if (host.State == CommunicationState.Faulted) { host.Abort(); } else { host.Close(); } host = new ServiceHost(type); host.Faulted+=new EventHandler(Faulted); host.Open(); Here's some snippets from my app.config to show some of the things I've tried <runtime> <gcConcurrent enabled="true" /> <generatePublisherEvidence enabled="false" /> </runtime> ......... <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior name="Throttled"> <serviceThrottling maxConcurrentCalls="300" maxConcurrentSessions="300" maxConcurrentInstances="300" /> .......... <services> <service name="MyService" behaviorConfiguration="Throttled"> <endpoint address="net.tcp://localhost:49001/MyService" binding="netTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="Tcp" contract="IMyService"> </endpoint> </service> </services> .......... <netTcpBinding> <binding name="Tcp" openTimeout="00:00:10" closeTimeout="00:00:10" portSharingEnabled="true" receiveTimeout="00:5:00" sendTimeout="00:5:00" hostNameComparisonMode="WeakWildcard" listenBacklog="1000" maxConnections="1000"> <reliableSession enabled="false"/> <security mode="None"/> </binding> </netTcpBinding> .......... <!--for my diagnostics--> <diagnostics performanceCounters="ServiceOnly" wmiProviderEnabled="true" /> There's obviously some resource getting tied up, but I thought I covered everything with my config. I'm only getting about ~150 clients so I don't think I'm coming up against my "300" limit. "Calls per second" stays constant at anywhere from 2-5 calls per second. The service will run for hours and hours with 0-2 "calls outstanding" and very low "call duration" and then eventually it will shoot up to 30 calls oustanding and 20s call duration. Any tips on what might be causing my "calls outstanding" and "call duration" to spike? Where am I leaking? Point me in the right direction?

    Read the article

  • What is the best workaround for the WCF client `using` block issue?

    - by Eric King
    I like instantiating my WCF service clients within a using block as it's pretty much the standard way to use resources that implement IDisposable: using (var client = new SomeWCFServiceClient()) { //Do something with the client } But, as noted in this MSDN article, wrapping a WCF client in a using block could mask any errors that result in the client being left in a faulted state (like a timeout or communication problem). Long story short, when Dispose() is called, the client's Close() method fires, but throws and error because it's in a faulted state. The original exception is then masked by the second exception. Not good. The suggested workaround in the MSDN article is to completely avoid using a using block, and to instead instantiate your clients and use them something like this: try { ... client.Close(); } catch (CommunicationException e) { ... client.Abort(); } catch (TimeoutException e) { ... client.Abort(); } catch (Exception e) { ... client.Abort(); throw; } Compared to the using block, I think that's ugly. And a lot of code to write each time you need a client. Luckily, I found a few other workarounds, such as this one on IServiceOriented. You start with: public delegate void UseServiceDelegate<T>(T proxy); public static class Service<T> { public static ChannelFactory<T> _channelFactory = new ChannelFactory<T>(""); public static void Use(UseServiceDelegate<T> codeBlock) { IClientChannel proxy = (IClientChannel)_channelFactory.CreateChannel(); bool success = false; try { codeBlock((T)proxy); proxy.Close(); success = true; } finally { if (!success) { proxy.Abort(); } } } } Which then allows: Service<IOrderService>.Use(orderService => { orderService.PlaceOrder(request); } That's not bad, but I don't think it's as expressive and easily understandable as the using block. The workaround I'm currently trying to use I first read about on blog.davidbarret.net. Basically you override the client's Dispose() method wherever you use it. Something like: public partial class SomeWCFServiceClient : IDisposable { void IDisposable.Dispose() { if (this.State == CommunicationState.Faulted) { this.Abort(); } else { this.Close(); } } } This appears to be able to allow the using block again without the danger of masking a faulted state exception. So, are there any other gotchas I have to look out for using these workarounds? Has anybody come up with anything better?

    Read the article

  • How to Force an Exception from a Task to be Observed in a Continuation Task?

    - by Richard
    I have a task to perform an HttpWebRequest using Task<WebResponse>.Factory.FromAsync(req.BeginGetRespone, req.EndGetResponse) which can obviously fail with a WebException. To the caller I want to return a Task<HttpResult> where HttpResult is a helper type to encapsulate the response (or not). In this case a 4xx or 5xx response is not an exception. Therefore I've attached two continuations to the request task. One with TaskContinuationOptions OnlyOnRanToCompletion and the other with OnlyOnOnFaulted. And then wrapped the whole thing in a Task<HttpResult> to pick up the one result whichever continuation completes. Each of the three child tasks (request plus two continuations) is created with the AttachedToParent option. But when the caller waits on the returned outer task, an AggregateException is thrown is the request failed. I want to, in the on faulted continuation, observe the WebException so the client code can just look at the result. Adding a Wait in the on fault continuation throws, but a try-catch around this doesn't help. Nor does looking at the Exception property (as section "Observing Exceptions By Using the Task.Exception Property" hints here). I could install a UnobservedTaskException event handler to filter, but as the event offers no direct link to the faulted task this will likely interact outside this part of the application and is a case of a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Given an instance of a faulted Task<T> is there any means of flagging it as "fault handled"? Simplified code: public static Task<HttpResult> Start(Uri url) { var webReq = BuildHttpWebRequest(url); var result = new HttpResult(); var taskOuter = Task<HttpResult>.Factory.StartNew(() => { var tRequest = Task<WebResponse>.Factory.FromAsync( webReq.BeginGetResponse, webReq.EndGetResponse, null, TaskCreationOptions.AttachedToParent); var tError = tRequest.ContinueWith<HttpResult>( t => HandleWebRequestError(t, result), TaskContinuationOptions.AttachedToParent |TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted); var tSuccess = tRequest.ContinueWith<HttpResult>( t => HandleWebRequestSuccess(t, result), TaskContinuationOptions.AttachedToParent |TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion); return result; }); return taskOuter; } with: private static HttpDownloaderResult HandleWebRequestError( Task<WebResponse> respTask, HttpResult result) { Debug.Assert(respTask.Status == TaskStatus.Faulted); Debug.Assert(respTask.Exception.InnerException is WebException); // Try and observe the fault: Doesn't help. try { respTask.Wait(); } catch (AggregateException e) { Log("HandleWebRequestError: waiting on antecedent task threw inner: " + e.InnerException.Message); } // ... populate result with details of the failure for the client ... return result; } (HandleWebRequestSuccess will eventually spin off further tasks to get the content of the response...) The client should be able to wait on the task and then look at its result, without it throwing due to a fault that is expected and already handled.

    Read the article

  • WCF Troubleshooting from ASP.NET Client -- Help!

    - by Kobojunkie
    I am trying to call a method in my service that is as below, from an ASP.NET application. public bool ValidateUser(string username, string password) { try { // String CurrentLoggedInWindowsUserName = WindowsIdentity.GetCurrent().Name; // //primary identity of the call // String CurrentServiceSecurityContextPrimaryIdentityName = // ServiceSecurityContext.Current.PrimaryIdentity.Name; // } catch (Exception ex) { FaultExceptionFactory fct = new FaultExceptionFactory(); throw new FaultException<CustomFaultException>(fct.CreateFaultException(ex)); } return false; } The Config for the client end of my service is as below <binding name="WSHttpBinding_IMembershipService" closeTimeout="00:01:00" openTimeout="00:01:00" receiveTimeout="00:10:00" sendTimeout="00:01:00" bypassProxyOnLocal="false" transactionFlow="false" hostNameComparisonMode="StrongWildcard" maxBufferPoolSize="524288" maxReceivedMessageSize="65536" messageEncoding="Text" textEncoding="utf-8" useDefaultWebProxy="false" allowCookies="false"> <readerQuotas maxDepth="32" maxStringContentLength="8192" maxArrayLength="16384" maxBytesPerRead="4096" maxNameTableCharCount="16384" /> <reliableSession ordered="true" inactivityTimeout="00:10:00" enabled="false" /> <security mode="Message"> <transport clientCredentialType="Windows" proxyCredentialType="None" realm="" /> <message clientCredentialType="Windows" negotiateServiceCredential="true" algorithmSuite="Default" establishSecurityContext="true" /> </security> </binding> Problem I keep having is when I call it; I get the following exception message. Server Error in '/' Application. The communication object, System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannel, cannot be used for communication because it is in the Faulted state. Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.ServiceModel.CommunicationObjectFaultedException: The communication object, System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannel, cannot be used for communication because it is in the Faulted state. Stack Trace: [CommunicationObjectFaultedException: The communication object, System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannel, cannot be used for communication because it is in the Faulted state.] System.Runtime.Remoting.Proxies.RealProxy.HandleReturnMessage(IMessage reqMsg, IMessage retMsg) +7596735 System.Runtime.Remoting.Proxies.RealProxy.PrivateInvoke(MessageData& msgData, Int32 type) +275 System.ServiceModel.ICommunicationObject.Close(TimeSpan timeout) +0 System.ServiceModel.ClientBase`1.System.ServiceModel.ICommunicationObject. Close(TimeSpan timeout) +142 System.ServiceModel.ClientBase`1.Close() +38 System.ServiceModel.ClientBase`1.System.IDisposable.Dispose() +4 Controls.Membership.accountLogin.ValidateUserCredentials(String UserName, String Password) in C:\ Petition.WebClient\Controls\ Membership\accountLogin.ascx.cs:49 Controls.Membership.accountLogin.Login1_Authenticate(Object sender, AuthenticateEventArgs e) in C:\ WebClient\ Controls\Membership \accountLogin.ascx.cs:55 I am not entirely sure why I keep getting this. Just in case, here is how I call my service from the client private bool ValidateUserCredentials(string UserName, string Password) { bool boolReturnValue = false; using(Members.MembershipServiceClient client = new Controls.Members.MembershipServiceClient()) { try { boolReturnValue = client.ValidateUser(UserName, Password); } catch (FaultException<CustomFaultException> ex) { throw ex; } } return boolReturnValue; } Anyone have any idea what I need to do in this case?

    Read the article

  • WCF Host as windows service faults

    - by pdiddy
    I have this WCF service running as a window service. I have in my code that everytime it faults it will restart the service. Now I'm having the issue where the host faults, it tries to restarts, then faults again, but at some point it just stop the service. Wondering why it stop the service? Is this something handled by the OS that it detects the service has faulted a number of time within a certain time it will just stop the service because it faulted too many time ?

    Read the article

  • WCF: Is it safe to override the Client's Dispose method using a partial class?

    - by pdiddy
    I'd like to override the Dispose method of generated proxy (ClientBase) because of the fact that disposing of a proxy calls Close and can throw an exception when the channel is faulted. The only way I came up was to create a partial class to my generated proxy, make it inherit from IDisposable: public partial class MyServiceProxy : IDisposable { #region IDisposable Members public void Dispose() { if (State != System.ServiceModel.CommunicationState.Faulted) Close(); else Abort(); } #endregion } I did some test and my Dispose method is indeed called. Do you see any issue with this strategy? Also, I don't like the fact that I'll have to create this partial class for every generated proxy. It be nice if I was able to make my proxy inherit from a base class...

    Read the article

  • wcf possible to override the dipose of proxy

    - by pdiddy
    I'd like to override the Dispose method of generated proxy (ClientBase) because of the fact that disposing of a proxy calls Close and can throw an exception when the channel is faulted. The only way I came up was to create a partial class to my generatedproxy, make it inherit from IDisposable. : public partial class MyServiceProxy : IDisposable { #region IDisposable Members public void Dispose() { if (State != System.ServiceModel.CommunicationState.Faulted) Close(); else Abort(); } #endregion } I did some test and my Dipose method is indeed called. Do you see any issue with this strategy? Also, I don't like the fact that I'll have to create this partial class for every generated proxy. It be nice if I was able to make my proxy inherit from a base class...

    Read the article

  • Unable to debug WCF service in VS2008 after UserNamePasswordValidator fault

    - by lsb
    Hi! I have a WCF service that I secure with a custom UserNamePasswordValidator and Message security running over wsHttpBinding. The release code works great. Unfortunately, when I try to run in debug mode after having previously used invalid credentials (the current credentials ARE valid!) VS2008 displays an annoying dialog box (more on this below). A simplified version of my Validate method from the validator might look like the following: public override void Validate(string userName, string password) { if (password != "ABC123") throw new FaultException("The password is invalid!"); } The client receives a MessageSecurityException with InnerException set to the FaultException I explictly threw. This is workable since my client can display the message text of the original FaultException I wanted the user to see. Unfortunately, in all subsequent service calls VS2008 displays an "Unable to automatically debug..." dialog. The only way I can stop this from happening is to exit VS2008, get back in and connect to my service using correct credentials. I should also add that this occurs even when I create a brand new proxy on each and every call. There's no chance MY channel is faulted when I make a call. Its likely, however, that VS2008 hangs on to the previously faulted channel and tries to use it for debugging purposes. Needless to say, this sucks! The entire reason I'm entering "bad" credentials is to test the "bad-credential" handling. Anyway, if anyone has any ideas as to how I can get around this bug (?!?) I'd be very very appreciative....

    Read the article

  • Expose NativeActivity Variables to Workflow Designer

    - by sixlettervariables
    I've got a NativeActivity which contains an Activity body. The purpose of this activity is to expose a resource for the duration of the child activity as a Variable. The problem I've encountered is it appears the Variable cannot be used outside the activity. I'll use StreamReader as an example resource. ResourceActivity.cs: [Designer(typeof(ResourceActivityDesigner))] public sealed class ResourceActivity : NativeActivity { [RequiredArgument] public InArgument<string> Path { get; set; } [Browsable(false), EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] public Activity Body { get; set; } [Browsable(false), EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] public Variable<StreamReader> Resource { get; set; } public ResourceActivity() { this.Resource = new Variable<StreamReader> { Default = null, Name = "reader" }; } protected override void CacheMetadata(NativeActivityMetadata metadata) { if (this.Path != null) metadata.AddArgument(this.Path); if (this.Body != null) metadata.AddChild(this.Body); if (this.Resource != null) metadata.AddVariable(this.Resource); } protected override void Execute(NativeActivityContext context) { this.Resource.Set(context, new StreamReader(this.Path.Get(context))); context.ScheduleActivity(this.Body, new completionCallback(Done), new FaultCallback(Faulted)); } private void Done(NativeActivityContext context, ActivityInstance instance) { var reader = this.Reader.Get(context); if (reader != null) reader.Dispose(); } private void Faulted(NativeActivityFaultContext context, Exception ex, ActivityInstance instance) { var reader = this.Reader.Get(context); if (reader != null) reader.Dispose(); } } I cannot view "Resource" or "reader" in the Variables list in the Workflow Designer. Am I missing something in CacheMetadata?

    Read the article

  • WCF timeout exception on calling service on 11th time

    - by Sergej Andrejev
    I'm creating a WCF service and stumbled with request timeout problem. When I load test the service the 11th call always fails with "System.Net.WebException: The operation has timed out". I have read that would happen if serviceThrotling is set to defaults so I added following lines to my service configuration file <behavior name="ServiceBehavior"> <!-- ... --> <serviceThrottling maxConcurrentCalls="100" maxConcurrentSessions="100" maxConcurrentInstances="100" /> </behavior> But this doesn't help. I thought that closing the proxy might be a problem, but I do close all proxies. try { response = service.GetCustomerHdQuotes(request); } finally { try { if (service.State != CommunicationState.Faulted) service.Close(); else service.Abort(); // Abort if the State is Faulted. } catch (Exception) { service.Abort(); } } I also have an idea that inside service some resources pile up preventing service to accept new connections, but the fact that this is always 11th request points that this is more likely due to some configuration problems. Can anybody help me with that?

    Read the article

  • NHibernate Session per Call in WCF - How to Rollback

    - by Corey Coogan
    I've implemented some components to use WCF with both an IoC Container (StructureMap) and the Session per Call pattern. The NHibernate stuff is most taken from here: http://realfiction.net/Content/Entry/133. It seems to be OK, but I want to open a transaction with each call and commit at the end, rather than just Flush() which how its being done in the article. Here's where I am running into some problems and could use some advice. I haven't figured out a good way to rollback. I realize I can check the CommunicationState and if there's an exception, rollback, like so: public void Detach(InstanceContext owner) { if (Session != null) { try { if(owner.State == CommunicationState.Faulted) RollbackTransaction(); else CommitTransaction(); } finally { Session.Dispose(); } } } void CommitTransaction() { if(Session.Transaction != null && Session.Transaction.IsActive) Session.Transaction.Commit(); } void RollbackTransaction() { if (Session.Transaction != null && Session.Transaction.IsActive) Session.Transaction.Rollback(); } However, I almost never return a faulted state from a service call. I would typically handle the exception and return an appropriate indicator on my response object and rollback the transaction myself. The only way I can think of handling this would be to inject not only repositories into my WCF services, but also an ISession so I can rollback and handle the way I want. That doesn't sit well with me and seems kind of leaky. Anyone else handling the same problem?

    Read the article

  • How to use MSMQ in WCF?

    - by Jader Dias
    I can work with many WCF bindings, except netMsmqBinding. All I get is: CommunicationObjectFaultedException: "The communication object, System.ServiceModel.ServiceHost, cannot be used for communication because it is in the Faulted state." at System.ServiceModel.Channels.CommunicationObject.Close(TimeSpan timeout) I tried it in a Windows Server 2008 R2 with the following features installed Message Queueing Message Queueing Services Message Queueing Server Message Queueing Triggers HTTP Support Multicasting Support Message Queueing DCOM Proxy I tried also to add manually a private Message Queue in the Server Manager but it didn't work. The address I am trying to expose is: net.msmq://localhost/private/MyServiceName

    Read the article

  • WCF Service Issue

    - by Om
    Hi, I am facing issue of the WCF Services on staging server. The same service is running perfectly in my local pc. But when i configured the same on staging server it is giving issue saying that: "The communication object, System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannel, cannot be used for communication, because it is in Faulted state." Is it related to security or anything else? How can i fix the issue? Regards, Om

    Read the article

  • Wcf exception handling

    - by pdiddy
    I noticed that if you do a throw new InvalidCastException for example, the channel state on the client side is faulted. But if you throw new FaultException, the channel state on the client side is opened. By curiosity, what is the reason why one faults the channel and the other doesn't?

    Read the article

  • Reliable session faulting for unknown reason

    - by Scarfman007
    I am trying to achieve the following - one client-side proxy instance (kept open) accessed by multiple threads using a reliable session. What I have managed so far is to have either A) a reliable session with a client-side proxy which is created and disposed per call or B) what I aim for, but without a reliable session. When I enable reliable sessions on my binding however, the following behaviour is exhibited: Client-side Upon application startup everything appears to work fine until roughly 18 messages in to the WCF session. I firstly get the proxy.InnerChannel.Faulted event raised, then an exception is caught at the point where I am calling the method on the proxy. The exception is a System.TimeoutException, with message: "The request channel timed out while waiting for a reply after 00:00:59.9062512. Increase the timeout value passed to the call to Request or increase the SendTimeout value on the Binding. The time allotted to this operation may have been a portion of a longer timeout." The inner exception has a similar message: "The request operation did not complete within the allotted timeout of 00:01:00. The time allotted to this operation may have been a portion of a longer timeout." With the method at the top of the inner stack trace being: System.ServiceModel.Channels.ReliableRequestSessionChannel.SyncRequest.WaitForReply(TimeSpan timeout) I then call proxy.Close followed by proxy.Abort (catching and ignoring exceptions). If I utilize the default settings (i.e. have simply <reliableSession/>), then calling proxy. Close results in another System.Timeout exception (although this time the allotted timeout is 00:00:00), however if I override the defaults as specified above no exception is thrown. Service-side Utilizing WCF tracing I get a System.ServiceModel.CommunicationException, with message: "The sequence has been terminated by the remote endpoint. The session has stopped waiting for a particular reply. Because of this the reliable session cannot continue. The reliable session was faulted." And a stack trace ending at: System.ServiceModel.AsyncResult.End[TAsyncResult](IAsyncResult result) When remotely attaching to the server I get the same message, which occurs when code execution steps over the return statement of my service in the service call which causes the error. The puzzling thing to me is that the service is stable and runs with options A) or B) as decribed at the beginning of my post, and occurs after a varying number of messages (around 18). The former fact points to there being nothing wrong with the code (indeed I have checked that no exceptions are thrown), and the latter just serves to confuse me and is why I modified the settings on the reliable session binding. I am quite stuck on this. Can anyone suggest why the reliable session would fault in such a way?

    Read the article

  • Exchange 2007 CCR: Logs not replicating to passive node partition

    - by yum_tacos4u
    In my environment I have setup Exchange 2007 in an CCR cluster, mirroring our main servers to a set of servers in passive mode. One of the partitions on the passive node that I have setup for the logs for Exchange 2007 has faulted, causing the partition to be unreadable. I have replaced the partition on the passive node, and setup the drive to mirror the one in active mode, but the logs are not replicating since the change. Is there anyway to force the replication of the new drive for the logs to the new partition? Any idea why the logs are not replicating? Any help or comments is appreciated, and thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Backups of Exchange 2007 SP3 using VSS are abnormally large

    - by Stew
    I have recently implemented Veeam backup and recovery 6.0, and have noted when backing up my exchange server via incremental updates, it is transferring way more data than expected. Backup is incremental, and setup to use VSS. VSS is stable and healthy, according to vssadmin. Exchange 2007 SP3 running on Windows Server 2008 R2, just last weekend I installed the latest Rollup for Exchange. I thought the nightly incrementals were large, but perhaps my users really are sending that much mail so I tested taking one incremental backup, waiting 10 minutes and taking a second. The second incremental backup transfered 5.8GB of data. We as an organization are absolutely NOT putting 5.8GB of data on the mail server every 10 minutes. Are there any other veeam users who have seen something similar? Is my test faulted? Are there other considerations for VSS?

    Read the article

1 2 3  | Next Page >