Do server-less functions install modules every time they are called?
I am trying to understand how serverless functions really work. I understand that serverfull is basically a computer that executes code and that the server code runs on it 24/7 unless it is stopped for some reason. On the other hand I understand serverless code just runs when it is called. Where is this code stored? When I call a function in a serverless application does it install the modules (for example from npm) everytime I call the function? Is this what causes cold-start delays?
I understand that serverfull is like my computer running code. How can I describe serverless using the same analogy?
My Questions:
Do server-less functions install modules every time they are called?
If there is no server, where is this code stored in serverless?
I understand that serverfull is like my computer running code. How can I describe serverless using the same analogy?
No, the dependencies are a part of the deployment artifact (e.g. a ZIP file or container image in the case of AWS Lambda), so they do not have to be installed on each invocation.
I understand that serverfull is like my computer running code. How can I describe serverless using the same analogy?
That's not going to be a perfect explanation, but hopefully, it fits your analogy. Imagine that your computer is sleeping, but there's another computer that can receive requests and wake up your computer whenever it receives a new one, so it can be run on your computer. After it finishes running, it goes back to sleep. But instead of a single computer, there are many of them that can be brought from sleep in a matter of milliseconds. Hope that makes sense.
I'm considering Google Cloud Run for some cron-like operations I need to perform. They will get triggered by an HTTP invocation. The invocation will return (likely with a 202) and continue running in the background via a golang goroutine.
But, I'm concerned that Google Cloud Run containers are destroyed when they're not handling HTTP requests. I could be part-way through my processing and get reaped.
Is there a way to tell GCR to keep the container alive until I'm finished?
Cloud Run will scale your CPU down to nearly zero when it's not handling any requests, because you’re only paying when a request is being processed. (It's documented here).
Therefore, applications starting goroutines in the background are not suitable for Cloud Run. If you do this, your goroutines will most likely starve for CPU time shares and your program may start behaving very weirdly (as it would be running on a very very slow CPU, if anything at all).
The miniscule amount of an inactive Cloud Run application gets is probably only good for garbage collection, which go runtime will be doing for you.
If you want to wait for your goroutine to finish during the context of the request, you should block the request from returning, by using something like a blocking-receive from a chan, or sync.WaitGroup#Done().
The fairly new Always On CPU feature of Cloud Run solves this. Here is a link to the details: https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/serverless/cloud-run-gets-always-on-cpu-allocation
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.