Related
I've developed an application which connects to Neo4j and creates a bunch of nodes. I've also developed a plugin for Neo4j using Graphaware. And both these are run in separate dockers (one for the code and one for the Neo4j with plugin).
Now, since I start these containers automatically and simultaneously, the code should wait for the Neo4j to completely start before it tries creating the nodes. For that, I'm testing the availability of the Neo4j by trying to connect to it using bolt protocol (Neo4j's driver).
The problem I've got is that it seems Neo4j starts accepting incoming connections before it completely loads the plugins. As the result, the connection is made before Neo4j is actually prepared and also something goes wrong (I don't know what) and the whole code halts (I don't think this issue is important) all because the connection is made before the plugins are loaded. I know that since if I delay the connection manually, everything goes forward smoothly.
So my question is how to make sure that Neo4j is warmed up (fully) before starting to connect to it? Right now I'm checking the availability of management (http://localhost:7474) but what if there's no management, to begin with?
At the moment you'll find that you can keep the management interface local, but you can't actually turn it off (unless you're working in embedded mode), so waiting for http://localhost:7474 is a good approach. If you want to be more fine-grained, you can check yourinstallation\logs\debug.log
2017-07-27 03:58:53.643+0000 INFO [o.n.k.AvailabilityGuard] Fulfilling of requirement makes database available: Database available
2017-07-27 03:58:53.644+0000 INFO [o.n.k.i.f.GraphDatabaseFacadeFactory] Database is now ready
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Tom
I am developing my first web application using ASP.Net MVC, and I am in a situation where I would like a background service to process status notifications outside of the application, not unlike the reputation/badge system on stackoverflow.
What is the best way to handle something like this? Is it even possible in a shared-hosting environment like Godaddy, which I am using.
I don't need to communicate with the background worker directly, since I will be adding notification records to a database table with a column set to an "unprocessed" state. Then the worker will just scan the table on a regular schedule and processes what is ready.
Thanks for your advice.
Have you tried with quartz.net? I think it may fit your needs.
also take a look at this Simulate a Windows Service using ASP.NET to run scheduled jobs article.
it explains a nice way to schedule operations with no outer dependence.
The idea is to use Cache timeout to control the schedule. I've implemented it successfully on a project which required regular temp file cleaning. This cleaning is a bit heavy so we move this clean operation in a scheduled job (using the asp.net cache) to avoid having to deploy scheduled task or custom program.
To answer whether GoDaddy will support a seperate service you need to ask them.
However there are a number of creative ways that you can "get around" this issue on shared hosting.
Have a secure page that's purpose is to execute your background work. You could have scheduled task on a machine under your control that calls to this web page at set intervals.
Use a variation of the Background Worker Thread answer from #safi. Your background worker thread could check to see if another is already processing and stop, so that only one instance is running at a time.
If only one background task is enough for you then use the WebBackgrounder
And this is the article with detailed explanation.
I have written several services in Delphi now, but I want to add the facility of auto updating the service either from a LAN unc path or from a http server. I have been pondering this and I am interested to hear peoples ideas. I can create a thread that will check for the update periodically, but how do I go about stopping the service uninstalling and installing automatically. My initial thoughts where to write a console app to do this and start it using create process, then let the service stop and the console app do the work, starting the new version of the service before it exits. Is this a good stratergy or shoul I consider something else. Thanks in advance
I do as you suggest. A thread checks occasionally for an update. If it is present, it downloads it and puts it into an appropriate place. It then verifies that it is wholesome (don't want it to be broken!). Finally, the thread then launches another app with parameters to tell it what to do, specifically, the name of the service, the location of the file to replace, and the file to replace it with. Then the service just waits.
When the updater app starts, it pauses a moment to make sure that the service is all stable, and then it uses the service control API to stop the service. It then monitors it until it is gone. Finally, it pauses a little to ensure that Windows has really finished with the file. Then it starts the process of renaming the old file to move it out of the way (if still in use, it retries a few times), and then copying the new file into place. And finally, it starts the service up again. Then the updater quits.
This has worked quite reliably for my services, and also standalone apps too (with different parameters for the updater app to know which mode). And if you are careful, you can update the updater using the exact same system, which is nice to watch.
I would have the service be a shell that only updates another executable or DLL file where the real code is at.
Have some communication method between the shell and the child process to force a shutdown and then have the shell perform the upgrade and relaunch the child.
As a side note, this makes debugging the service much easier as well as you'll be able to run the child process directly without having to worry about the extra efforts required to debug windows services.
your idea seems very good to me, however take this into consideration aswell:
- add module(the main core) to the service that will be unloaded and will load the updated module(*.dll file) when an update is available -- in this time the service should put the "tasks" in a queue or something...
additionally you can use plugins and/or scripts like Pascal script or DWScript
Last versions of Windows (I think since windows 10) does not allow a service to start other programs. So you will need an other program to run the update. It could be an other service.
Windows Services cannot start additional applications because they are
not running in the context of any particular user. Unlike regular
Windows applications, services are now run in an isolated session and
are prohibited from interacting with a user or the desktop.
I'm writing a simple Windows Service that sends out emails to all employees every month. My question is, how to stop itself when it's done? I'm a noobie in this field so please help me out. Really appreciated.
It will be deployed on the server to be run monthly. I did not start this thing and the code was given to me like that. It is written in VB.NET and I'm asked now to change a few things around it. I noticed that there is only 'Sub OnStart' and wondered when the service would stop? After the main sub is done, what it the status of this service? Is it stopped or just hung in there? Sorry, as I said, I am really new to this....
If you have a task that recurs monthly you may be better off writing a console app, and then using Windows Task Scheduler to set it to run monthly. A service should be used for processes that need to run for a long time or constantly, with or without a user logged on
As every other answer has noted, it sounds like this should be an executable or script that you run as a scheduled task.
However, if you are obligated for some reason to run as a Windows Service and you're working in .NET, you just have to call the Stop() method inherited from ServiceBase once your service completes its work. From the MSDN documentation for the method:
The Stop method sets the service state
to indicate a stop is pending and
calls the OnStop method. After the
application is stopped, the service
state is set to stopped. If the
application is a hosted service, the
application domain is unloaded.
There's one important caveat here: the user account under which the service is running must have permission to stop services (which is a topic for ServerFault).
Once a service's OnStart method completes, it will continue running (doing nothing) until something tells it to stop in one of the following ways:
Programatically, by calling Stop
within the service itself or from an
external process using the method
Colin Gravill describes in his
answer.
Via the command-line.
Through the windows Computer Management console's "Services" panel.
If this is a Win32 service (i.e. written in C or C++), then you simply call SetServiceStatus(SERVICE_STOPPED) and return from ServiceMain.
On the other hand, if you're just sending emails once a month, why are you using a service at all? Use the Windows Task Scheduler and run a normal application or script.
net stop [service_name] ...on the command line will do it too.
But, I agree with everyone else; it seems that Windows Task Scheduler will meet your needs better.
It might be better to write this as a scheduled task, it would certainly be easier to develop initially. Then it would naturally terminate and wouldn't be consuming resources for the rest of the month.
To answer the original question, you can get a list of the current running services in C#
services = System.ServiceProcess.ServiceController.GetServices();
Then look for the one you want and set the status to stopped
locatedService.Status == ServiceControllerStatus.Stopped
Full example on msdn
Is there a reason it has to be a Windows service? If not, then follow #Macros solution. However, if it does, then why stop the service? If you stop it, then it'll just have to be restarted when the emails need to be sent. Based on your description, it doesn't sound like it would require a lot of resources, so I'd suggest just installing it and letting it run, firing up once a month to send the emails.
here's what i did in a similar situation.
windows service runs 24/7 and processes work units. it gets work units through a database view.
table Message
ProcessingStartTime
CompletionDTE
...
the database view only pulls records marked not-complete and have a ProcessingStartTime in the past. So after the service confirms the transaction it executes a stored procedure that updates the database record. For this system, end-user upload excel files to asp.net webfrom that imports them into the database.
What are the cons and pros of windows services vs scheduled tasks for running a program repeatedly (e.g. every two minutes)?
Update:
Nearly four years after my original answer and this answer is very out of date. Since TopShelf came along Windows Services development got easy. Now you just need to figure out how to support failover...
Original Answer:
I'm really not a fan of Windows Scheduler. The user's password must be provided as #moodforall points out above, which is fun when someone changes that user's password.
The other major annoyance with Windows Scheduler is that it runs interactively and not as a background process. When 15 MS-DOS windows pop up every 20 minutes during an RDP session, you'll kick yourself that didn't install them as Windows Services instead.
Whatever you choose I certainly recommend you separate out your processing code into a different component from the console app or Windows Service. Then you have the choice, either to call the worker process from a console application and hook it into Windows Scheduler, or use a Windows Service.
You'll find that scheduling a Windows Service isn't fun. A fairly common scenario is that you have a long running process that you want to run periodically. But, if you are processing a queue, then you really don't want two instances of the same worker processing the same queue. So you need to manage the timer, to make sure if your long running process has run longer than the assigned timer interval, it doesn't kick off again until the existing process has finished.
After you have written all of that, you think, why didn't I just use Thread.Sleep? That allows me to let the current thread keep running until it has finished and then the pause interval kicks in, thread goes to sleep and kicks off again after the required time. Neat!
Then you then read all the advice on the internet with lots of experts telling you how it is really bad programming practice:
http://msmvps.com/blogs/peterritchie/archive/2007/04/26/thread-sleep-is-a-sign-of-a-poorly-designed-program.aspx
So you'll scratch your head and think to yourself, WTF, Undo Pending Checkouts -> Yes, I'm sure -> Undo all today's work..... damn, damn, damn....
However, I do like this pattern, even if everyone thinks it is crap:
OnStart method for the single-thread approach.
protected override void OnStart (string args) {
// Create worker thread; this will invoke the WorkerFunction
// when we start it.
// Since we use a separate worker thread, the main service
// thread will return quickly, telling Windows that service has started
ThreadStart st = new ThreadStart(WorkerFunction);
workerThread = new Thread(st);
// set flag to indicate worker thread is active
serviceStarted = true;
// start the thread
workerThread.Start();
}
The code instantiates a separate thread and attaches our worker
function to it. Then it starts the thread and lets the OnStart event
complete, so that Windows doesn't think the service is hung.
Worker method for the single-thread approach.
/// <summary>
/// This function will do all the work
/// Once it is done with its tasks, it will be suspended for some time;
/// it will continue to repeat this until the service is stopped
/// </summary>
private void WorkerFunction() {
// start an endless loop; loop will abort only when "serviceStarted"
// flag = false
while (serviceStarted) {
// do something
// exception handling omitted here for simplicity
EventLog.WriteEntry("Service working",
System.Diagnostics.EventLogEntryType.Information);
// yield
if (serviceStarted) {
Thread.Sleep(new TimeSpan(0, interval, 0));
}
}
// time to end the thread
Thread.CurrentThread.Abort();
}
OnStop method for the single-thread approach.
protected override void OnStop() {
// flag to tell the worker process to stop
serviceStarted = false;
// give it a little time to finish any pending work
workerThread.Join(new TimeSpan(0,2,0));
}
Source: http://tutorials.csharp-online.net/Creating_a_.NET_Windows_Service%E2%80%94Alternative_1%3a_Use_a_Separate_Thread (Dead Link)
I've been running lots of Windows Services like this for years and it works for me. I still haven't seen a recommended pattern that people agree on. Just do what works for you.
Some misinformation here. Windows Scheduler is perfectly capable of running tasks in the background without windows popping up and with no password required. Run it under the NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM account. Use this schtasks switch:
/ru SYSTEM
But yes, for accessing network resources, the best practice is a service account with a separate non-expiring password policy.
EDIT
Depending on your OS and the requirements of the task itself, you may be able to use accounts less privileged than Localsystem with the /ru option.
From the fine manual,
/RU username
A value that specifies the user context under which the task runs.
For the system account, valid values are "", "NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM", or "SYSTEM".
For Task Scheduler 2.0 tasks, "NT AUTHORITY\LOCALSERVICE", and
"NT AUTHORITY\NETWORKSERVICE" are also valid values.
Task Scheduler 2.0 is available from Vista and Server 2008.
In XP and Server 2003, system is the only option.
In .NET development, I normally start off by developing a Console Application, which will run will all logging output to the console window. However, this is only a Console Application when it is run with the command argument /console. When it is run without this parameter, it acts as a Windows Service, which will stay running on my own custom coded scheduled timer.
Windows Services, I my mind, are normally used to manage other applications, rather than be a long running application. OR .. they are continuously-running heavyweight applications like SQL Server, BizTalk, RPC Connections, IIS (even though IIS technically offloads work to other processes).
Personally, I favour scheduled tasks over Window Services for repititive maintenance tasks and applications such as file copying/synchronisations, bulk email sending, deletion or archiving of files, data correction (when other workarounds are not available).
For one project I have been involved in the development of 8 or 9 Windows Services, but these sit around in memory, idle, eating 20MB or more memory per instance. Scheduled tasks will do their business, and release the memory immediately.
What's the overhead of starting and quitting the app? Every two minutes is pretty often. A service would probably let the system run more smoothly than executing your application so frequently.
Both solutions can run the program when user isn't logged in, so no difference there. Writing a service is somewhat more involved than a regular desktop app, though - you may need a separate GUI client that will communicate with the service app via TCP/IP, named pipes, etc.
From a user's POV, I wonder which is easier to control. Both services and scheduled tasks are pretty much out of reach for most non-technical users, i.e. they won't even realize they exist and can be configured / stopped / rescheduled and so on.
The word 'serv'ice shares something in common with 'serv'er. It is expected to always be running, and 'serv'e. A task is a task.
Role play. If I'm another operating system, application, or device and I call a service, I expect it to be running and I expect a response. If I (os, app, dev) just need to execute an isolated task, then I will execute a task, but if I expect to communicate, possibly two way communication, I want a service. This has to do with the most effective way for two things to communicate, or a single thing that wants to execute a single task.
Then there's the scheduling aspect. If you want something to run at a specific time, schedule. If you don't know when you're going to need it, or need it "on the fly", service.
My response is more philosophical in nature because this is very similar to how humans interact and work with another. The more we understand the art of communication, and "entities" understand their role, the easier this decision becomes.
All philosophy aside, when you are "rapidly prototyping", as my IT Dept often does, you do whatever you have to in order to make ends meet. Once the prototyping and proof of concept stuff is out of the way, usually in the early planning and discovering, you have to decide what's more reliable for long term sustainability.
OK, so in conclusion, it's highly dependent on a lot of factors, but hopefully this has provided insight instead of confusion.
A Windows service doesn't need to have anyone logged in, and Windows has facilities for stopping, starting, and logging the service results.
A scheduled task doesn't require you to learn how to write a Windows service.
It's easier to set up and lock down windows services with the correct permissions.
Services are more "visible" meaning that everyone (ie: techs) knows where to look.
This is an old question but I will like to share what I have faced.
Recently I was given a requirement to capture the screenshot of a radar (from a Meteorological website) and save it in the server every 10 minutes.
This required me to use WebBrowser.
I usually make windows services so I decided to make this one service too but it would keep crashing.
This is what I saw in Event Viewer
Faulting module path: C:\Windows\system32\MSHTML.dll
Since the task was urgent and I had very less time to research and experiment, I decided to use a simple console application and triggered it as a task and it executed smoothly.
I really liked the article by Jon Galloway recommended in accepted answer by Mark Ransom.
Recently passwords on the servers were changed without acknowledging me and all the services failed to execute since they could not logon.
So ppl claiming in the article comments that this is a problem. I think windows services can face same problem (Pls. correct me if I am wrong, I am jus a newbie)
Also the thing mentioned, if using task scheduler windows pop up or the console window pops up.
I have never faced that. It may pop up but it is at least very instantaneous.
Why not provide both?
In the past I've put the 'core' bits in a library and wrapped a call to Whatever.GoGoGo() in both a service as well as a console app.
With something you're firing off every two minutes the odds are decent it's not doing much (e.g. just a "ping" type function). The wrappers shouldn't have to contain much more than a single method call and some logging.
Generally, the core message is and should be that the code itself must be executable from each and every "trigger/client". So it should not be rocket science to switch from one to the other approach.
In the past we used more or less always Windows Services but since also more and more of our customers switch to Azure step by step and the swap from a Console App (deployed as a Scheduled Task) to a WebJob in Azure is much easier than from a Windows Service, we focus on Scheduled Tasks for now. If we run into limitations, we just ramp up the Windows Service project and call the same logic from there (as long as customers are working OnPrem..) :)
BR,
y
Windows services want more patience until it's done.
It has a bit hard debug and install. It's faceless.
If you need a task which must be done in every second, minute or hour,
you should choice Windows Service.
Scheduled Task is quickly developed and has a face.
If you need a daily or weekly task, you can use Scheduled Task.