Search Results

Search found 26908 results on 1077 pages for 'asynchronous wcf call'.

Page 63/1077 | < Previous Page | 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70  | Next Page >

  • Thinktecture.IdentityModel: WIF Support for WCF REST Services and OData

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    The latest drop of Thinktecture.IdentityModel includes plumbing and support for WIF, claims and tokens for WCF REST services and Data Services (aka OData). Cibrax has an alternative implementation that uses the WCF Rest Starter Kit. His recent post reminded me that I should finally “document” that part of our library. Features include: generic plumbing for all WebServiceHost derived WCF services support for SAML and SWT tokens support for ClaimsAuthenticationManager and ClaimsAuthorizationManager based solely on native WCF extensibility points (and WIF) This post walks you through the setup of an OData / WCF DataServices endpoint with token authentication and claims support. This sample is also included in the codeplex download along a similar sample for plain WCF REST services. Setting up the Data Service To prove the point I have created a simple WCF Data Service that renders the claims of the current client as an OData set. public class ClaimsData {     public IQueryable<ViewClaim> Claims     {         get { return GetClaims().AsQueryable(); }     }       private List<ViewClaim> GetClaims()     {         var claims = new List<ViewClaim>();         var identity = Thread.CurrentPrincipal.Identity as IClaimsIdentity;           int id = 0;         identity.Claims.ToList().ForEach(claim =>             {                 claims.Add(new ViewClaim                 {                    Id = ++id,                    ClaimType = claim.ClaimType,                    Value = claim.Value,                    Issuer = claim.Issuer                 });             });           return claims;     } } …and hooked that up with a read only data service: public class ClaimsDataService : DataService<ClaimsData> {     public static void InitializeService(IDataServiceConfiguration config)     {         config.SetEntitySetAccessRule("*", EntitySetRights.AllRead);     } } Enabling WIF Before you enable WIF, you should generate your client proxies. Afterwards the service will only accept requests with an access token – and svcutil does not support that. All the WIF magic is done in a special service authorization manager called the FederatedWebServiceAuthorizationManager. This code checks incoming calls to see if the Authorization HTTP header (or X-Authorization for environments where you are not allowed to set the authorization header) contains a token. This header must either start with SAML access_token= or WRAP access_token= (for SAML or SWT tokens respectively). For SAML validation, the plumbing uses the normal WIF configuration. For SWT you can either pass in a SimpleWebTokenRequirement or the SwtIssuer, SwtAudience and SwtSigningKey app settings are checked.If the token can be successfully validated, ClaimsAuthenticationManager and ClaimsAuthorizationManager are invoked and the IClaimsPrincipal gets established. The service authorization manager gets wired up by the FederatedWebServiceHostFactory: public class FederatedWebServiceHostFactory : WebServiceHostFactory {     protected override ServiceHost CreateServiceHost(       Type serviceType, Uri[] baseAddresses)     {         var host = base.CreateServiceHost(serviceType, baseAddresses);           host.Authorization.ServiceAuthorizationManager =           new FederatedWebServiceAuthorizationManager();         host.Authorization.PrincipalPermissionMode = PrincipalPermissionMode.Custom;           return host;     } } The last step is to set up the .svc file to use the service host factory (see the sample download). Calling the Service To call the service you need to somehow get a token. This is up to you. You can either use WSTrustChannelFactory (for the full CLR), WSTrustClient (Silverlight) or some other way to obtain a token. The sample also includes code to generate SWT tokens for testing – but the whole WRAP/SWT support will be subject of a separate post. I created some extensions methods for the most common web clients (WebClient, HttpWebRequest, DataServiceContext) that allow easy setting of the token, e.g.: public static void SetAccessToken(this DataServiceContext context,   string token, string type, string headerName) {     context.SendingRequest += (s, e) =>     {         e.RequestHeaders[headerName] = GetHeader(token, type);     }; } Making a query against the Data Service could look like this: static void CallService(string token, string type) {     var data = new ClaimsData(new Uri("https://server/odata.svc/"));     data.SetAccessToken(token, type);       data.Claims.ToList().ForEach(c =>         Console.WriteLine("{0}\n {1}\n ({2})\n", c.ClaimType, c.Value, c.Issuer)); } HTH

    Read the article

  • What is stopping data flow with .NET 3.5 asynchronous System.Net.Sockets.Socket?

    - by TonyG
    I have a .NET 3.5 client/server socket interface using the asynchronous methods. The client connects to the server and the connection should remain open until the app terminates. The protocol consists of the following pattern: send stx receive ack send data1 receive ack send data2 (repeat 5-6 while more data) receive ack send etx So a single transaction with two datablocks as above would consist of 4 sends from the client. After sending etx the client simply waits for more data to send out, then begins the next transmission with stx. I do not want to break the connection between individual exchanges or after each stx/data/etx payload. Right now, after connection, the client can send the first stx, and get a single ack, but I can't put more data onto the wire after that. Neither side disconnects, the socket is still intact. The client code is seriously abbreviated as follows - I'm following the pattern commonly available in online code samples. private void SendReceive(string data) { // ... SocketAsyncEventArgs completeArgs; completeArgs.Completed += new EventHandler<SocketAsyncEventArgs>(OnSend); clientSocket.SendAsync(completeArgs); // two AutoResetEvents, one for send, one for receive if ( !AutoResetEvent.WaitAll(autoSendReceiveEvents , -1) ) Log("failed"); else Log("success"); // ... } private void OnSend( object sender , SocketAsyncEventArgs e ) { // ... Socket s = e.UserToken as Socket; byte[] receiveBuffer = new byte[ 4096 ]; e.SetBuffer(receiveBuffer , 0 , receiveBuffer.Length); e.Completed += new EventHandler<SocketAsyncEventArgs>(OnReceive); s.ReceiveAsync(e); // ... } private void OnReceive( object sender , SocketAsyncEventArgs e ) {} // ... if ( e.BytesTransferred > 0 ) { Int32 bytesTransferred = e.BytesTransferred; String received = Encoding.ASCII.GetString(e.Buffer , e.Offset , bytesTransferred); dataReceived += received; } autoSendReceiveEvents[ SendOperation ].Set(); // could be moved elsewhere autoSendReceiveEvents[ ReceiveOperation ].Set(); // releases mutexes } The code on the server is very similar except that it receives first and then sends a response - the server is not doing anything (that I can tell) to modify the connection after it sends a response. The problem is that the second time I hit SendReceive in the client, the connection is already in a weird state. Do I need to do something in the client to preserve the SocketAsyncEventArgs, and re-use the same object for the lifetime of the socket/connection? I'm not sure which eventargs object should hang around during the life of the connection or a given exchange. Do I need to do something, or Not do something in the server to ensure it continues to Receive data? The server setup and response processing looks like this: void Start() { // ... listenSocket.Bind(...); listenSocket.Listen(0); StartAccept(null); // note accept as soon as we start. OK? mutex.WaitOne(); } void StartAccept(SocketAsyncEventArgs acceptEventArg) { if ( acceptEventArg == null ) { acceptEventArg = new SocketAsyncEventArgs(); acceptEventArg.Completed += new EventHandler<SocketAsyncEventArgs>(OnAcceptCompleted); } Boolean willRaiseEvent = this.listenSocket.AcceptAsync(acceptEventArg); if ( !willRaiseEvent ) ProcessAccept(acceptEventArg); // ... } private void OnAcceptCompleted( object sender , SocketAsyncEventArgs e ) { ProcessAccept(e); } private void ProcessAccept( SocketAsyncEventArgs e ) { // ... SocketAsyncEventArgs readEventArgs = new SocketAsyncEventArgs(); readEventArgs.SetBuffer(dataBuffer , 0 , Int16.MaxValue); readEventArgs.Completed += new EventHandler<SocketAsyncEventArgs>(OnIOCompleted); readEventArgs.UserToken = e.AcceptSocket; dataReceived = ""; // note server is degraded for single client/thread use // As soon as the client is connected, post a receive to the connection. Boolean willRaiseEvent = e.AcceptSocket.ReceiveAsync(readEventArgs); if ( !willRaiseEvent ) this.ProcessReceive(readEventArgs); // Accept the next connection request. this.StartAccept(e); } private void OnIOCompleted( object sender , SocketAsyncEventArgs e ) { // switch ( e.LastOperation ) case SocketAsyncOperation.Receive: ProcessReceive(e); // similar to client code // operate on dataReceived here case SocketAsyncOperation.Send: ProcessSend(e); // similar to client code } // execute this when a data has been processed into a response (ack, etc) private SendResponseToClient(string response) { // create buffer with response // currentEventArgs has class scope and is re-used currentEventArgs.SetBuffer(sendBuffer , 0 , sendBuffer.Length); Boolean willRaiseEvent = currentClient.SendAsync(currentEventArgs); if ( !willRaiseEvent ) ProcessSend(currentEventArgs); } A .NET trace shows the following when sending ABC\r\n: Socket#7588182::SendAsync() Socket#7588182::SendAsync(True#1) Data from Socket#7588182::FinishOperation(SendAsync) 00000000 : 41 42 43 0D 0A Socket#7588182::ReceiveAsync() Exiting Socket#7588182::ReceiveAsync() - True#1 And it stops there. It looks just like the first send from the client but the server shows no activity. I think that could be info overload for now but I'll be happy to provide more details as required. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Calling end invoke on an asynchronous call when an exception has fired in WCF.

    - by james.ingham
    Hey, I currently have an asynchronous call with a callback, which fires this method on completion: private void TestConnectionToServerCallback(IAsyncResult iar) { bool result; try { result = testConnectionDelegate.EndInvoke(iar); Console.WriteLine("Connection made!"); } catch (EndpointNotFoundException e) { Console.WriteLine("Server Timeout. Are you connected?"); result = false; } ... } With the EndpointNotFoundException firing when the server is down or no connection can be made. My question is this, if I want to recall the testConnectionDelegate with some kind of re-try button, must I first call testConnectionDelegate.EndInvoke where the exception is caught? When I do call end invoke in the catch, I get another exception on result = testConnectionDelegate.EndInvoke(iar); whenever I call this method for the second time. This is "CommunicationObjectFaultedException". I'm assuming this is because I didn't end it properly, which is what I think I have to do. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks - James

    Read the article

  • Async CTP (C# 5): How to make WCF work with Async CTP

    - by javarg
    If you have recently downloaded the new Async CTP you will notice that WCF uses Async Pattern and Event based Async Pattern in order to expose asynchronous operations. In order to make your service compatible with the new Async/Await Pattern try using an extension method similar to the following: WCF Async/Await Method public static class ServiceExtensions {     public static Task<DateTime> GetDateTimeTaskAsync(this Service1Client client)     {         return Task.Factory.FromAsync<DateTime>(             client.BeginGetDateTime(null, null),             ar => client.EndGetDateTime(ar));     } } The previous code snippet adds an extension method to the GetDateTime method of the Service1Client WCF proxy. Then used it like this (remember to add the extension method’s namespace into scope in order to use it): Code Snippet var client = new Service1Client(); var dt = await client.GetDateTimeTaskAsync(); Replace the proxy’s type and operation name for the one you want to await.

    Read the article

  • Design For Asynchronous User Interface

    - by Sohnee
    I have been working on a integration that has posed an interesting user interface conundrum that I would like suggestions for. The user interface is displayed within a third party product. The state of the interface is supplied by calls to a service I have written. There can be small delays between the actual state changing the the user interface changing due to the polling for state by the third party. When a user interacts with the user interface, requests are sent back to my application. This then affects the state and the next state poll request will update the user interface. The problem is that the delay between pressing a button and seeing the user interface update is perhaps 1 or 2 seconds and in usability testing I can see that people are clicking again before the user interface updates, thinking that they haven't properly clicked the first time. Given the constraints (we can only update the user interface via the polling mechanism - if we updated it when they clicked, the polling might return and overwrite the change causing unpredictable / undesirable results)... what can we do to make the user experience better. My current idea is to show a message for a couple of seconds so people know their click was accepted, the message would not be affected by the state polling, so wouldn't be prematurely removed / overwritten etc. I'm sure there are other ideas out there and I'm also confident someone has a better idea that I have!

    Read the article

  • Silverlight TV 20: Community Driven Development with WCF RIA Services

    In this episode, John talks with Jeff Handley about how the community's feedback really helped shape some features in WCF RIA Services. Jeff is very active in the community and has a wealth of knowledge about WCF RIA Services. Relevant links: John's Blog and John on Twitter Jeff's Blog and Jeff on Twitter WCF RIA Services ContosoSales sample application shown in the episode Silverlight 4 RC Features (or download here) Follow us on Twitter @SilverlightTV Silverlight Training...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Reusing WCF Proxy to reduce Memory Usage

    - by Sudheer Kumar
    I am working on a program that uploads BLOB from DB to a Document Management System. I have a WCF service to interact with the DMS. I have a multi-threaded client program that uploads the BLOBs to DMS and every thread used to create and dispose a proxy instance for every record to update. When I have a large no of records to convert, I found that the tool’s memory foot print keeps increasing. After a little debugging I found that the WCF proxies are the culprits for excessive memory usage. I changed the program to re-use the proxies to the service, having one proxy per thread. So in some scenarios, it might be beneficial to re-use WCF proxies.

    Read the article

  • Why does the MaxReceiveMessageSize in WCF matter in case of Streaming

    The default value of MaxReceiveMessageSize in WCF is 65,536.  When you choose streaming as TransferMode, WCF runtime will create 8192 as buffer size. So what happened now is that WCF channel stack will read the first 8192 bytes, and decode the first couple of bytes as the size of the entire envelope. Then we will do a size check, and send back fault if the actual size exceeds the limit.   According to MSDN documentation, the MaxReceiveMessageSize is something that prevents a DOS attack,...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Optimizing data downloaded via 'link' media queries and asynchronous loading

    - by adam-asdf
    I have a website that tries to make sensible use of media queries and avoid 'expensive' CSS for users of mobile devices. My eventual goal is to make it 'mobile-first' but for now, since it is based on Twitter Bootstrap it isn't. I included some background images (Base64 encoded) and styles that would only apply to "full-size" browsers in a separate stylesheet loaded asynchronously via modernizr.load. In Firefox (but not webkit browsers) it makes it so that if you navigate away from the homepage and then return, the content (specifically, all those extras) 'blinks' when it finishes loading...or maybe I should say reloading. If, instead of using modernizr.load, I include that stylesheet via a link... in the head with a media query attribute will it prevent the data from being downloaded by non-matching browsers (mobile, based on screensize) that it is inapplicable to?

    Read the article

  • Any good web frameworks for asynchronous multiplayer games?

    - by Steven Stadnicki
    I'm trying to craft a site for web-based (original) board games, and my client (currently written in Actionscript, but that's highly fungible) works fine - I can play solitaire games in the client - but it has nothing to connect to. What I'm looking for is a server framework for handling accounts/authentication and game tracking: something that would let players log in, show them a list of their current games, let them invite friends to new games, let them make moves in the games they have open, etc. I'm flexible on language; obviously I'm going to have to write a lot of server code to handle the actual game logic, but that should be straightforward enough. I'm more concerned with how to handle the user (and game) DBs, though suggestions for a good server framework for communicating with the DBs (and serving up, most likely, JSON for client communications) are also welcome. Right now my leaning is towards Ruby (probably with Rails) but as far as I can determine it would be a pretty good chunk of effort to set up the necessary databases, so having something even higher-level would be really useful to me.

    Read the article

  • Speaking at Microsoft's Duth DevDays

    - by gsusx
    Last week I had the pleasure of presenting two sessions at Microsoft's Dutch DevDays at Den Hague. On Tuesday I presented a sessions about how to implement real world RESTFul services patterns using WCF, WCF Data Services and ASP.NET MVC2. During that session I showed a total of 15 small demos that highlighted how to implement key aspects of RESTful solutions such as Security, LowREST clients, URI modeling, Validation, Error Handling, etc. As part of those demos I used the OAuth implementation created...(read more)

    Read the article

  • What are the benefits of Android way of "saving memory" - explicitly passing Context objects everywhere?

    - by Sarge Borsch
    Turned out, this question is not easy to formulate for me, but let's try. In Android, pretty much any UI object depends on a Context, and has defined lifetime. It also can destroy and recreate UI objects and even whole application process at any time, and so on. This makes coding asynchronous operations correctly not straightforward. (and sometimes very cumbersome) But I never have seen a real explanation, why it's done that way? There are other OSes, including mobile OSes (iOS, for example), that don't do such things. So, what are the wins of Android way (Activities & Contexts)? Does that allow Android applications to use much less RAM, or maybe there are other benefits?

    Read the article

  • Asynchronous vs Synchronous vs Threading in an iPhone App

    - by Coocoo4Cocoa
    I'm in the design stage for an app which will utilize a REST web service and sort of have a dilemma in as far as using asynchronous vs synchronous vs threading. Here's the scenario. Say you have three options to drill down into, each one having its own REST-based resource. I can either lazily load each one with a synchronous request, but that'll block the UI and prevent the user from hitting a back navigation button while data is retrieved. This case applies almost anywhere except for when your application requires a login screen. I can't see any reason to use synchronous HTTP requests vs asynchronous because of that reason alone. The only time it makes sense is to have a worker thread make your synchronous request, and notify the main thread when the request is done. This will prevent the block. The question then is bench marking your code and seeing which has more overhead, a threaded synchronous request or an asynchronous request. The problem with asynchronous requests is you need to either setup a smart notification or delegate system as you can have multiple requests for multiple resources happening at any given time. The other problem with them is if I have a class, say a singleton which is handling all of my data, I can't use asynchronous requests in a getter method. Meaning the following won't go: - (NSArray *)users { if(users == nil) users = do_async_request // NO GOOD return users; } whereas the following: - (NSArray *)users { if(users == nil) users == do_sync_request // OK. return users; } You also might have priority. What I mean by priority is if you look at Apple's Mail application on the iPhone, you'll notice they first suck down your entire POP/IMAP tree before making a second request to retrieve the first 2 lines (the default) of your message. I suppose my question to you experts is this. When are you using asynchronous, synchronous, threads -- and when are you using either async/sync in a thread? What kind of delegation system do you have setup to know what to do when a async request completes? Are you prioritizing your async requests? There's a gamut of solutions to this all too common problem. It's simple to hack something out. The problem is, I don't want to hack and I want to have something that's simple and easy to maintain.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 2 Cancel Asynchronous Action

    - by Sean Carpenter
    The MSDN documentation for using an asynchronous controller mentions choosing an asynchronous controller when you want to provide a way for users to cancel requests. I couldn't find any documentation related to actually allowing users to cancel asynchronous requests, however. Is there a way to indicate to ASP.Net and/or the MVC framework that a request should be canceled?

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework 4, WCF &amp; Lazy Loading Tip

    - by Dane Morgridge
    If you are doing any work with Entity Framework and custom WCF services in EFv1, everything works great.  As soon as you jump to EFv4, you may find yourself getting odd errors that you can’t seem to catch.  The problem is almost always has something to do with the new lazy loading feature in Entity Framework 4.  With Entity Framework 1, you didn’t have lazy loading so this problem didn’t surface.  Assume I have a Person entity and an Address entity where there is a one-to-many relationship between Person and Address (Person has many Addresses). In Entity Framework 1 (or in EFv4 with lazy loading turned off), I would have to load the Address data by hand by either using the Include or Load Method: var people = context.People.Include("Addresses"); or people.Addresses.Load(); Lazy loading works when the first time the Person.Addresses collection is accessed: 1: var people = context.People.ToList(); 2:  3: // only person data is currently in memory 4:  5: foreach(var person in people) 6: { 7: // EF determines that no Address data has been loaded and lazy loads 8: int count = person.Addresses.Count(); 9: } 10:  Lazy loading has the useful (and sometimes not useful) feature of fetching data when requested.  It can make your life easier or it can make it a big pain.  So what does this have to do with WCF?  One word: Serialization. When you need to pass data over the wire with WCF, the data contract is serialized into either XML or binary depending on the binding you are using.  Well, if I am using lazy loading, the Person entity gets serialized and during that process, the Addresses collection is accessed.  When that happens, the Address data is lazy loaded.  Then the Address is serialized, and the Person property is accessed, and then also serialized and then the Addresses collection is accessed.  Now the second time through, lazy loading doesn’t kick in, but you can see the infinite loop caused by this process.  This is a problem with any serialization, but I personally found it trying to use WCF. The fix for this is to simply turn off lazy Loading.  This can be done at each call by using context options: context.ContextOptions.LazyLoadingEnabled = false; Turning lazy loading off will now allow your classes to be serialized properly.  Note, this is if you are using the standard Entity Framework classes.  If you are using POCO,  you will have to do something slightly different.  With POCO, the Entity Framework will create proxy classes by default that allow things like lazy loading to work with POCO.  This proxy basically creates a proxy object that is a full Entity Framework object that sits between the context and the POCO object.  When using POCO with WCF (or any serialization) just turning off lazy loading doesn’t cut it.  You have to turn off the proxy creation to ensure that your classes will serialize properly: context.ContextOptions.ProxyCreationEnabled = false; The nice thing is that you can do this on a call-by-call basis.  If you use a new context for each set of operations (which you should) then you can turn either lazy loading or proxy creation on and off as needed.

    Read the article

  • How to host WCF service and TCP server on same socket?

    - by Ole Jak
    Tooday I use ServiceHost for self hosting WCF cervices. I want to host near to my WCF services my own TCP programm for direct sockets operations (like lien to some sort of broadcasting TCP stream) I need control over namespaces (so I would be able to let my clients to send TCP streams directly into my service using some nice URLs like example.com:port/myserver/stream?id=1 or example.com:port/myserver/stream?id=anything and so that I will not be bothered with Idea of 1 client for 1 socket at one time moment, I realy want to keep my WCF services on the same port as my own server or what it is so to be able to call www.example.com:port/myWCF/stream?id=222...) Can any body please help me with this? I am using just WCF now. And I do not enjoy how it works. That is one of many resons why I want to start migration to clear TCP=) I can not use net-tcp binding or any sort of other cool WS-* binding (tooday I use the simpliest one so that my clients like Flash, AJAX, etc connect to me with ease). I needed Fast and easy in implemrnting connection protocol like one I created fore use with Sockets for real time hi ammount of data transfering. So.. Any Ideas? Please - I need help.

    Read the article

  • how to call async method until get success response?

    - by ppp
    I am making a async method call through a delegate. Delegate pointing to a function is a void function. How can I know that the async function has been executed successfully and if not the again call that function untill I get success response. here my code- BillService bs = new BillService(); PayAdminCommisionDelegate payCom = new PayAdminCommisionDelegate(bs.PaySiteAdminByOrderNo); payCom.BeginInvoke(OrderNo,null,null);

    Read the article

  • Getting WCF Services in a Silverlight solution to play nice on deployment

    - by brendonpage
    I have come across 2 issues with deploying WCF services in a Silverlight solution, admittedly the one is more of a hiccup, and only occurs if you take the easy way out and reference your services through visual studio. The First Issue This occurs when you deploy your WFC services to an IIS server. When browse to the services using your web browser, you are greeted with “This collection already contains an address with scheme http.  There can be at most one address per scheme in this collection.”. When you make a call to this service from your Silverlight application, you get the extremely helpful “NotFound” error, this error message can be found in the error property of the event arguments on the complete event handler for that call. As it did with me this will leave most people scratching their head, because the very same services work just fine on the ASP.NET Development Web Server and on my local IIS server. Now I’m no server/hosting/IIS expert so I did a bit of searching when I first encountered this issue. I found out this happens because IIS supports multiple address bindings per protocol (http/https/ftp … etc) per web site, but WCF only supports binding to one address per protocol. This causes a problem when the WCF service is hosted on a site with multiple address bindings, because IIS provides all of the bindings to the host factory when running the service. While this problem occurs mainly on shared hosting solutions, it is not limited to shared hosting, it just seems like all shared hosting providers setup sites on their servers with multiple address bindings. For interests sake I added functionality to the example project attached to this post to dump the addresses given to the WCF service by IIS into a log file. This was the output on the shared hosting solution I use: http://mydomain.co.za/Services/TestService.svc http://www.mydomain.co.za/Services/TestService.svc http://mydomain-co-za.win13.wadns.net/Services/TestService.svc http://win13/Services/TestService.svc As you can see all these addresses are for the http protocol, which is where it all goes wrong for WCF. Fixes for the First Issue There are a few ways to get around this. The first being the easiest, target .NET 4! Yes that's right in .NET 4 WCF services support multiple addresses per protocol. This functionality is enabled by an option, which is on by default if you create a new project, you will need to turn on if you are upgrading to .NET 4. To do this set the multipleSiteBindingsEnabled property of the serviceHostingEnviroment tag in the web.config file to true, as shown below: <system.serviceModel>     <serviceHostingEnvironment multipleSiteBindingsEnabled="true" /> </system.serviceModel> Beware this ONLY works in .NET 4, so if you don’t have a server with .NET 4 installed on that you can deploy to, you will need to employ one of the other work a rounds. The second option will work for .NET 3.5 & 4. For this option all you need to do is modify the web.config file and add baseAddressPrefixFilters to the serviceHostingEnviroment tag as shown below: <system.serviceModel>     <serviceHostingEnvironment>         <baseAddressPrefixFilters>              <add prefix="http://www.mydomain.co.za"/>         </baseAddressPrefixFilters>     </serviceHostingEnvironment> </system.serviceModel> These will be used to filter the list of base addresses that IIS provides to the host factory. When specifying these prefix filters be sure to specify filters which will only allow 1 result through, otherwise the entire exercise will be pointless. There is however a problem with this work a round, you are only allowed to specify 1 prefix filter per protocol. Which means you can’t add filters for all your environments, this will therefore add to the list of things to do before deploying or switching dev machines. The third option is the one I currently employ, it will work for .NET 3, 3.5 & 4, although it is not needed for .NET 4. For this option you create a custom host factory which inherits from the ServiceHostFactory class. In the implementation of the ServiceHostFactory you employ logic to figure out which of the base addresses, that are give by IIS, to use when creating the service host. The logic you use to do this is completely up to you, I have seen quite a few solutions that simply statically reference an index from the list of base addresses, this works for most situations but falls short in others. For instance, if the order of the base addresses where to change, it might end up returning an address that only resolves on the servers local network, like the last one in the example I gave at the beginning. Another instance, if a request comes in on a different protocol, like https, you will be creating the service host using an address which is on the incorrect protocol, like http. To reliably find the correct address to use, I use the address that the service was requested on. To accomplish this I use the HttpContext, which requires the service to operate with AspNetCompatibilityRequirements set on. If for some reason running you services with AspNetCompatibilityRequirements on isn’t an option, you can still use this method, you will just have to come up with your own logic for selecting the correct address. First you will need to enable AspNetCompatibilityRequirements for your hosting environment, to do this you will need to set it to true in the web.config file as shown below: <system.serviceModel>     <serviceHostingEnvironment AspNetCompatibilityRequirements="true" /> </system.serviceModel> You will then need to mark any services that are going to use the custom host factory, to allow AspNetCompatibilityRequirements, as shown below: [AspNetCompatibilityRequirements(RequirementsMode = AspNetCompatibilityRequirementsMode.Allowed)] public class TestService { } Now for the custom host factory, this is where the logic lives that selects the correct address to create service host with. The one i use is shown below: public class CustomHostFactory : ServiceHostFactory { protected override ServiceHost CreateServiceHost(Type serviceType, Uri[] baseAddresses) { // // Compose a prefix filter based on the requested uri // string prefixFilter = HttpContext.Current.Request.Url.Scheme + "://" + HttpContext.Current.Request.Url.DnsSafeHost; if (!HttpContext.Current.Request.Url.IsDefaultPort) { prefixFilter += ":" + HttpContext.Current.Request.Url.Port.ToString() + "/"; } // // Find a base address that matches the prefix filter // foreach (Uri baseAddress in baseAddresses) { if (baseAddress.OriginalString.StartsWith(prefixFilter)) { return new ServiceHost(serviceType, baseAddress); } } // // Throw exception if no matching base address was found // throw new Exception("Custom Host Factory: No base address matching '" + prefixFilter + "' was found."); } } The most important line in the custom host factory is the one that returns a new service host. This has to return a service host that specifies only one base address per protocol. Since I filter by the address the request came on in, I only need to create the service host with one address, since this address will always be of the correct protocol. Now you have a custom host factory you have to tell your services to use it. To do this you view the markup of the service by right clicking on it in the solution explorer and choosing “View Markup”. Then you add/set the value of the Factory property to the full namespace path of you custom host factory, as shown below. And that is it done, the service will now use the specified custom host factory. The Second Issue As I mentioned earlier this issue is more of a hiccup, but I thought worthy of a mention so I included it. This issue only occurs when you add a service reference to a Silverlight project. Visual Studio will generate a lot of code for you, part of that generated code is the ServiceReferences.ClientConfig file. This file stores the endpoint configuration that is used when accessing your services using the generated proxy classes. Here is what that file looks like: <configuration>     <system.serviceModel>         <bindings>             <customBinding>                 <binding name="CustomBinding_TestService">                     <binaryMessageEncoding />                     <httpTransport maxReceivedMessageSize="2147483647" maxBufferSize="2147483647" />                 </binding>                 <binding name="CustomBinding_BrokenService">                     <binaryMessageEncoding />                     <httpTransport maxReceivedMessageSize="2147483647" maxBufferSize="2147483647" />                 </binding>             </customBinding>         </bindings>         <client>             <endpoint address="http://localhost:49347/services/TestService.svc"                 binding="customBinding" bindingConfiguration="CustomBinding_TestService"                 contract="TestService.TestService" name="CustomBinding_TestService" />             <endpoint address="http://localhost:49347/Services/BrokenService.svc"                 binding="customBinding" bindingConfiguration="CustomBinding_BrokenService"                 contract="BrokenService.BrokenService" name="CustomBinding_BrokenService" />         </client>     </system.serviceModel> </configuration> As you will notice the addresses for the end points are set to the addresses of the services you added the service references from, so unless you are adding the service references from your live services, you will have to change these addresses before you deploy. This is little more than an annoyance really, but it adds to the list of things to do before you can deploy, and if left unchecked that list can get out of control. Fix for the Second Issue The way you would usually access a service added this way is to create an instance of the proxy class like so: BrokenServiceClient proxy = new BrokenServiceClient(); Closer inspection of these generated proxy classes reveals that there are a few overloaded constructors, one of which allows you to specify the end point address to use when creating the proxy. From here all you have to do is come up with some logic that will provide you with the relative path to your services. Since my WCF services are usually hosted in the same project as my Silverlight app I use the class shown below: public class ServiceProxyHelper { /// <summary> /// Create a broken service proxy /// </summary> /// <returns>A broken service proxy</returns> public static BrokenServiceClient CreateBrokenServiceProxy() { Uri address = new Uri(Application.Current.Host.Source, "../Services/BrokenService.svc"); return new BrokenServiceClient("CustomBinding_BrokenService", address.AbsoluteUri); } } Then I will create an instance of the proxy class using my service helper class like so: BrokenServiceClient proxy = ServiceProxyHelper.CreateBrokenServiceProxy(); The way this works is “Application.Current.Host.Source” will return the URL to the ClientBin folder the Silverlight app is hosted in, the “../Services/BrokenService.svc” is then used as the relative path to the service from the ClientBin folder, combined by the Uri object this gives me the URL to my service. The “CustomBinding_BrokenService” is a reference to the end point configuration in the ServiceReferences.ClientConfig file. Yes this means you still need the ServiceReferences.ClientConfig file. All this is doing is using a different end point address than the one specified in the ServiceReferences.ClientConfig file, all the other settings form the ServiceReferences.ClientConfig file are still used when creating the proxy. I have uploaded an example project which covers the custom host factory solution from the first issue and everything from the second issue. I included the code to write a list of base addresses to a log file in my implementation of the custom host factory, this is not need for the custom host factory to function and can safely be removed. Download (WCFServicesDeploymentExample.zip)

    Read the article

  • Where best to instantiate and close a Silverlight-enabled WCF Service from the Silverlight app?

    - by Yttrium
    When using a Silverlight-enabled WCF service, where is the best place to instantiate the service and to call the CloseAsync() method? Should you say, instantiate an instance each time you need to make a call to the service, or is it better to just instantiate an instance as a variable of the UserControl that will be making the calls? Then, where is it better to call the CloseAsync method? Should you call it in each of the "someServiceCall_completed" event methods? Or, if created as a variable of the UserControl class, is there a single place to call it? Like a Dispose method, or something equivalent for the UserControl class. Thanks, Jeff

    Read the article

  • How to ignore timezone of DateTime in .NET WCF client?

    - by Net_Dev
    WCF client is receiving a Date value from a Java web service where the date sent to the client in XML is : <sampleDate>2010-05-10+14:00</sampleDate> Now the WCF client receiving this date is in timezone (+08:00) and when the client deserialises the Date value it is converted into the following DateTime value : 2010-05-09 18:00 +08:00 However we would like to ignore the +14:00 being sent from the server so that the serialised Date value in the client is : 2010-05-10 Note that the +14:00 is not consistent and may be +10:00, +11:00 etc so it is not possible to use DateTime conversions on the client side to get the desired date value. How can this be easily achieved in WCF? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Can Tornado communicate with Cassandra, in Non-blocking asynchronous style?

    - by takaomag
    I'm working on a web project, which have to process so many client requests. So I am considering to use Cassandra and tornado. Tornado seems to have a build-in client(tornado.httpclient.AsyncHTTPClient), which can do http Non-Blocking request. But, Cassandra uses Thrift protocol. Using Thrift, Tornado seems to be blocked while quering to Cassandra. Has anyone got expereince? Please suggest how should I do. Or, is there any add-on module for this purpose? Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70  | Next Page >