currently i stuck with the apppool timeout and the automapper.
In my Global.asax i wrote in the Application_start function following code.
Mapper.Initialize(cfg =>
{
cfg.CreateMissingTypeMaps = false;
cfg.CreateMap<string, MvcHtmlString>()
.ConvertUsing<MvcHtmlStringConverter>();
// Get all my project assemblies
Assembly[] assemblies = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies().Where(
x => x.GetName().Name.StartsWith("MyMvcApplication.")).ToArray();
// Add all assemblies to automapper to search for defined profiles.
cfg.AddProfiles(assemblies);
});
At first if i'm rebuild my mvc project and access my page it works all fine.
All my mappings from many assemblies are defined as expected.
Now the problem:
If i'm waiting for the apppool timeout (ex. defined 5 min) and access my website after the 5min i get some "AutoMapper.AutoMapperMappingException: Missing type map configuration or unsupported mapping." if the automapper is trying to map some models from assemblies except the main assembly.
Solution Structure:
MyMvcApplication.DataAccess
Entities
MyMvcApplication.Services
ServiceModels
AutoMapperProfiles
MyMvcApplication.Web
Models
AutoMapperProfiles
All Mappings defined in the AutoMapperProfiles from the Web which referres to Models in the web project and service project are still defined in the automapper.
All mappings defined in the AutoMapperProfiles from the Service project which referres to ServiceModels and Entites are MISSING in the automapper.
If i'm calling "Mapper.Configuration.GetAllTypeMaps()" i get following results
Before timeout: {AutoMapper.TypeMap[30]}
After timeout: {AutoMapper.TypeMap[13]}
So the automapper loses his mappings after the apppool starting to sleep.
Example of an automapper profile:
namespace MyMvcApplication.Services.MappingProfiles
{
using AutoMapper;
using MyMvcApplication.DataAccess.DAL;
using MyMvcApplication.Services.Models.Users;
public class UserMappingProfile : Profile
{
public UserMappingProfile()
{
base.CreateMap<UserEntity, User>();
base.CreateMap<UserEntity, BasicUser>();
base.CreateMap<UserEntity, OverviewUser>();
base.CreateMap<UserEntity, LoginUser>();
}
}
}
Does anyone know whats i'm doing wrong with the automapper implementation?
Best regards
I got it and found the mistake of my own.
In AutoMapper.Initialize i wrote "AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()" this caused the problem after the appool recyle. Instead i have to use "BuildManager.GetReferencedAssemblies()" to get all assemblies as well if they are currently not loaded.
Reference link to solve my problem: https://stackoverflow.com/a/2479400/10236859
Related
My company has got a deployment policy (I skip the details) such that any 3rd party software should be installed in the GAC, whilst our libraries are in Web/bin folder. But this approach doesn't work with Ninject and MVC 3/4. Let's follow an example:
This is my dependencies binding code:
public class RequestorDependenciesRegistration : NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
Bind<IMyDearDependency>().To<MyDearImplementation>();
}
}
And this is my MVC controller:
public MyController(IMyDearDependency something) {
this.something = something; // 'something' is set only if Ninject dlls are in Web/bin... X-(
}
If Ninject dlls are in the GAC, it loads the module correctly, but when instantiating the MVC Controller the dependency is not injected (in some cases is null, in some cases MVC returns an error "No parameterless constructor etc etc"). If I manually copy Ninject*.dll in the Web/bin folder, than everything works fine, even without restarting IIS! Can't really understand why...
Even more surprisingly (for me), if I do something super-dirty like storing a reference to the Ninject Kernel instance in a public static property and use it as a ServiceLocator, it works! (Something dirty like this, in the MVC controller):
public MyController(IMyDearDependency something) { // 'something' is always null if Ninject is only in the GAC...
var controller = Kernel.Get<MyController>()
this.something = controller.something; // ... but this 'controller.something' is set, even if Ninject is only in the GAC!!! 8-O
}
Can anyone suggest me the reason why? And possibly a solution? :-) Many thanks!!
Ninject has a built in extension loading mechanism which is used to load the different extension like the Ninject.Web.Mvc.
But mechanism is looking only for the application folder to load the extensions so if your dll are in the GAC Ninject won't find them.
To solve this you can turn off the automatic extension loading and load the MvcModule module by hand when creating your StandardKernel:
var _kernel = new StandardKernel(
new NinjectSettings() { LoadExtensions = false },
new MvcModule(),
/* your other modules * /);
I have got my PCL model to build now, which took a bit of time making plug-ins, however now in my Android UI project I get two errors when building it.
First error is:
The type 'System.Collections.ObjectModel.ObservableCollection`1<T0>' is defined in an assembly that is not referenced.
You must add a reference to assembly 'System.Windows, Version=2.0.5.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=7cec85d7bea7798e,
Retargetable=Yes'. C:\ENM\Main\src\prod\Mobile\Stakeholder\UI.Android.vNext\Views\LocationsMapView.cs 40 32 UI.Android.vNext
The second error is:
foreach statement cannot operate on variables of type
'System.Collections.ObjectModel.ObservableCollection`1<BK.EMS.Stakeholder.Model.ViewModels.LocationViewModel>'
because 'System.Collections.ObjectModel.ObservableCollection`1<BK.EMS.Stakeholder.Model.ViewModels.LocationViewModel>'
does not contain a public definition for 'GetEnumerator'
C:\ENM\Main\src\prod\Mobile\Stakeholder\UI.Android.vNext\Views\LocationsMapView.cs 40 32 UI.Android.vNext
I have referenced the System.Windows assembly from the System.Windows.Droid project, which is supposed to forward ObservableCollection<>.
The lines where the error occurs:
private void AddLocationOverlays()
{
if (_itemizedOverlay.Size() > 0) _itemizedOverlay.ClearOverlayItems();
RunOnUiThread(() =>
{
foreach (var location in ViewModel.Locations)
{
_itemizedOverlay.AddOverlayItem(location);
}
_mapView.Invalidate();
});
}
The Locations property in my ViewModel looks like this:
public ObservableCollection<LocationViewModel> Locations
{
get { return _locations; }
set
{
_locations = value;
RaisePropertyChanged(() => Locations);
}
}
Nothing too complicated and works fine in the non-PCL models...
So how do I get around and fix this?
We now have a solution to this problem - see fix from Daniel Plaisted in Portable Class Library strong assembly reference problems in MonoTouch/MonoDroid
This fix is checked in at https://github.com/slodge/MvvmCross/commit/f6a88048467838e5ac5ca687744dc0b2d1958aa8
Update : See other answer. It appears we now have a solution to this problem!
I believe this is linked to this problem - Portable Class Library strong assembly reference problems in MonoTouch/MonoDroid
Which is linked to: https://github.com/slodge/MvvmCross/issues/41
This is raised with Xamarin as a bug: https://bugzilla.xamarin.com/show_bug.cgi?id=8035 and
I'm afraid I don't understand the recommended Strong Signing solutions right now.
Please upvote the bug report to alert the Microsoft PCL and Xamarin teams about this. The MS and Xamarin teams are talking to each other on this (albeit through me!), and I am hopeful we will find a way for either Microsoft or Xamarin to ship some signed DLLs.
In the meantime, some possible workarounds are:
Use IEnumerable access instead of ObservableCollection - the collection can still be an ObservableCollection instance, just don't reference it as an ObservableCollection in the UI code.
Try putting your iterating code in a class library rather than in an application project - bizarre as it feels, the compiler seems perfectly happy building the same code when its in a library rather than in an application
Try building in MonoDevelop with the Mono compiler - this doesn't seem to have the same strong name reference checks.
Looking at your sample code I would just try:
private ObservableCollection<LocationViewModel> _locations;
public IEnumerable<LocationViewModel> Locations
{
get { return _locations; }
set
{
if (value != null && !(value is ObservableCollection<LocationViewModel>)
{
throw new Exception("You must Set an ObservableCollection");
}
_locations = (ObservableCollection<LocationViewModel>)value;
RaisePropertyChanged(() => Locations);
}
}
then AddLocationOverlays could stay the same.
The only problem with this would be if you then wanted to bind to INotifyCollectionChanged on this collection - but I think you can find a way around this too if needed - e.g. you could somehow expose another INotifyCollectionChanged hook, or you could try using a hack involving an intermediary class library.
I accept that for now these are workarounds not solutions :/
We're trying to use MEF 2 with ASP.NET MVC 4 to support an extensible application. There are really 2 parts to this question (hope that's okay SO gods):
How do we use Microsoft.Composition and the MVC container code (MEF/MVC demo source) to replace Ninject as our DI for ICoreService, ICoreRepository, IUnitOfWork, and IDbContext?
It looks like we can't use both Ninject and the MVC container at the same time (I'm sure many are saying "duh"), so we'd like to go with MEF, if possible. I tried removing Ninject and setting [Export] attributes on each of the relevant implementations, spanning two assemblies in addition to the web project, but Save() failed to persist with no errors. I interpreted that as a singleton issue, but could not figure out how to sort it out (incl. [Shared]).
How do we load multiple assemblies dynamically at runtime?
I understand how to use CompositionContainer.AddAssemblies() to load specific DLLs, but for our application to be properly extensible, we require something more akin to how I (vaguely) understand catalogs in "full" MEF, which have been stripped out from the Microsoft.Composition package (I think?); to allow us to load all IPluggable (or whatever) assemblies, which will include their own UI, service, and repository layers and tie in to the Core service/repo too.
EDIT 1
A little more reading solved the first problem which was, indeed, a singleton issue. Attaching [Shared(Boundaries.HttpRequest)] to the CoreDbContext solved the persistence problem. When I tried simply [Shared], it expanded the 'singletonization' to the Application level (cross-request) and threw an exception saying that the edited object was already in the EF cache.
EDIT 2
I used the iterative assembly loading "meat" from Nick Blumhardt's answer below to update my Global.asax.cs code. The standard MEF 2 container from his code did not work in mine, probably because I'm using the MEF 2(?) MVC container. Summary: the code listed below now works as desired.
CoreDbContext.cs (Data.csproj)
[Export(typeof(IDbContext))]
[Shared(Boundaries.HttpRequest)]
public class CoreDbContext : IDbContext { ... }
CoreRepository.cs (Data.csproj)
[Export(typeof(IUnitOfWork))]
[Export(typeof(ICoreRepository))]
public class CoreRepository : ICoreRepository, IUnitOfWork
{
[ImportingConstructor]
public CoreRepository(IInsightDbContext context)
{
_context = context;
}
...
}
CoreService.cs (Services.csproj)
[Export(typeof(ICoreService))]
public class CoreService : ICoreService
{
[ImportingConstructor]
public CoreService(ICoreRepository repository, IUnitOfWork unitOfWork)
{
_repository = repository;
_unitOfWork = unitOfWork;
}
...
}
UserController.cs (Web.csproj)
public class UsersController : Controller
{
[ImportingConstructor]
public UsersController(ICoreService service)
{
_service = service;
}
...
}
Global.asax.cs (Web.csproj)
public class MvcApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication
{
protected void Application_Start()
{
CompositionProvider.AddAssemblies(
typeof(ICoreRepository).Assembly,
typeof(ICoreService).Assembly,
);
// EDIT 2 --
// updated code to answer my 2nd question based on Nick Blumhardt's answer
foreach (var file in System.IO.Directory.GetFiles(Server.MapPath("Plugins"), "*.dll"))
{
try
{
var name = System.Reflection.AssemblyName.GetAssemblyName(file);
var assembly = System.Reflection.Assembly.Load(name);
CompositionProvider.AddAssembly(assembly);
}
catch
{
// You'll need to craft exception handling to
// your specific scenario.
}
}
}
}
If I understand you correctly, you're looking for code that will load all assemblies from a directory and load them into the container; here's a skeleton for doing that:
var config = new ContainerConfiguration();
foreach (var file in Directory.GetFiles(#".\Plugins", "*.dll"))
{
try
{
var name = AssemblyName.GetAssemblyName(file);
var assembly = Assembly.Load(name);
config.WithAssembly(assembly);
}
catch
{
// You'll need to craft exception handling to
// your specific scenario.
}
}
var container = config.CreateContainer();
// ...
Hammett discusses this scenario and shows a more complete version in F# here: http://hammett.castleproject.org/index.php/2011/12/a-decent-directorycatalog-implementation/
Note, this won't detect assemblies added to the directory after the application launches - Microsoft.Composition isn't intended for that kind of use, so if the set of plug-ins changes your best bet is to detect that with a directory watcher and prompt the user to restart the app. HTH!
MEF is not intended to be used as DI framework. Which means that you should separate your "plugins" (whatever they are) composition from your infrastructure dependencies, and implement the former via MEF and the latter via whatever DI framework you prefer.
I think there are a little misunderstandings on what MEF can and can't do.
Originally MEF was conceived as purely an extensibility architecture, but as the framework evolved up to its first release, it can be fully supported as a DI container also. MEF will handle dependency injection for you, and does so through it's ExportProvider architecture. It is also entirely possible to use other DI frameworks with MEF. So in reality there are a number of ways things could be achieved:
Build a NinjectExportProvider that you can plug into MEF, so when MEF is searching for available exports, it will be able to interrogate your Ninject container.
Use an implementation of the Common Services Locator pattern to bridge between MEF and Ninject or vice versa.
Because you are using MEF for the extensibility, you'll probably want to use the former, as this exposes your Ninject components to MEF, which in turn exposes them to your plugins.
The other thing to consider, which is a bit disappointing, is in reality there isn't a lot of room for automagically plugging in of features ala Wordpress on ASP.NET. ASP.NET is a compiled and managed environment, and because of that you either resort to late-binding by loading assemblies manually at runtime, or you restart the application to pick up the new plugins, which sort of defeats the object of being able to plug new extensions in through the application.
My advice, is plan your architecture to pick up any extensibility points as startup and assume that any core changes will require a deployment and application restart.
In terms of the direct questions asked:
The CompositionProvider accepts in instance of ContainerConfiguration which is used internally to create the CompositionContainer used by the provider. So you could use this as the point by which you customise how you want your container to be instantiated. The ContainerConfiguration supports a WithProvider method:
var configuration = new ContainerConfiguration().WithProvider(new NinjectExportDescriptorProvider(kernel));
CompositionProvider.SetConfiguration(configuration);
Where NinjectExportDescriptorProvider might be:
public class NinjectExportDescriptorProvider: ExportDescriptorProvider
{
private readonly IKernel _kernel;
public NinjectExportDescriptorProvider(IKernel kernel)
{
if (kernel == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("kernel");
_kernel = kernel;
}
public override IEnumerable<ExportDescriptorPromise> GetExportDescriptors(
CompositionContract contract, DependencyAccessor dependencyAccessor)
{
var type = contract.ContractType;
if (!_kernel.GetBindings(type).Any())
return NoExportDescriptors;
return new[] {
new ExportDescriptorPromise(
contract,
"Ninject Kernel",
true, // Hmmm... need to consider this, setting it to true will create it as a shared part, false as new instance each time,
NoDependencies,
_ => ExportDescriptor.Create((c, o) => _kernel.Get(type), NoMetadata)) };
}
}
}
Note: I have not tested this, this is all theory, and is based on the example AppSettingsExportDescriptorProvider at: http://mef.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=ProgrammingModelExtensions
It's different from using the standard ExportProvider, because using the CompostionProvider is built around lightweight composition. But essentially you're wrapping up access to your Ninject kernel and making it available to your CompositionContainer.
As with adding a specific new provider (see above), you can use the ContainerConfiguration to read the available assemblies, probably something like:
var configuration = new ContainerConfiguration().WithAssemblies(AppDomain.GetAssemblies())
Again, I haven't tested all of this, but I hope it at least points you in the right direction.
Recently I've switched to Ninject 2.0 release and started getting the following error:
Error occured: Error activating SomeController
More than one matching bindings are available.
Activation path:
1) Request for SomeController
Suggestions:
1) Ensure that you have defined a binding for SomeController only once.
However, I'm unable to find certain reproduction path. Sometimes it occurs, sometimes it does not.
I'm using NinjectHttpApplication for automatic controllers injection. Controllers are defined in separate assembly:
public class App : NinjectHttpApplication
{
protected override IKernel CreateKernel()
{
INinjectModule[] modules = new INinjectModule[] {
new MiscModule(),
new ProvidersModule(),
new RepositoryModule(),
new ServiceModule()
};
return new StandardKernel(modules);
}
protected override void OnApplicationStarted()
{
RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);
RegisterAllControllersIn("Sample.Mvc");
base.OnApplicationStarted();
}
/* ............. */
}
Maybe someone is familiar with this error.
Any advice?
I finally figured this issue out recently. Apparently, the NinjectHttpApplication.RegisterAllControllersIn() function doesn't do all of the proper bindings needed. It binds your concrete controller implementations to IController requests. For example, if you have a controller class called SampleMvcController, which inherits from System.Web.Mvc.Controller. It would do the following named binding during application start:
kernel.Bind<IController>().To(SampleMvcController).InTransientScope().Named("SampleMvc");
But when debugging the NinjectControllerFactory, I find that request are being made for the Ninject Kernel to return an object for the class "SampleMvcController", not for a concrete implementation of IController, using the named binding of "SampleMvc".
Because of this, when the first web request that involves the SampleMvcController is made, it creates a binding of SampleMvcController to itself. This is not thread safe though. So if you have several web requests being made at once, the bindings can potentially happen more than once, and now you are left with this error for having multiple bindings for the SampleMvcController.
You can verify this by quickly refreshing an MVC URL, right after causing your web application to restart.
The fix:
The simplest way to fix this issue is to create a new NinjectModule for your controller bindings, and to load this module during application start. Within this module, you self bind each of your defined controllers, like so:
class ControllerModule : StandardModule {
public override Load() {
Bind<SampleMvcController>().ToSelf();
Bind<AnotherMvcController>().ToSelf();
}
}
But if you don't mind changing the Ninject source code, you can modify the RegisterAllControllersIn() function to self bind each controller it comes across.
I have been dealing with this problem for months. I tried so many options but was unable to come to a solution. I knew that it was a threading problem because it would only occur when there was a heavy load on my site. Just recently a bug was reported and fixed in the ninject source code that solves this problem.
Here is a reference to the issue. It was fixed in build 2.1.0.70 of the Ninject source. The key change was in KernelBase.cs by removing the line
context.Plan = planner.GetPlan(service);
and replacing it with
lock (planner)
{
context.Plan = planner.GetPlan(service);
}
To use this new build with MVC you will need to get the latest build of Ninject then get the latest build of ninject.web.mvc. Build ninject.web.mvc with the new Ninject build.
I have been using this new build for about a week with a heavy load and no problems. That is the longest it has gone without a problem so I would consider this to be a solution.
Are you sure you really are creating a single completely new Kernel from scratch in your OnApplicationStarted every time it's invoked ? If you're not and you're actually creating it once but potentially running the registration bit twice. Remember that you're not guaranteed to only ever have one App class instantiated ever within a given AppDomain.
My answer was a bit more obvious.
I had declared the binding for one of my controllers more than once during refactor of my code.
I added this to my global.ascx.cs file:
public void RegisterAllControllersInFix(Assembly assembly)
{
RegisterAllControllersInFix(assembly, GetControllerName);
}
public void RegisterAllControllersInFix(Assembly assembly, Func<Type, string> namingConvention)
{
foreach (Type type in assembly.GetExportedTypes().Where(IsController))
Kernel.Bind(type).ToSelf();
}
private static bool IsController(Type type)
{
return typeof(IController).IsAssignableFrom(type) && type.IsPublic && !type.IsAbstract && !type.IsInterface;
}
private static string GetControllerName(Type type)
{
string name = type.Name.ToLowerInvariant();
if (name.EndsWith("controller"))
name = name.Substring(0, name.IndexOf("controller"));
return name;
}
Then called it from my OnApplicationStarted() method as follows:
RegisterAllControllersIn(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly());
RegisterAllControllersInFix(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly());
Difficult to know whether this fixed it though because it's so intermittent.
In the C# language, using StructureMap 2.5.4, targeting .NET Framework 3.5 libraries.
I've taken the step to support multiple Profiles in a structure map DI setup, using ServiceLocator model with Bootstrapper activation. First setup was loading default registry, using the scanner.
Now I like to determine runtime what Registry configuration I like to use. Scanning and loading multiple assemblies with registries.
Seems it's not working for the actual implementation (Getting the 202, default instance not found), but a stripped test version does work. The following setup.
Two assemblies containing Registries and implementations
Scanning them in running AppDomain, providing the shared Interface, and requesting Creation Of Instance, using the interfaces in constructor (which get dealt with thanx to the profile on Invokation)
Working code sample below (same structure for other setup, but with more complex stuff, that get's a 202):
What type of couses are possible for a 202, specifically naming the System.Uri type, not being handles by a default type?? (uri makes no sense)
// let structure map create instance of class tester, that provides the registered
// interfaces in the registries to the constructor of tester.
public class Tester<TPOCO>
{
private ITestMe<TPOCO> _tester;
public Tester(ITestMe<TPOCO> some)
{
_tester = some;
}
public string Exec()
{
return _tester.Execute();
}
}
public static class Main {
public void ExecuteDIFunction() {
ObjectFactory.GetInstance<Tester<string>>().Exec();
}
}
public class ImplementedTestMe<TSome> : ITestMe<TSome>
{
public string Execute()
{
return "Special Execution";
}
}
public class RegistryForSpecial : Registry
{
public RegistryForSpecial()
{
CreateProfile("Special",
gc =>
{
gc.For(typeof(ITestMe<>)).UseConcreteType(typeof(ImplementedTestMe<>));
});
}
}
Background articles on Profiles I used.
How to setup named instances using StructureMap profiles?
http://devlicio.us/blogs/derik_whittaker/archive/2009/01/07/setting-up-profiles-in-structuremap-2-5.aspx
http://structuremap.sourceforge.net/RegistryDSL.htm
EDIT:
It seemed the missing interface was actually the one being determined runtime. So here is the next challange (and solved):
I provided a default object whenever StructureMap needs to create the object. Like:
x.ForRequestedType<IConnectionContext>()
.TheDefault.Is.Object(new WebServiceConnection());
This way I got rid of the 202 error, because now a real instance could be used whever structure map needed the type.
Next was the override on runtime. That did not work out at first using the ObjectFactory.Configure method. Instead I used the ObjectFactory.Inject method to overide the default instance. Works like a charm.
ObjectFactory.Inject(typeof(IConnectionContext), context);
Loving the community effort.
Error code 202 means a default instance could not be built for the requested type. Your test code is apparently not equal to your real code that fails. If you are getting an error about Uri, you likely have a dependency that requires a Uri in its constructor. It may not be the class you are asking for - it may be one of that classes dependendencies - or one of the dependencies dependencies... somewhere down the line someone is asking StructureMap to resolve a Uri, which it cannot do, without some help from you.