I am new at this (I'm still learning), I would appreciate very much if you Jedi masters out there can help me out with the question and concern that I have.
I want to use Ninject and I have the codes below, I would like to know whether my objects will get disposed properly and garbage collected.
For Ninject's default Transient Scope, I read that "Lifetime is not managed by the Kernel (the Scope object is null) and will never be Disposed."
If I would to use my codes in production, especially when I get lots of concurrent calls to my WebApi (POST), will it cause any problems like Memory Leak, etc?
What would be the best Ninject's Object scope to use for this situation?
By the way, if I don't specify the object scope like "kernel.Bind().To();", will it default to TransientScope?
public class VehicleClassRepository : IVehicleClassRepository
{
SomeDataContext context = new SomeDataContext();
public IQueryable<VehicleClass> All
{
get { return context.VehicleClasses; }
}
public IQueryable<VehicleClass> AllIncluding(params Expression<Func<VehicleClass, object>>[] includeProperties)
{
IQueryable<VehicleClass> query = context.VehicleClasses;
foreach (var includeProperty in includeProperties) {
query = query.Include(includeProperty);
}
return query;
}
public VehicleClass Find(int id)
{
return context.VehicleClasses.Find(id);
}
public void InsertOrUpdate(VehicleClass vehicleclass)
{
if (vehicleclass.VehicleClassId == default(int)) {
// New entity
context.VehicleClasses.Add(vehicleclass);
} else {
// Existing entity
context.Entry(vehicleclass).State = EntityState.Modified;
}
}
public void Delete(int id)
{
var vehicleclass = context.VehicleClasses.Find(id);
context.VehicleClasses.Remove(vehicleclass);
}
public void Save()
{
context.SaveChanges();
}
public void Dispose()
{
context.Dispose();
}
}
public interface IVehicleClassRepository : IDisposable
{
IQueryable<VehicleClass> All { get; }
IQueryable<VehicleClass> AllIncluding(params Expression<Func<VehicleClass, object>>[] includeProperties);
VehicleClass Find(int id);
void InsertOrUpdate(VehicleClass vehicleclass);
void Delete(int id);
void Save();
}
In my NinjectWebCommon.cs:
private static void RegisterServices(IKernel kernel)
{
kernel.Bind<IVehicleClassRepository>().To<VehicleClassRepository>();
}
In my WebApi's VehicleClassController.cs:
public HttpResponseMessage Post(VehicleClass value)
{
if (value == null)
{
return new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest);
}
else
{
vehicleclassRepository.InsertOrUpdate(value);
vehicleclassRepository.Save();
return new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.Created);
}
}
Late answer (almost 2 years) but in case others read this...
Although it's true that the garbage collector will eventually dispose of your VehicleClassRepository instance, you'll very likely run into problems before then.
Your data context likely holds an open db connection until it's disposed. The db connection probably comes from a pool of db connections.
So long before the CLR ends up garbage collecting these (which would also dispose them), incoming requests end up blocking while trying to get a db connection but there are none available.
I've encountered this type of behavior and learned from it the hard way. So the VehicleClassRepository should be scoped in dependency scope so that you get one per call and more importantly, it'll get disposed immediately after the call is done.
Related
The task is to call a database, retrieve certain records update and save them.
As the amount of records if fairly large we want to do this Async, however, this doesn't seem to be implemented correctly.
The main class:
#SpringBootApplication
#EnableAsync
MainApplication() {
#Bean("threadPoolExecutor")
public TaskExecutor getAsyncExecutor(){
ThreadPoolTaskExecutor executor = new ThreadPoolTaskExecutor();
executor.setCorePoolSize(DataSourceConfig.getTHREAD_POOL_SIZE());
executor.setMaxPoolSize(DataSourceConfig.getTHREAD_POOL_SIZE());
executor.setWaitForTasksToCompleteOnShutdown(true);
executor.setThreadNamePrefix("RetryEnhancement-");
return executor;
}
}
Method in the first service:
#Service
public class FirstService() {
#Transactional
public void fullProcess() {
for(int counter = 0; counter < ConfigFile.getTHREADS(); counter++){
secondaryService.threads();
}
}
}
Method in the second service:
#Service
public class SecondService () {
#Async("threadPoolExecutor")
public void threads() {
while(thirdService.threadMethod()) {
//doNothing
}
}
}
Method in the third service:
#Service
public class ThirdService() {
#Transactional
public boolean threads() {
Record record = repository.fetchRecord();
if(record!=null) {
updateRecord(record);
saveRecord(record);
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
}
Repository:
public interface repository extends CrudRepository<Record, long> {
#Lock(LockModeType.PESSIMISTIC_WRITE)
Record fetchRecord();
}
The issue I'm finding is that, while the code executes perfectly fine, it seems to have a Synchronous execution (found by adding a .sleep and watching the execution in the logger).
The seperate threads seem to be waiting until the other is executed.
I'm probably doing something wrong and if another thread already explains the issue, than please refer it, though I have not been able to find this issue in a different thread.
Your solution is way to complex. Ditch all of that and just inject the TaskExecutor and do the updateRecord in a separate thread (you might need to retrieve it again as you are now using a different thread and thus connection.
Something like this should do the trick
private final TaskExecutor executor; // injected through constructor
public void process() {
Stream<Record> records = repository.fetchRecords(); // Using a stream gives you a lazy cursor!
records.forEach(this::processRecord);
}
private void processRecord(Record record) {
executor.submit({
updateRecord(record);
saveRecord(record);
});
}
You might want to put the processRecord into another object and make it #Transactional or wrap it in a TransactionTemplate to get that behavior.
We are launching a website that will have a very heavy volume for a short period of time. It is basically giving tickets. The code is written in Java, Spring & Hibernate. I want to mimic the high volume by spawning multiple threads and trying to get the ticket using JUnit test case. The problem is that in my DAO class the code just simply dies after I begin transaction. I mean there is no error trace in the log file or anything like that. Let me give some idea about the way my code is.
DAO code:
#Repository("customerTicketDAO")
public class CustomerTicketDAO extends BaseDAOImpl {// BaseDAOImpl extends HibernateDaoSupport
public void saveCustomerTicketUsingJDBC(String customerId) {
try{
getSession().getTransaction().begin(); //NOTHING HAPPENS AFTER THIS LINE OF CODE
// A select query
Query query1 = getSession().createSQLQuery("my query omitted on purpose");
.
.
// An update query
Query query2 = getSession().createSQLQuery("my query omitted on purpose");
getSession().getTransaction().commite();
} catch (Exception e) {
}
}
Runnable code:
public class InsertCustomerTicketRunnable implements Runnable {
#Autowired
private CustomerTicketDAO customerTicketDAO;
public InsertCustomerTicketRunnable(String customerId) {
this.customerId = customerId;
}
#Override
public void run() {
if (customerTicketDAO != null) {
customerTicketDAO.saveCustomerTicketUsingJDBC(customerId);
}
}
}
JUnit method:
#RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
#ContextConfiguration(locations={"file:src/test/resources/applicationContext-test.xml"})
public class DatabaseTest {
#Before
public void init() {
sessionFactory = (SessionFactory)applicationContext.getBean("sessionFactory");
Session session = SessionFactoryUtils.getSession(sessionFactory, true);
TransactionSynchronizationManager.bindResource(sessionFactory, new SessionHolder(session));
customerTicketDAO = (CustomerTicketDAO)applicationContext.getBean("customerTicketDAO");
}
#After
public void end() throws Exception {
SessionHolder sessionHolder = (SessionHolder) TransactionSynchronizationManager.unbindResource(sessionFactory);
SessionFactoryUtils.closeSession(session);
}
#Test
public void saveCustomerTicketInMultipleThreads () throws Exception {
ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(NTHREDS);
for (int i=0; i<1000; i++) {
executor.submit(new InsertCustomerTicketRunnable(i));
}
// This will make the executor accept no new threads
// and finish all existing threads in the queue
executor.shutdown();
// Wait until all threads are finish
executor.awaitTermination(1, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
}
I see no data being inserted into the database. Can someone please point me as to where I am going wrong?
Thanks
Raj
SessionFactory is thread safe but Session is not. So my guess is that you need to call SessionFactoryUtils.getSession() from within each thread, so that each thread gets its own instance. You are currently calling it from the main thread, so all children threads try to share the same instance.
Naughty, naughty!
public void saveCustomerTicketUsingJDBC(String customerId) {
try {
getSession().getTransaction().begin(); //NOTHING HAPPENS AFTER THIS LINE OF CODE
.
.
} catch (Exception e) {
}
}
You should never (well, hardly ever) have an empty catch block, if there is a problem you will find that your code 'just simply dies' with no log messages. Oh look, that's what's happening ;)
At the very minimum you should log the exception, that will go a long way towards you helping you find what the problem is (and from there, the solution).
First thing: This is a compact framework 3.5 application.
I have a very weird problem. In a Dispose-Method the application disposes items in a collection and after that clears the list. So far nothing special and it works like a charm when Dispose is called by my application. But as soon as the Garbage Collector calls the Finalizer, which calls the same Dispose-Method the system throws a NotSupported-Exception on the Clear-Method of the generic collection.
Here is the body of the Dispose-Method:
public override void Dispose()
{
if (items != null)
{
foreach (Shape item in items)
{
item.Dispose();
}
items.Clear();
items = null;
}
base.Dispose();
}
I'm totally stuck here. Maybe someone can explain this to me, or had a similar problem and solved it.
A finalizer needs only call Dispose if there are unmanaged resources to clean up. You cannot attempt to access managed resources when being called from the finalizer.
As mentioned in the comment above, there is no reason [that we can see] that your class should implement a finalizer.
For reference, should you need to use a finalizer, the Dispose pattern to use as follows:
// The finalizer
~MyClass()
{
Dispose(false);
}
// The IDisposable implemenation
public void Dispose()
{
Dispose(true);
GC.SuppressFinalize(this);
}
// The "real" dispose method
protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing)
{
if (!_disposed)
{
if (disposing)
{
// Dispose managed objects here
}
else
{
// Free unmanaged resources here
}
_disposed = true;
}
}
I'm using Ninject 2.0 with an MVC 2/EF 4 project in order to inject my repositories into my controllers. I've read that when doing something like that, one should bind using InRequestScope(). When I do that, I get a new repository per request, but the old repositories aren't being disposed. Since the old repositories are remaining in memory, I get conflicts with multiple ObjectContexts existing at the same time.
My concrete repositories implement IDisposable:
public class HGGameRepository : IGameRepository, IDisposable
{
// ...
public void Dispose()
{
if (this._siteDB != null)
{
this._siteDB.Dispose();
}
}
}
And my Ninject code:
public class NinjectControllerFactory : DefaultControllerFactory
{
private IKernel kernel = new StandardKernel(new HandiGamerServices());
protected override IController GetControllerInstance(System.Web.Routing.RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType)
{
try
{
if (controllerType == null)
{
return base.GetControllerInstance(requestContext, controllerType);
// return null;
}
}
catch (HttpException ex)
{
if (ex.GetHttpCode() == 404)
{
IController errorController = kernel.Get<ErrorController>();
((ErrorController)errorController).InvokeHttp404(requestContext.HttpContext);
return errorController;
}
else
{
throw ex;
}
}
return (IController)kernel.Get(controllerType);
}
private class HandiGamerServices : NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
Bind<HGEntities>().ToSelf().InRequestScope();
Bind<IArticleRepository>().To<HGArticleRepository>().InRequestScope();
Bind<IGameRepository>().To<HGGameRepository>().InRequestScope();
Bind<INewsRepository>().To<HGNewsRepository>().InRequestScope();
Bind<ErrorController>().ToSelf().InRequestScope();
}
}
}
What am I doing wrong?
I'm quite sure that you are wrong about the guess that your objects are not disposed. This just does not happen when you think it will happen. But the fact that this does happen later should not give you any problems with ObjectContexts unless you are doing something wrong. With a high load you will have a lot of ObjectContexts at the same time anyway.
What can become a problem though is that the memory usage increases. That's why the request scope needs to be released actively. The Ninject MVC extensions will take care of that. Otherwise have a look at the OnePerRequestModule to see how it is done:
https://github.com/ninject/Ninject.Web.Common/blob/master/src/Ninject.Web.Common/OnePerRequestHttpModule.cs
I was looking at Prism EventAggregator and its' great. I part i was most concerned was its capability to marshal thread correctly to UI thread.
I was wondering if i can use this capability to provide module developers a class which could be used to create threads in a similar way as BackgroundWorker. Interface of class can be somewhat similar to
public interface IMyTask
{
event DoWorkEventHandler DoWork;
event RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler RunWorkerCompleted;
void RunTaskAsync(object obj);
}
I have kept types similar to backgroundworker for better understanding. In implementation i am registering taskstart and taskcomplete events
public class TaskStartEventPayload
{
public SubscriptionToken token { get; set; }
public object Argument { get; set; }
}
public class TaskStartEvent : CompositePresentationEvent<TaskStartEventPayload>
{
}
public class TaskCompleteEventPayload
{
public SubscriptionToken token { get; set; }
public object Argument { get; set; }
public object Result { get; set; }
}
public class TaskCompleteEvent : CompositePresentationEvent<TaskCompleteEventPayload>
{
}
In the constructor for the MyTask class i take which thread the completion is required on as
public MyTask(IEventAggregator eventAggregator, bool isUICompletion)
{
if (eventAggregator == null)
{
throw new ArgumentNullException("eventAggregator");
}
_eventAggregator = eventAggregator;
_eventAggregator.GetEvent<TaskStartEvent>().Subscribe(TaskStartHandler, ThreadOption.BackgroundThread, false, new Predicate<TaskStartEventPayload>(StartTokenFilter));
if(isUICompletion)
_token = _eventAggregator.GetEvent<TaskCompleteEvent>().Subscribe(TaskCompleteHandler, ThreadOption.UIThread,true,new Predicate<TaskCompleteEventPayload>(CompleteTokenFilter));
else
_token = _eventAggregator.GetEvent<TaskCompleteEvent>().Subscribe(TaskCompleteHandler, ThreadOption.BackgroundThread, true, new Predicate<TaskCompleteEventPayload>(CompleteTokenFilter));
}
here i am registering with filters where filter function returns the event only if it has Payload has same token as while got while subscribing.
further I use
public void RunTaskAsync(object obj)
{
//create payload
_eventAggregator.GetEvent<TaskStartEvent>().Publish(payload);
}
public void TaskStartHandler(TaskStartEventPayload t)
{
//fire dowork and create payload
DoWork(this, args);
_eventAggregator.GetEvent<TaskCompleteEvent>().Publish(tc);
}
public void TaskCompleteHandler(TaskCompleteEventPayload t)
{
RunWorkerCompleted(this, args);
}
This class can be used as
MyTask et = new MyTaskagg, true);
et.DoWork += new System.ComponentModel.DoWorkEventHandler(et_DoWork);
et.RunWorkerCompleted += new System.ComponentModel.RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(et_RunWorkerCompleted);
et.RunTaskAsync("Test");
Benefit I see in this approach is
1. It uses threadpool so no overhead of creating threads as in backgroundWorker.
2. Proper thread marshalling in case RunWorkerCompleted to be executed on UI thread.
Please advice if this would be correct to use eventaggregator as Threader.
This will work, although it's code you have to debug for very little performance gain. Micro-optimizing is rarely worth the effort and support costs in my opinion.
EventAggregator is meant to be a message bus for your application and I typically prefer to use things for their original intention, lest I have to debug a lot of code, but that's my personal preference.
Event Aggregator is going to have to work a little harder than it is meant to cleaning up all of those subscriptions, which will likely exceed any performance gain you get from the thread pooling, but that is just a guess.