Search Results

Search found 13200 results on 528 pages for 'wcf testing'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 2/528 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Unit testing in Django

    - by acjohnson55
    I'm really struggling to write effective unit tests for a large Django project. I have reasonably good test coverage, but I've come to realize that the tests I've been writing are definitely integration/acceptance tests, not unit tests at all, and I have critical portions of my application that are not being tested effectively. I want to fix this ASAP. Here's my problem. My schema is deeply relational, and heavily time-oriented, giving my model object high internal coupling and lots of state. Many of my model methods query based on time intervals, and I've got a lot of auto_now_add going on in timestamped fields. So take a method that looks like this for example: def summary(self, startTime=None, endTime=None): # ... logic to assign a proper start and end time # if none was provided, probably using datetime.now() objects = self.related_model_set.manager_method.filter(...) return sum(object.key_method(startTime, endTime) for object in objects) How does one approach testing something like this? Here's where I am so far. It occurs to me that the unit testing objective should be given some mocked behavior by key_method on its arguments, is summary correctly filtering/aggregating to produce a correct result? Mocking datetime.now() is straightforward enough, but how can I mock out the rest of the behavior? I could use fixtures, but I've heard pros and cons of using fixtures for building my data (poor maintainability being a con that hits home for me). I could also setup my data through the ORM, but that can be limiting, because then I have to create related objects as well. And the ORM doesn't let you mess with auto_now_add fields manually. Mocking the ORM is another option, but not only is it tricky to mock deeply nested ORM methods, but the logic in the ORM code gets mocked out of the test, and mocking seems to make the test really dependent on the internals and dependencies of the function-under-test. The toughest nuts to crack seem to be the functions like this, that sit on a few layers of models and lower-level functions and are very dependent on the time, even though these functions may not be super complicated. My overall problem is that no matter how I seem to slice it, my tests are looking way more complex than the functions they are testing.

    Read the article

  • design pattern for unit testing? [duplicate]

    - by Maddy.Shik
    This question already has an answer here: Unit testing best practices for a unit testing newbie 4 answers I am beginner in developing test cases, and want to follow good patterns for developing test cases rather than following some person or company's specific ideas. Some people don't make test cases and just develop the way their senior have done in their projects. I am facing lot problems like object dependencies (when want to test method which persist A object i have to first persist B object since A is child of B). Please suggest some good books or sites preferably for learning design pattern for unit test cases. Or reference to some good source code or some discussion for Dos and Donts will do wonder. So that i can avoid doing mistakes be learning from experience of others.

    Read the article

  • WCF Binding Created In Code

    - by Daniel
    Hello I've a must to create wcf service with parameter. I'm following this http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/wcf/thread/8f18aed8-8e34-48ea-b8be-6c29ac3b4f41 First this is that I don't know how can I set this custom behavior "MyServiceBehavior" in my Web.config in ASP.NET MVC app that will host it. As far as I know behaviors must be declared in section in wcf.config. How can I add reference there to my behavior class from service assembly? An second thing is that I the following example the create local host, but how I can add headers used in constructor when I use service reference and it will already create instance of web service, right? Regards, Daniel Skowronski

    Read the article

  • Unit-Testing functions which have parameters of classes where source code is not accessible

    - by McMannus
    Relating to this question, I have another question regarding unit testing functions in the utility classes: Assume you have function signatures like this: public function void doSomething(InternalClass obj, InternalElement element) where InternalClass and InternalElement are both Classes which source code are not available, because they are hidden in the API. Additionally, doSomething only operates on obj and element. I thought about mocking those classes away but this option is not possible due to the fact that they do not implement an interface at all which I could use for my Mocking classes. However, I need to fill obj with defined data to test doSomething. How can this problem be solved?

    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

  • Unit Testing DateTime – The Crazy Way

    - by João Angelo
    We all know that the process of unit testing code that depends on DateTime, particularly the current time provided through the static properties (Now, UtcNow and Today), it’s a PITA. If you go ask how to unit test DateTime.Now on stackoverflow I’ll bet that you’ll get two kind of answers: Encapsulate the current time in your own interface and use a standard mocking framework; Pull out the big guns like Typemock Isolator, JustMock or Microsoft Moles/Fakes and mock the static property directly. Now each alternative has is pros and cons and I would have to say that I glean more to the second approach because the first adds a layer of abstraction just for the sake of testability. However, the second approach depends on commercial tools that not every shop wants to buy or in the not so friendly Microsoft Moles. (Sidenote: Moles is now named Fakes and it will ship with VS 2012) This tends to leave people without an acceptable and simple solution so after reading another of these types of questions in SO I came up with yet another alternative, one based on the first alternative that I presented here but tries really hard to not get in your way with yet another layer of abstraction. So, without further dues, I present you, the Tardis. The Tardis is single section of conditionally compiled code that overrides the meaning of the DateTime expression inside a single class. You still get the normal coding experience of using DateTime all over the place, but in a DEBUG compilation your tests will be able to mock every static method or property of the DateTime class. An example follows, while the full Tardis code can be downloaded from GitHub: using System; using NSubstitute; using NUnit.Framework; using Tardis; public class Example { public Example() : this(string.Empty) { } public Example(string title) { #if DEBUG this.DateTime = DateTimeProvider.Default; this.Initialize(title); } internal IDateTimeProvider DateTime { get; set; } internal Example(string title, IDateTimeProvider provider) { this.DateTime = provider; #endif this.Initialize(title); } private void Initialize(string title) { this.Title = title; this.CreatedAt = DateTime.UtcNow; } private string title; public string Title { get { return this.title; } set { this.title = value; this.UpdatedAt = DateTime.UtcNow; } } public DateTime CreatedAt { get; private set; } public DateTime UpdatedAt { get; private set; } } public class TExample { public void T001() { // Arrange var tardis = Substitute.For<IDateTimeProvider>(); tardis.UtcNow.Returns(new DateTime(2000, 1, 1, 6, 6, 6)); // Act var sut = new Example("Title", tardis); // Assert Assert.That(sut.CreatedAt, Is.EqualTo(tardis.UtcNow)); } public void T002() { // Arrange var tardis = Substitute.For<IDateTimeProvider>(); var sut = new Example("Title", tardis); tardis.UtcNow.Returns(new DateTime(2000, 1, 1, 6, 6, 6)); // Act sut.Title = "Updated"; // Assert Assert.That(sut.UpdatedAt, Is.EqualTo(tardis.UtcNow)); } } This approach is also suitable for other similar classes with commonly used static methods or properties like the ConfigurationManager class.

    Read the article

  • how to enable WCF Session with wsHttpBidning with Transport only Security

    - by Mubashar Ahmad
    Dear Devs I have a WCF Service currently deployed with basicHttpBindings and SSL enabled. But now i need to enable wcf sessions(not asp sessions) so i moved service to wsHttpBidnings but sessions are not enabled I have set [ServiceBehavior(InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.PerSession)] But when i set SessionMode=SessionMode.Required on service contract it says Contract requires Session, but Binding 'WSHttpBinding' doesn't support it or isn't configured properly to support it. following is the definition of WSHttpBinding <wsHttpBinding> <binding name="wsHttpBinding"> <readerQuotas maxStringContentLength="10240" /> <reliableSession enabled="false" /> <security mode="Transport"> <transport clientCredentialType="None"> <extendedProtectionPolicy policyEnforcement="Never" /> </transport> </security> </binding> </wsHttpBinding> please help me with this

    Read the article

  • Can unit tests verify software requirements?

    - by Peter Smith
    I have often heard unit tests help programmers build confidence in their software. But is it enough for verifying that software requirements are met? I am losing confidence that software is working just because the unit tests pass. We have experienced some failures in production deployment due to an untested\unverified execution path. These failures are sometimes quite large, impact business operations and often requires an immediate fix. The failure is very rarely traced back to a failing unit test. We have large unit test bodies that have reasonable line coverage but almost all of these focus on individual classes and not on their interactions. Manual testing seems to be ineffective because the software being worked on is typically large with many execution paths and many integration points with other software. It is very painful to manually test all of the functionality and it never seems to flush out all the bugs. Are we doing unit testing wrong when it seems we still are failing to verify the software correctly before deployment? Or do most shops have another layer of automated testing in addition to unit tests?

    Read the article

  • Tellago && Tellago Studios 2010

    - by gsusx
    With 2011 around the corner we, at Tellago and Tellago Studios , we have been spending a lot of times evaluating our successes and failures (yes those too ;)) of 2010 and delineating some of our goals and strategies for 2011. When I look at 2010 here are some of the things that quickly jump off the page: Growing Tellago by 300% Launching a brand new company: Tellago Studios Expanding our customer base Establishing our business intelligence practice http://tellago.com/what-we-say/events/business-intelligence...(read more)

    Read the article

  • design pattern for unit testing?

    - by Maddy.Shik
    I am beginner in developing test cases, and want to follow good patterns for developing test cases rather than following some person or company's specific ideas. Some people don't make test cases and just develop the way their senior have done in their projects. I am facing lot problems like object dependencies (when want to test method which persist A object i have to first persist B object since A is child of B). Please suggest some good books or sites preferably for learning design pattern for unit test cases. Or reference to some good source code or some discussion for Dos and Donts will do wonder. So that i can avoid doing mistakes be learning from experience of others.

    Read the article

  • Area of testing

    - by ?????? ??????????
    I'm trying to understand which part of my code I should to test. I have some code. Below is example of this code, just to understand the idea. Depends of some parametrs I put one or another currency to "Event" and return his serialization in the controller. Which part of code I should to test? Just the final serialization, or only "Event" or every method: getJson, getRows, fillCurrency, setCurrency? class Controller { public function getJson() { $rows = $eventManager->getRows(); return new JsonResponse($rows); } } class EventManager { public function getRows() { //some code here if ($parameter == true) { $this->fillCurrency($event, $currency); } } public function fillCurrency($event, $currency) { //some code here if ($parameters == true) { $event->setCurrency($currency); } } } class Event { public function setCurrency($currency) { $this->updatedAt = new Datetime(); $this->currency = $currency; } }

    Read the article

  • Calling a WCF service from another WCF service

    - by ultraman69
    Hi ! I have a WCF service hosted on a windows service on my Server1. It also has IIS on this machine. I call the service from a web app and it works fine. But within this service, I have to call another WCF sevice (also hosted on a windows service) located on Server2. The security credentials are set to "Message" and "Username". I have an error like "SOAP protcol negociation failed". It's a problem with my server certificate public key that doesn't seem to be recognise. However, if I call the service on the Server2 from Server1 in a console app, it works fine. I followed this tutorial to set up my certificates : http://www.codeproject.com/KB/WCF/wcf_certificates.aspx Here's the config file from my service on Server1 that tries to call the second one : <endpoint address="" binding="wsHttpBinding" contract="Microsoft.ServiceModel.Samples.ITraitement" /> <endpoint address="mex" binding="mexHttpBinding" contract="IMetadataExchange" /> </service> </services> <client> <endpoint address="http://Server2:8000/servicemodelsamples/service" behaviorConfiguration="myClientBehavior" binding="wsHttpBinding" bindingConfiguration="MybindingCon" contract="Microsoft.ServiceModel.Samples.ICalculator" name=""> <identity> <dns value="ODWCertificatServeur" /> </identity> </endpoint> </client> <bindings> <wsHttpBinding> <binding name="MybindingCon"> <security mode="Message"> <message clientCredentialType="UserName" /> </security> </binding> </wsHttpBinding> </bindings> <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior name="ServiceTraitementBehavior"> <serviceMetadata httpGetEnabled="True"/> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="True" /> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> <endpointBehaviors> <behavior name="myClientBehavior"> <clientCredentials> <clientCertificate findValue="MachineServiceTraitement" x509FindType="FindBySubjectName" storeLocation="LocalMachine" storeName="My" /> <serviceCertificate> <authentication certificateValidationMode="ChainTrust" revocationMode="NoCheck"/> </serviceCertificate> </clientCredentials> </behavior> </endpointBehaviors> </behaviors> And here's the config file from the web app that calls the service on Server1 : <system.serviceModel> <bindings> <wsHttpBinding> <binding name="WSHttpBinding_ITraitement" 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="true" 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> </wsHttpBinding> </bindings> <client> <endpoint address="http://localhost:8020/ServiceTraitementPC" binding="wsHttpBinding" bindingConfiguration="WSHttpBinding_ITraitement" contract="ITraitement" name="WSHttpBinding_ITraitement"> </endpoint> </client> Any idea why it works if if I call it in a console app and not from my service ? Maybe it has something to do with the certificateValidationMode="ChainTrust" ?

    Read the article

  • Configuring multiple distinct WCF binding configurations causes an exception to be thrown

    - by Sandor Drieënhuizen
    I have a set of IIS7-hosted net.tcp WCF services that serve my ASP.NET MVC web application. The web application is accessed over the internet. WCF Services (IIS7) <--> ASP.NET MVC Application <--> Client Browser The services are username authenticated, the account that a client (of my web application) uses to logon ends up as the current principal on the host. I want one of the services to be authenticated differently, because it serves the view model for my logon view. When it's called, the client is obviously not logged on yet. I figure Windows authentication serves best or perhaps just certificate based security (which in fact I should use for the authenticated services as well) if the services are hosted on a machine that is not in the same domain as the web application. That's not the point here though. Using multiple TCP bindings is what's giving me trouble. I tried setting it up like this: <bindings> <netTcpBinding> <binding> <security mode="TransportWithMessageCredential"> <message clientCredentialType="UserName"/> </security> </binding> <binding name="public"> <security mode="Transport"> <message clientCredentialType="Windows"/> </security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> The thing is that both bindings don't seem to want live together in my host. When I remove either of them, all's fine but together they produce the following exception on the client: The requested upgrade is not supported by 'net.tcp://localhost:8081/Service2.svc'. This could be due to mismatched bindings (for example security enabled on the client and not on the server). In the server trace log, I find the following exception: Protocol Type application/negotiate was sent to a service that does not support that type of upgrade. Am I looking into the right direction or is there a better way to solve this?

    Read the article

  • How to configure multiple WCF binding configurations for the same scheme

    - by Sandor Drieënhuizen
    I have a set of IIS7-hosted net.tcp WCF services that serve my ASP.NET MVC web application. The web application is accessed over the internet. WCF Services (IIS7) <--> ASP.NET MVC Application <--> Client Browser The services are username authenticated, the account that a client (of my web application) uses to logon ends up as the current principal on the host. I want one of the services to be authenticated differently, because it serves the view model for my logon view. When it's called, the client is obviously not logged on yet. I figure Windows authentication serves best or perhaps just certificate based security (which in fact I should use for the authenticated services as well) if the services are hosted on a machine that is not in the same domain as the web application. That's not the point here though. Using multiple TCP bindings is what's giving me trouble. I tried setting it up like this in my client configuration: <bindings> <netTcpBinding> <binding> <security mode="TransportWithMessageCredential"> <message clientCredentialType="UserName"/> </security> </binding> <binding name="public"> <security mode="Transport"> <message clientCredentialType="Windows"/> </security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> <client> <endpoint contract="Server.IService1" binding="netTcpBinding" address="net.tcp://localhost:8081/Service1.svc"/> <endpoint contract="Server.IService2" binding="netTcpBinding" address="net.tcp://localhost:8081/Service2.svc"/> </client> The server configuration is this: <bindings> <netTcpBinding> <binding portSharingEnabled="true"> <security mode="TransportWithMessageCredential"> <message clientCredentialType="UserName"/> </security> </binding> <binding name="public"> <security mode="Transport"> <message clientCredentialType="Windows"/> </security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> <services> <service name="Service1"> <endpoint contract="Server.IService1, Library" binding="netTcpBinding" address=""/> </service> <service name="Service2"> <endpoint contract="Server.IService2, Library" binding="netTcpBinding" address=""/> </service> </services> <serviceHostingEnvironment> <serviceActivations> <add relativeAddress="Service1.svc" service="Server.Service1"/> <add relativeAddress="Service2.svc" service="Server.Service2"/> </serviceActivations> </serviceHostingEnvironment> The thing is that both bindings don't seem to want live together in my host. When I remove either of them, all's fine but together they produce the following exception on the client: The requested upgrade is not supported by 'net.tcp://localhost:8081/Service2.svc'. This could be due to mismatched bindings (for example security enabled on the client and not on the server). In the server trace log, I find the following exception: Protocol Type application/negotiate was sent to a service that does not support that type of upgrade. Am I looking into the right direction or is there a better way to solve this?

    Read the article

  • WCF client endpoint identity - configuration question

    - by Roel
    Hi all, I'm having a strange situation here. I got it working, but I don't understand why. Situation is as follows: There is a WCF service which my application (a website) has to call. The WCF service exposes a netTcpBinding and requires Transport Security (Windows). Client and server are in the same domain, but on different servers. So generating a client results in the following config (mostly defaults) <system.serviceModel> <bindings> <netTcpBinding> <binding name="MyTcpEndpoint" ...> <reliableSession ordered="true" inactivityTimeout="00:10:00" enabled="false" /> <security mode="Transport"> <transport clientCredentialType="Windows" protectionLevel="EncryptAndSign"/> <message clientCredentialType="Windows" /> </security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> <client> <endpoint address="net.tcp://localhost:xxxxx/xxxx/xxx/1.0" binding="netTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="MyTcpEndpoint" contract="Service.IMyService" name="TcpEndpoint"/> </client> </system.serviceModel> When I run the website and make the call to the service, I get the following error: System.ServiceModel.Security.SecurityNegotiationException: Either the target name is incorrect or the server has rejected the client credentials. ---> System.Security.Authentication.InvalidCredentialException: Either the target name is incorrect or the server has rejected the client credentials. ---> System.ComponentModel.Win32Exception: The logon attempt failed --- End of inner exception stack trace --- at System.Net.Security.NegoState.EndProcessAuthentication(IAsyncResult result) at System.Net.Security.NegotiateStream.EndAuthenticateAsClient(IAsyncResult asyncResult) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.WindowsStreamSecurityUpgradeProvider.WindowsStreamSecurityUpgradeInitiator.InitiateUpgradeAsyncResult.OnCompleteAuthenticateAsClient(IAsyncResult result) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.StreamSecurityUpgradeInitiatorAsyncResult.CompleteAuthenticateAsClient(IAsyncResult result) --- End of inner exception stack trace --- Server stack trace: at System.ServiceModel.AsyncResult.End[TAsyncResult](IAsyncResult result) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannel.SendAsyncResult.End(SendAsyncResult result) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannel.EndCall(String action, Object[] outs, IAsyncResult result) .... Now, if I just alter the configuration of the client like so: <endpoint address="net.tcp://localhost:xxxxx/xxxx/xxx/1.0" binding="netTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="MyTcpEndpoint" contract="Service.IMyService" name="TcpEndpoint"> <identity> <dns /> </identity> </endpoint> everything works and my server happily reports that it got called by the service account which hosts the AppPool for my website. All good. My question now is: why does this work? What does this do? I got to this solution by mere trial-and-error. To me it seems that all the <dns /> tag does is tell the client to use the default DNS for authentication, but doesn't it do that anyway? Thanks for providing me with some insight.

    Read the article

  • Configuring multiple WCF binding configurations for the same scheme doesn't work

    - by Sandor Drieënhuizen
    I have a set of IIS7-hosted net.tcp WCF services that serve my ASP.NET MVC web application. The web application is accessed over the internet. WCF Services (IIS7) <--> ASP.NET MVC Application <--> Client Browser The services are username authenticated, the account that a client (of my web application) uses to logon ends up as the current principal on the host. I want one of the services to be authenticated differently, because it serves the view model for my logon view. When it's called, the client is obviously not logged on yet. I figure Windows authentication serves best or perhaps just certificate based security (which in fact I should use for the authenticated services as well) if the services are hosted on a machine that is not in the same domain as the web application. That's not the point here though. Using multiple TCP bindings is what's giving me trouble. I tried setting it up like this in my client configuration: <bindings> <netTcpBinding> <binding> <security mode="TransportWithMessageCredential"> <message clientCredentialType="UserName"/> </security> </binding> <binding name="public"> <security mode="Transport"> <message clientCredentialType="Windows"/> </security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> <client> <endpoint contract="Server.IService1" binding="netTcpBinding" address="net.tcp://localhost:8081/Service1.svc"/> <endpoint contract="Server.IService2" binding="netTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="public" address="net.tcp://localhost:8081/Service2.svc"/> </client> The server configuration is this: <bindings> <netTcpBinding> <binding portSharingEnabled="true"> <security mode="TransportWithMessageCredential"> <message clientCredentialType="UserName"/> </security> </binding> <binding name="public"> <security mode="Transport"> <message clientCredentialType="Windows"/> </security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> <services> <service name="Service1"> <endpoint contract="Server.IService1, Library" binding="netTcpBinding" address=""/> </service> <service name="Service2"> <endpoint contract="Server.IService2, Library" binding="netTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="public" address=""/> </service> </services> <serviceHostingEnvironment> <serviceActivations> <add relativeAddress="Service1.svc" service="Server.Service1"/> <add relativeAddress="Service2.svc" service="Server.Service2"/> </serviceActivations> </serviceHostingEnvironment> The thing is that both bindings don't seem to want live together in my host. When I remove either of them, all's fine but together they produce the following exception on the client: The requested upgrade is not supported by 'net.tcp://localhost:8081/Service2.svc'. This could be due to mismatched bindings (for example security enabled on the client and not on the server). In the server trace log, I find the following exception: Protocol Type application/negotiate was sent to a service that does not support that type of upgrade. Am I looking into the right direction or is there a better way to solve this?

    Read the article

  • How to configurie multiple distinct WCF binding configurations for the same scheme

    - by Sandor Drieënhuizen
    I have a set of IIS7-hosted net.tcp WCF services that serve my ASP.NET MVC web application. The web application is accessed over the internet. WCF Services (IIS7) <--> ASP.NET MVC Application <--> Client Browser The services are username authenticated, the account that a client (of my web application) uses to logon ends up as the current principal on the host. I want one of the services to be authenticated differently, because it serves the view model for my logon view. When it's called, the client is obviously not logged on yet. I figure Windows authentication serves best or perhaps just certificate based security (which in fact I should use for the authenticated services as well) if the services are hosted on a machine that is not in the same domain as the web application. That's not the point here though. Using multiple TCP bindings is what's giving me trouble. I tried setting it up like this in my client configuration: <bindings> <netTcpBinding> <binding> <security mode="TransportWithMessageCredential"> <message clientCredentialType="UserName"/> </security> </binding> <binding name="public"> <security mode="Transport"> <message clientCredentialType="Windows"/> </security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> <client> <endpoint contract="Server.IService1" binding="netTcpBinding" address="net.tcp://localhost:8081/Service1.svc"/> <endpoint contract="Server.IService2" binding="netTcpBinding" address="net.tcp://localhost:8081/Service2.svc"/> </client> The server configuration is this: <bindings> <netTcpBinding> <binding portSharingEnabled="true"> <security mode="TransportWithMessageCredential"> <message clientCredentialType="UserName"/> </security> </binding> <binding name="public"> <security mode="Transport"> <message clientCredentialType="Windows"/> </security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> <services> <service name="Service1"> <endpoint contract="Server.IService1, Library" binding="netTcpBinding" address=""/> </service> <service name="Service2"> <endpoint contract="Server.IService2, Library" binding="netTcpBinding" address=""/> </service> </services> <serviceHostingEnvironment> <serviceActivations> <add relativeAddress="Service1.svc" service="Server.Service1"/> <add relativeAddress="Service2.svc" service="Server.Service2"/> </serviceActivations> </serviceHostingEnvironment> The thing is that both bindings don't seem to want live together in my host. When I remove either of them, all's fine but together they produce the following exception on the client: The requested upgrade is not supported by 'net.tcp://localhost:8081/Service2.svc'. This could be due to mismatched bindings (for example security enabled on the client and not on the server). In the server trace log, I find the following exception: Protocol Type application/negotiate was sent to a service that does not support that type of upgrade. Am I looking into the right direction or is there a better way to solve this?

    Read the article

  • How much detail is in a good UI regression test?

    - by GlenPeterson
    We use a detailed step-by-step user-interface regression test for our commercial web application. It has a "backbone" test for the most used / most important parts of the system, with optional tests for specific areas of functionality. Using this plan has definitely helped us ensure high quality software. But, having very specific tests can be counter-productive. The tester concentrates on following the test and will completely miss usability issues, or not notice fairly obvious problems such as the bottom part of a page that is missing. By contrast, some of the best UI testing happens when building a demo of a new feature. I often do my own best testing by pretending to demonstrate the system to an imaginary prospect. Yet when I tell the testers, "Just demonstrate the system to yourself" they don't cover nearly as much functionality as they do with a detailed point-by-point test. I'm repeatedly asked to provide more and more detail in the test plan so that a new untrained tester can test with it without asking any questions. Yet details seem to be counter-productive. How much detail do you put in a regression test to make it effective? What techniques make the tester to focus more on the system than on checking off items on the test?

    Read the article

  • WCF Maximum message size quota exceeded problem - Guru needed

    - by Rire1979
    The maximum message size quota for incoming messages (65536) has been exceeded. To increase the quota, use the MaxReceivedMessageSize property on the appropriate binding element. Let me begin by saying that I can fix the problem by increasing the size of MaxReceivedMessageSize and the appropriate buffer. However it looks to me that this solution is not ideal because it's impossible to establish an upper bound to the size of the message as data changes daily. Setting it to the maximum size of two gigs feels like the wrong approach ... It may matter... or not: I'm using the MSN ad center API v6. Can an experienced WCF professional confirm this is indeed the approach we'll have to make do with? Is it as bad as it looks? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How to trace WCF serialization issues / exceptions

    - by Fabiano
    Hi I occasionally run into the problem that an application exception is thrown during the WCF-serialization (after returning a DataContract from my OperationContract). The only (and less meaningfull) message I get is System.ServiceModel.CommunicationException : The underlying connection was closed: The connection was closed unexpectedly. without any insight to the inner exception, which makes it really hard to find out what caused the error during serialization. Does someone know a good way how you can trace, log and debug these exceptions? Or even better can I catch the exception, handle them and send a defined FaulMessage to the client? thank you

    Read the article

  • Wcf IInstanceProvider Behaviour never calling Realease() ?

    - by Jon
    Hi, I'm implementing my own IInstanceProvider class to override the creation and realease of new service instances but the Release() method never gets called on my implemented class? It's implemented using an IServiceBehavior to attach to the exposed endpoint. No matter how hard we hammer the service the Relaease() method nevers gets called. We have the service running a per call instanceContext mode with 50 instance max. The deconstruct of the service instance gets called but not on all created instance and this looks like the gargageCollection rather than wcf realeasing and disposing. Any ideas why the Release() method never gets called? Thanks in Advance, Jon

    Read the article

  • WCF: How to detect new connections to WCF PerSession services ?

    - by Christian Toma
    I have a self-hosted WCF service with the InstanceContextMode set to PerSession. How can I detect new client connections (sessions) to my service from the host application and use that new session context to observe my service trough its events? Something like: [ServiceBehavior(InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.PerSession)] public class MyService : IMyService { public event EventHandler ClientRegistered; public event EventHandler FileUploaded; } and from my host application to be able to do: ServiceHost svc = new ServiceHost(typeof(MyService)); svc.Open(); // something like: svc.NewSession += new EventHandler(...) //... public void SessionHandler(InstanceContext SessionContext) { MySessionHandler NewSessionHandler = new MySessionHandler(SessionContext); // From MySessionHandler I handle the service's events (FileUploaded, ClientRegistered) // for this session and notify the UI of any changes. NewSessionHandler.Handle(); }

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >