I use autofac web integration and it works just great to resolve lifetime bound components. But one piece of code is invoked from timer and I'm getting null reference exception somewhere in Autofac.Integration.Web.ContainerProvider.AmbientRequestLifetime.get(). Obviously it is because in timer there is no HttpContext and lifetime can not be obtained.
According to documentation I need to invoke "container.BeginLifetimeScope" and use this lifetime to resolve my component. But the component is quite low-level (networking, messaging) and it has no access to asp's Global object to access container object. Global object also has no access to so low-level component to inject container manually.
To make the problem more difficult, this component can be invoked from web pages and need web request lifetime and it needs to be invoked from timer with manually constructed lifetime (or IDispose+using would be fine too).
How do I deal with situation when 2 types of life time scope is required?
Two things might help you get started in the right direction.
First, builder.Register(...).InstancePerLifetimeScope() will give you 'per-request' as well as 'per-custom-lifetime' scoping.
Second, if you're kicking things off under a timer, create a new lifetime scope manually at the entry point of the timer method wherever it happens to be:
void OnTimer()
{
using (var timerScope = ApplicationContainer.BeginLifetimeScope())
{
var someComponent = timerScope.Resolve(...);
someComponent.DoWork();
}
}
Here, the ApplicationContainer is the one you built in Global.asax when the web request started up - you need to find some way to get at it when the timer ticks.
Related
I am developing a modular WPF application with Prism in .Net Core 5.0 (using MVVM, DryIoc) and I would like to have a module that is not a WPF module, i.e., a module with functionality that can be used by any other module. I don't want any project reference, because I want to keep the loosely coupled idea of the modules.
My first question is: is it conceptually correct? Or is it mandatory that a module has a screen? I guess it should be ok.
The second and more important (for me) is, what would be the best way to create the instance?
This is the project (I know I should review the names in this project):
HotfixSearcher is the main class, the one I need to get instantiated. In this class, for example, I subscribe to some events.
And this is the class that implements the IModule interface (the module class):
namespace SearchHotfix.Library
{
public class HotfixSearcherModule : IModule
{
public HotfixSearcherModule()
{
}
public void OnInitialized(IContainerProvider containerProvider)
{
//Create Searcher instance
var searcher = containerProvider.Resolve<IHotfixSearcher>();
}
public void RegisterTypes(IContainerRegistry containerRegistry)
{
containerRegistry.RegisterSingleton<IHotfixSearcher, HotfixSearcher>();
}
}
}
That is the only way I found to get the class instantiated, but I am not a hundred per cent comfortable with creating an instance that is not used, I think it does not make much sense.
For modules that have screens, the instances get created when navigating to them using the RequestNavigate method:
_regionManager.RequestNavigate(RegionNames.ContentRegion, "ContentView");
But since this is only a library with no screens, I can't find any other way to get this instantiated.
According to Prism documentation, subscribing to an event shoud be enough but I tried doing that from within my main class HotfixSearcher but it does not work (breakpoints on constructor or on the event handler of the event to which I subscribe are never hit).
When I do this way, instead, the instance is created, I hit the constructor breakpoint, and obviously the instance is subscribed to the event since it is done in the constructor.
To sum up, is there a way to get rid of that var searcher = containerProvider.Resolve<IHotfixSearcher>(); and a better way to achieve this?
Thanks in advance!
Or is it mandatory that a module has a screen?
No, of course not, modules have nothing to do with views or view models. They are just a set of registrations with the container.
what would be the best way to create the instance?
Let the container do the work. Normally, you have (at least) one assembly that only contains public interfaces (and the associated enums), but no modules. You reference that from the module and register the module's implementations of the relevant interfaces withing the module's Initialize method. Some other module (or the main app) can then have classes that get the interfaces as constructor parameters, and the container will resolve (i.e. create) the concrete types registered in the module, although they are internal or even private and completely unknown outside the module.
This is as loose a coupling as it gets if you don't want to sacrifice strong typing.
is there a way to get rid of that var searcher = containerProvider.Resolve<IHotfixSearcher>(); and a better way to achieve this?
You can skip the var searcher = part :-) But if the HotfixSearcher is never injected anywhere, it won't be created unless you do it yourself. OnInitialized is the perfect spot for this, because it runs after all modules had their chance to RegisterTypes so all dependencies should be registered.
If HotfixSearcher is not meant to be injected, you can also drop IHotfixSearcher and resolve HotfixSearcher directly:
public void OnInitialized(IContainerProvider containerProvider)
{
containerProvider.Resolve<HotfixSearcher>();
}
I am not a hundred per cent comfortable with creating an instance that is not used, I think it does not make much sense.
It is used, I suppose, although not through calling one of its methods. It's used by sending it an event. That's just fine. Think of it like Task.Run - it's fine for the task to exist in seeming isolation, too.
We are using Autofac 4 for DI and I started experimenting with AI a short while ago. Now I created a IdentityTelemetryInitializer class which needs and IIdentityProvider to be able to get the ID of the current authorized user and set it add it to the context. I cannot find a way in which to inject dependencies into a TelemetryInitializer. If I define a contructor that takes an IIdentityProvider, the custom initializer is skipped altogether.
Any ideas are welcome. I was thinking of having the user ID also set as the Thread Principal so that we can access it this way, but I was hoping I could use DI for this?
You cannot inject dependencies using a constructor as the initializer initialized internally using the default (empty) constructor. When you explicitly defined a new ctor you've actually 'removed' the default one, thus the initializer was skipped altogether, as you've mentioned.
Therefore, the only way is to resolve the dependencies during the 'Initialize' method, after registering them on application startup.
ctx.RegisterType<MyService>().As<IService>().AsSelf(); // on application startup
ctx.Resolve<IService>(); // during initializer 'Initialize' method
You might look at the question I asked here
How to have "Request" events with authenticated user id ?
because I had managed to have the TelemetryInitializer working, passing user id via the HttpContext as suggested by #yonisha.
Off course it's not as lean as what you try to achieve.
The Telemetry Initializer is called each time you instanciate a Telemetry class, so really depending of how you manage them. Btw I am looking for good advice/best pratice on that : for the moment I have one private instance on each Controller that need to track something, but that does not smell good due to lifetime of Controller.
I've got a base class I'm using with MSpec which provides convenience methods around AutoMock:
public abstract class SubjectBuilderContext
{
static AutoMock _container;
protected static ISubjectBuilderConfigurationContext<T> BuildSubject<T>()
{
_container = AutoMock.GetLoose();
return new SubjectBuilderConfigurationContext<T>(_container);
}
protected static Mock<TDouble> GetMock<TDouble>()
where TDouble : class
{
return _container.Mock<TDouble>();
}
}
Occasionally, I'm seeing an exception happen when attempting to retrieve a Mock like so:
It should_store_the_receipt = () => GetMock<IFileService>().Verify(f => f.SaveFileAsync(Moq.It.IsAny<byte[]>(), Moq.It.IsAny<string>()), Times.Once());
Here's the exception:
System.ObjectDisposedExceptionInstances cannot be resolved and nested
lifetimes cannot be created from this LifetimeScope as it has already
been disposed.
I'm guessing it has something to do with the way MSpec runs the tests (via reflection) and that there's a period of time when nothing actively has references to any of the objects in the underlying lifetime scope being used by AutoMock which causes the lifetimescope to get disposed. What's going on here, and is there some simple way for me to keep it from happening?
The AutoMock lifetime scope from Autofac.Extras.Moq is disposed when the mock itself is disposed. If you're getting this, it means the AutoMock instance has been disposed or has otherwise lost scope and the GC has cleaned it up.
Given that, there are a few possibilities.
The first possibility is that you've got some potential threading challenges around async method calls. Looking at the method that's being mocked, I see you're verifying the call to a SaveFileAsync method. However, I don't see any async related code in there, and I'm not entirely sure when/how the tests running are calling it given the currently posted code, but if there is a situation where an async call causes the test to run on one thread while the AutoMock loses scope or otherwise gets killed on the other thread, I could see this happening.
The second possibility is the mix of static and instance items in the context. You are storing the AutoMock as a static, but it appears the context class in which it resides is a base class that is intended to supply instance-related values. If two tests run in parallel, for example, the first test will set the AutoMock to what it thinks it needs, then the second test will overwrite the AutoMock and the first will go out of scope, disposing the scope.
The third possibility is multiple calls to BuildSubject<T> in one test. The call to BuildSubject<T> initializes the AutoMock. If you call that multiple times in one test, despite changing the T type, you'll be stomping the AutoMock each time and the associated lifetime scope will be disposed.
The fourth possibility is a test ordering problem. If you only see it sometimes but not other times, it could be that certain tests inadvertently assume that some setup, like the call to BuildSubject<T>, has already been done; while other tests may not make that assumption and will call BuildSubject<T> themselves. Depending on the order the tests run, you may sometimes get lucky and not see the exception, but other times you may run into the problem where BuildSubject<T> gets called at just the wrong time and causes you pain.
I am new to scaldi. I have a class being used in my cloud environment configuration where I want two things to happen.
bind [EnvironmentInfo] to new EnvironmentInfo initWith(_.init())
First, I want it to be a singleton. It retrieves the runtime information (Google AppEngine in this case) and it should do this once on instantiation. It seems like initWith is a good choice.
Next, I want instantiation to be delayed until first request. Following the execution path it is being instantiated well before the first call.
If I can get delayed instantiation, then initWith should move to the class constructor.
My answer ended up being simple. I abstracted the singleton "state" and accessed it as a 'lazy val ...'.
I am investigating the use of Autofac in our web application having previously used Castle Windsor in the past.
The thing that I really like with Autofac is being able to express dynamic component construction through lamda expressions, as opposed to creating DependancyResolvers etc. in Windsor.
One scenario I have is that I want a particular component to be registered at ASP.NET session level scope. With Windsor I would create/source a new LifestyleManager, however with Autofac I came up with this:
//Register SessionContext at HTTP Session Level
builder.Register(c =>
{
HttpContext current = HttpContext.Current;
//HttpContext handes delivering the correct session
Pelagon.Violet.Core.Interfaces.SessionContext instance = current.Session["SessionContext"] as Pelagon.Violet.Core.Interfaces.SessionContext;
if (instance == null)
{
instance = c.Resolve<Pelagon.Violet.Core.Interfaces.SessionContext>();
current.Session["SessionContext"] = instance;
}
return instance;
})
.FactoryScoped();
Which at some point I might be able to turn into an extension method. I accept this implemtation will bomb if the HttpContext.Current.Session is null as it should only be used in a web app.
The question is:
What is the best practice for such a registration in Autofac. I have seen a lot of mention about the use of nested containers etc. but no concrete examples, and I am keen to understand what might be wrong with the above approach (only thing I can think of is the automatic disposal stuff).
Thanks.
This looks fine.
Marking the component 'ExternallyOwned()' will ensure that Autofac doesn't call Dispose() on it.
The only gotchas here are that your session-scoped component could resolve dependencies of its own via the current container, and thus hold references to things that may belong to the current request (for instance.) This should be easy to spot in testing though.