In my mvc application adding one web role(same project with another web role) in service definition file, but am getting an error like "No Project Associated with(webrole name)".
My query is,
1) Is there any chance to run the one project with two web roles?
2) Presently my application is working one web role with one instance and VMsize="small".but my application running with low performance.
3)Is there any chance to increase the application performance by increasing the number of instance in the role?
Thanks,
PCSSCP.
The error "No Project Associated with ..." means that you have specified the existence of another web role, but there is no project in your solution (ASP.NET webproject, MVC project) that should be deployed as that webrole. Make soure you have two web projects in your solution, when using two web roles.
As an alternative you can deploy to web projects in a single web role.
Increasing the VM size gives your web role more resources (CPU speed, RAM, ...) to perform, which might increase the performance experience for visitors.
Using more instances won't make the application faster, but since all requests are shared amongst the instances, you can serve more users at the same time.
Related
As the title suggests, we are tasked with running a custom .NET MVC application in a virtual directory under the client's Orchard CMS installation. Now, I've successfully done this type of thing in the past with two custom .NET MVC applications, but never with Orchard. Orchard does some unique things behind the scenes, so I do not believe it would be possible.
Two things:
1. I can't build a new Orchard instance from source.
2. It must be a virtual directory on the same domain for SEO purposes. Running the site on a subdomain is bad for Google rankings. Therefore http://www.example.com/myportal is good, whereas http://myportal.example.com is really bad.
Yes you can. While this isn't specific to Orchard, you're likely going to run into some issues with web config inheritance. Depending on the individual scenarios you face (such as shared assemblies but different versions...duplicate config nodes etc) you should be able to search around on stackoverflow and resolve those easily though.
Resource: Virtual directory inside Orchard web application
I know about elastic search and run a server in Command prompt in Windows 10 and Work in ASP.NET MVC.
I just want to host in Azure platform. as i have been using shared hosting with SQL server before. so i Need help
What will be minimum requirement or features i have to get to host asp.net mvc application compatible with mobile apps ( providing Apis , not for large scale only for 1 , 2 application ) , with elastic search running at the end ?
Do i have to get virtual machine , documentDB etc features.
You have multiple solutions to your scenario.
Using ElasticSearch
1) To run ElasticSearch you need an Azure Virtual Machine, this could be one from the Marketplace, like, an Ubuntu Server. The size of the VM will depend on the load that it has to manage, maybe you can work with an S1 or you might need an S2. In this case, it's your responsability to expose the network interfases for the elastic search service.
2) For your Web App, you'd need an Azure Web App (App Services). Depending on the load, you can go with an S1/S2 and define your scaling strategy if you need to. There are plenty of tools to measure how your Web App is handling load (NewRelic / AppInsights).
3) Finally, it depends on your Data, but you might need to store it in a persistent storage, like Azure SQL or Azure DocumentDB (depends on the nature of the data) in case you need to rebuild your Elastic Search indexes (and thus reindex from the persistent store).
Using Azure Search
1) Instead of Elastic Search, you can use Azure Search, it will simplify the whole scenario, since it's SaaS (Soft-as-a-Service) and you don't need to maintain and configure a VM, just use the service API from your Web App. Under the hood, it's basically Elastic Search/Lucene with added things.
2) You still need the App Service for your Web App.
3) You still need the persistent storage (Azure SQL, DocumentDB) in case you need to reindex your information or create new indexes.
Basically it all boils down to 3 services (VM/Azure Search + App Service + SQL/DocumentDB) + the Network usage that your App consumes, that's how you'd calculate your costs.
We are currently using both solutions on our products (ElasticSearch for an ELK Logging platform / Azure Search for our main client products) and both work well, but it depends really on your wallet and the kind of implementation times you have, the Azure Search approach might be faster.
I need to know the best practices for deploying a new version of an ASP.NET MVC application while users are still connected to it
Everytime one deploys the .dll that contains the models and controllers of the application, the application is rebooted. Also deploying the web.config (that references eventually new libraries) results in rebooting the application.
So, the question is: how do I update the application's dll or web.config without disconnecting the users from the site?
You want to use another session state option other than using in-proc so your users survive when the process recycles or system reboots.
InProc: In-Proc mode stores values in the memory of the ASP.NET worker process. Thus, this mode offers the fastest access to these values. However, when the ASP.NET worker process recycles, the state data is lost.
See ASP.NET Session State Options for more ASP.NET options and mentions of other third party session state providers.
This question also deals with possible deployment scenarios to help with the websites under load and slow app times after a pool recycle: How are people solving app pool recycle issues on deployment with large apps?
Ideally you want to be as stateless as you can, and stay away from session. Perhaps you can use a cookie for tracking the current user via forms auth for example. But you must stay away from in-proc by using distributed cache/session provider so users won't lose session state on app pool recycles.
I think the best is to deploy a new site for new sessions, and mantain existing sessions in the old one.
I feel that "The blue green deployment strategy" article linked below can be hacked with a few changes to do that (Disallow New Connections instead of issue a "drain", using sticky sessions).
https://kevinareed.com/2015/11/07/how-to-deploy-anything-in-iis-with-zero-downtime-on-a-single-server/
I will developp and host an e-commerce website based on Asp.Net MVC4 (with several SQL Server Jobs).
I think use Azure in order to stay in Microsoft's world and avoid dedicated server management.
The package Web Site Shared with 1 site / 5Go SQL Server Database / 200Go Bandwidth is very interesting with the price based on 12 months.
But i don't know if this configuration is enough specially on the bandwidth.
What do you think of ? Did you use Azure with this type of application ?
Regards,
Guillaume.
If you want to develop E-Commerce application you will have to secure customers' sensitive data i.e. credit cards, address details etc. via secure connections (HTTPS; in many countries this is legal requirement). For that reason you will have to have SSL support.
Azure Website do not support SSL for custom domains. However, they support SSL for *.azurewebsites.net DNS name. So if your E-Commerce application DNS will be, say, my-ecom-app.azurewebsites.net then it's fine. Otherwise, I would not recommend Azure Website solution yet (I am sure SSL support for custom domains on Azure Website will be implemented).
Azure Cloud Services, on the other had, have full support of SSL for custom domains.
One of the really good websites to check Azure features and development roadmap is ScottGu's Blog
Azure Web Sites do not support SSL and I really don't know of any successful e-commerce site that does not run SSL for at least part of the website. If you really want to host your e-commerce on Azure today your only real choice is to run Virtual Machines for your web front end servers and use them for your DB or use SQL Azure.
We developed platform called Virto Commerce that does just that, MVC4 website hosted on Azure. There was also a need for SQL Jobs (indexing, payment processing, cart cleanups and so on) for which we used WorkerRole (instead of WebRole). WorkerRole and WebRole can actually be combined as part of a single deployment, however it is better to use a different instance for worker roles. In our case WorkerRole acted as a scheduler for multiple jobs defined in the database.
The challenge with WorkerRoles however is to make sure they scale well when new instances are added. So the workload needs to be distributed between multiple instances. This is done through the use of queues and blob locks, where each job is now split into two, one that schedules and partitions the work and the second that actually picks up the next partition and completes it.
Hope this helps!
PS: Virto Commerce is now available as an open source project on codeplex, go to http://virtocommerce.codeplex.com
There is an option for us to have 2 or more web roles in a single deployment. But each deployment can be either be staging or production i.e. by extension, we get only 1 URL to access that deployment.
Considering this case how to access the different webroles, what will be the URLs for those.Also what is the use for having multiple webroles in a single deployment.
Why multiple web roles in a single deployment? Consider an application with a public-facing (customer-oriented) website, as well as an administrative website (maybe on port 8000). There are two basic ways to handle this:
Place both sites in the same web role. This means they now share the VM instances, network cards, memory, etc. It also means that, should you need to scale to handle traffic, both sites are scaled together as a single unit.
Place each site in its own role. Now, they're in their own VM instances and may be scaled separately.
Option #1 is more cost-effective because you can get by with only two role instances (minimum two needed for SLA). Option #2 is better for independent scaling. for instance: If you get a huge spike in customer traffic, this could cause trouble for you when trying to access the administrative website, whereas if your admin website is in its own role, it won't be affected by customer traffic.
In both cases, you get one IP addres, one *.cloudapp.net name (and you can map a custom domain name to it with a CNAME).
Staging vs. Production: Your entire deployment may be published to either Staging or Production (or both, as two separate publishes). Staging is not meant for external users - it's really meant for a pre-live area, where you can verify that a new deployment works as expected. You can then perform a virtual IP swap with your currently-running system in Production, which effectively swaps your staging and production deployments. This results in a near-instant upgrade of your software with no customer downtime.
Keep in mind: Every role in a deployment must stay together - you can't deploy one role to one service and the other role to another service. If you want to do this: Separate your roles into separate deployments. Then you can publish them to different URLs.
In a production deployment your webrole can be accessed by the URL with a prefix you defined previously for example myapp.cloudapp.net; web roles in staging deployment on the other hand can be accessed by automatically generated URL for example 205521014d8c440a83852b62e0df9db5.cloudapp.net
I am afraid there is no way to access web role instance directly, bypassing AppFabric router. Why would you ever need to do it anyway?
If you need get access from one web role instance to another, consider using a queue or distributed cache instead of direct communication.