Search Results

Search found 6 results on 1 pages for 'iant8'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • WCF GZip Compression Request/Response Processing

    - by IanT8
    How do I get a WCF client to process server responses which have been GZipped or Deflated by IIS? On IIS, I've followed the instructions here on how to make IIS 6 gzip all responses (where the request contained "Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate") emitted by .svc wcf services. On the client, I've followed the instructions here and here on how to inject this header into the web request: "Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate". Fiddler2 shows the response is binary and not plain old Xml. The client crashes with an exception which basically says there's no Xml header, which ofcourse is true. In my IClientMessageInspector, the app crashes before AfterReceiveReply is called. Some further notes: (1) I can't change the WCF service or client as they are supplied by a 3rd party. I can however attach behaviors and/or message inspectors via configuration if this is the right direction to take. (2) I don't want to compress/uncompress just the soap body, but the entire message. Any ideas/solutions? * SOLVED * It was not possible to write a WCF extension to achieve these goals. Instead I followed this CodeProject article which advocate a helper class: public class CompressibleHttpRequestCreator : IWebRequestCreate { public CompressibleHttpRequestCreator() { } WebRequest IWebRequestCreate.Create(Uri uri) { HttpWebRequest httpWebRequest = Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(HttpWebRequest), BindingFlags.CreateInstance | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance, null, new object[] { uri, null }, null) as HttpWebRequest; if (httpWebRequest == null) { return null; } httpWebRequest.AutomaticDecompression =DecompressionMethods.GZip | DecompressionMethods.Deflate; return httpWebRequest; } } and also, an addition to the application configuration file: <configuration> <system.net> <webRequestModules> <remove prefix="http:"/> <add prefix="http:" type="Pajocomo.Net.CompressibleHttpRequestCreator, Pajocomo" /> </webRequestModules> </system.net> </configuration> What seems to be happening is that WCF eventually asks some factory or other deep down in system.net to provide an HttpWebRequest instance, and we provide the helper that will be asked to create the required instance. In the WCF client configuration file, a simple basicHttpBinding is all that is required, without the need for any custom extensions. When the application runs, the client Http request contains the header "Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate", the server returns a gzipped web response, and the client transparently decompresses the http response before handing it over to WCF. When I tried to apply this technique to Web Services I found that it did NOT work. Although the helper class was executed in the same was as when used by the WCF client, the http request did not contain the "Accept-Encoding: ..." header. To make this work for Web Services, I had to edit the Web Proxy class, and add this method: protected override System.Net.WebRequest GetWebRequest(Uri uri) { System.Net.HttpWebRequest rq = (System.Net.HttpWebRequest)base.GetWebRequest(uri); rq.AutomaticDecompression = DecompressionMethods.GZip | DecompressionMethods.Deflate; return rq; } Note that it did not matter whether the CompressibleHttpRequestCreator and block from the application config file were present or not. For web services, only overriding GetWebRequest in the Web Service Proxy worked.

    Read the article

  • AutoMapper How To Map Object A To Object B Differently Depending On Context

    - by IanT8
    Calling all AutoMapper gurus! I'd like to be able to map object A to object B differently depending on context at runtime. In particular, I'd like to ignore certain properties in one mapping case, and have all properties mapped in another case. What I'm experiencing is that Mapper.CreateMap can be called successfully in the different mapping cases however, once CreateMap is called, the map for a particular pair of types is set and is not subsequently changed by succeeding CreateMap calls which might describe the mapping differently. I found a blog post which advocates Mapper.Reset() to get round the problem, however, the static nature of the Mapper class means that it is only a matter of time before a collision and crash occur. Is there a way to do this? What I think I need is to call Mapper.CreateMap once per appdomain, and later, be able to call Mapper.Map with hints about which properties should be included / excluded. Right now, I'm thinking about changing the source code by writing a non-static mapping class that holds the mapping config instance based. Poor performance, but thread safe. What are my options. What can be done? Automapper seems so promising.

    Read the article

  • WCF Integration Facility and Self-Hosted Services

    - by IanT8
    I'm self-hosting several services where I do this to register the service: host = new ServiceHost(typeof(MyService)); host.Open(); Behind the scenes, wcf instantiates my service via the default constructor. Is it possble to use the WCF Integration Facility of Castle Windsor to get WCF to call on Windsor to create the service when I am self-hosting? The example seems shows IIS hosted services where the 1st line of the MyService.svc file looks like: <%@ServiceHost language=c# Debug="true" Service="Microsoft.ServiceModel.Samples.CalculatorService" Factory=WindsorServiceHostFactory%> where presumably a factory is used by wcf to instantiate the service instance.

    Read the article

  • NHibernate Mapping and Querying Where Tables are Related But No Foreign Key Constraint

    - by IanT8
    I'm fairly new to NHibernate, and I need to ask a couple of questions relating to a very frequent scenario. The following simplified example illustrates the problem. I have two tables named Equipment and Users. Users is a set of system administrators. Equipment is a set of machinery. Tables: Users table has UserId int and LoginName nvarchar(64). Equipment table has EquipId int, EquipType nvarchar(64), UpdatedBy int. Behavior: System administrators can make changes to Equipment, and when they do, the UpdatedBy field of Equipment is "normally" set to their User Id. Users can be deleted at any time. New Equipment items have an UpdatedBy value of null. There's no foreign key constraint on Equipment.UpdatedBy which means: Equipment.UpdatedBy can be null. Equipment.UpdatedBy value can be = existing User.UserId value Equipment.UpdatedBy value can be = non-existent User.UserId value To find Equipment and who last updated the Equipment, I might query like this: select E.EquipId, E.EquipName, U.UserId, U.LoginName from Equipment E left outer join Users U on. E.UpdatedBy = U.UserId Simple enough. So how to do that in NHibernate? My mappings might be as follows: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <hibernate-mapping xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2" namespace="Data" assembly="Data"> <class name="User" table="Users"> <id name="Id" column="UserId" unsaved-value="0"> <generator class="native" /> </id> <property name="LoginName" unique="true" not-null="true" /> </class> <class name="Equipment" table="Equipment"> <id name="Id" column="EquipId" type="int" unsaved-value="0"> <generator class="native" /> </id> <property name="EquipType" /> <many-to-one name="UpdatedBy" class="User" column="UpdatedBy" /> </class> </hibernate-mapping> So how do I get all items of equipment and who updated them? using (ISession session = sessionManager.OpenSession()) { List<Data.Equipment> equipList = session .CreateCriteria<Data.Equipment>() // Do I need to SetFetchmode or specify that I // want to join onto User here? If so how? .List<Data.Equipment>(); foreach (Data.Equipment item in equipList) { Debug.WriteLine("\nEquip Id: " + item.Id); Debug.WriteLine("Equip Type: " + item.EquipType); if (item.UpdatedBy.Country != null) Debug.WriteLine("Updated By: " + item.UpdatedBy.LoginName); else Debug.WriteLine("Updated by: Nobody"); } } When Equipment.UpdatedBy = 3 and there is no Users.UserId = 3, the above fail I also have a feeling that the generated SQL is a select all from Equipment followed by many select columns from Users where UserId = n whereas I'd expected NHibernate to left join as per my plain ordinary SQL and do one hit. If I can tell NHibernate to do the query in one hit, how do I do that? Time is of the essence on my project, so any help you could provide is gratefully received. If you're speculating about how NHibernate might work in this scenario, please say you're not absolutely sure. Many thanks.

    Read the article

  • How To Make NHibernate Automatically change an "Updated" column

    - by IanT8
    I am applying NHibernate to an existing project, where tables and columns are already defined and fixed. The database is MS-SQL-2008. NHibernate 2.1.2 Many tables have a column of type timestamp named "ReplicationID", and also a column of type datetime named "UpdatedDT". I understand I might be able to use the element of the mapping file to describe the "ReplicationID" column which will allow NHibernate to manage that column. Is it possible to make NHibernate automatically update the UpdatedDT column when the row is updated? I suppose I could try mapping the UpdatedDT property to be of type timestamp, but that have other side effects.

    Read the article

  • NHibernate Named Query Parameter Numbering @p1 @p2 etc

    - by IanT8
    A colleague recently ran into a problem where he was passing in a single date parameter to a named query. In the query, the parameter was being used twice, once in an expression and once in a GROUP BY clause. Much to our surprise, we discovered that NHibernate used two variables and sent the single named parameter in twice, as @p1 and @p2. This behaviour caused SQL to fail the query, with the usual "a column in the select clause is not in the group by clause" (I paraphrase ofcourse). Is this behaviour normal? Can it be changed? Seems to me that if you have a parameter name like :startDate, NHibernate only needs to pass in @p1 no matter how many times you might refer to :startDate in the query. Any comments? The problem was worked around by using another sub-query to overcome the SQL parsing error.

    Read the article

1