I have a SharePoint 2010 Farm and want to use object caching for my own custom objects.
Since it's an ASP.net Application at it's core, I could use HttpRuntime.Cache. On the other hand, SharePoint 2010 offers it's own SPCache.
Why would I choose SPCache over the HttpRuntime.Cache one?
We are using HttpRuntime.Cache API in an ASP.NET to cache data retrieved from a database.
For this particular application, our database queries feature a LOT of parameters, so our cache keys look something like this:
table=table1;param1=somevalue1;param2=somevalue2;param3=somevalue3;param4=somevalue4;param5=somevalue5;param6=somevalue6... etc...
we have so many parameters that the cache key is several hundred characters long. is there a limit to the length of these cache keys? Internally, it is using a dictionary, so theoretically the lookup time should be constant. However, I wonder if we have potential to run into some performance/memory problem.
I have a website setup like this:
/Web --this is the client facing site /Web/Admin --this is the backend system and is setup as a Virtual Application
I'm using HttpRuntime.Cache for caching calls to the database. What I want to be able to do is clear something that is cached on the /Web site from the /Web/Admin site. It appears though that HttpRuntime.Cache is a single instance per application.
I am new in Asp.net MVC but i really like it. I always prefer flexible authentication systems, on the other hand security is very important issue too. So i looked for some sipmle way to store current loged "user id/user name" in server side. I think that "HttpRuntime.Cache" can be a answer. So i write simple test project Of course this code is is not complete.
[Code]....
Im building a image gallery which reads file from disk, create thumbnails on the fly and present them to the user. This works good, except the processing takes a bit time.
I then decided to cache the processed images using the ASP .NET Application Cache. When a image is processed I add the byte[] stream to the cache. As far as I know this is beeing saved into the system memory. And this is working perfect, the loading of the page is much faster.
My question is if there are thousands of images which gets cached in the Application Cache, will that affect the server performance in any way?
We have a web application that is storiing all site data in HttpRuntime.Cache. We now need to deploy the application across 2 load balanced web servers. This being the case, each web server will have its own cache, which is not ideal because if a user requests data from webserver1 it will be cached, but there next request might go to webserver2, and the data that their previous request cached won't be available. Is it possible to use a shared-cache provider to share the HttpRuntime.Cache between the two web servers or to replecate the cache between them, so that the same cache will be available on both web servers?
View 4 Replieswhat the default serialization used by the ASP.net HttpRuntime.Cache is? Is it Binary, XML, something else?
I am populating a generic List with multiple objects of the same custom type. The custom type is a POCO, there is nothing special about it. All of its properties are public with { get; set; }, it is public, it has no inheritance, it has no interfaces. In fact it is much less complicated than many other objects which we are caching which work without issue. I have tried adding the [Serializable] attribute to the custom class and it has no effect.
I add the list to the cache with a unique key. The list has been verified as populated before it is inserted into the cache, the objects in the list have been verified as populated as well. But when the list is pulled back out of the cache it is an empty list (NOT NULL), it simply has no items in it. This means that the list is being added to the cache and is retrievable but for some reason the cache is having issues serializing the objects in the list.
I just find this freaky weird since I have another list of custom objects which are much more complicated (consisting of Inheritance, Interfaces, and also containing Properties which are generic lists of other complex objects) and the caching of those lists work without issue.
Both the working and non-working list are being managed in C# classes outside of the ASP.net user controls which consume the cached data. Both of these cache handling classes call the exact same Cache Manager class singleton instance which wraps the HttpRuntime.Cache to provide typed methods for pull and pushing objects into the cache.
Here is the class
[code]....
I've been experimenting with caching objects with HttpRuntime.Cache and I was generally under the impression that if I "added" something to the cache like this:
HttpRuntime.Cache.Insert("Test", "This is a test!", null,
Cache.NoAbsoluteExpiration, Cache.NoSlidingExpiration,
CacheItemPriority.NotRemovable, new CacheItemRemovedCallback(FileChanged));
that the "NotRemovable" and "NoExpiration" flags would keep the object in-memory for the duration of the application. But was finding that at the end of certain page requests, the HttpRuntime.Cache would be completely empty!
Tracing thru and setting a breakpoint inside my Callback "FileChanged" I could see that indeed something was "removing" my object (and every other object in the cache), but I couldn't figure out why. So eventually, I started disabling other things that I thought might affect this subsystem.
Eventually, I commented out the line:
WebConfigurationManager.OpenWebConfiguration("~").Save;
I had been mostly retrieving data from "web.config" in the AppSettings region, but occasionally writing back to AppSettings and saving the changes using the above command. I knew from reading that the "web.config" is cached, but saving my changes back to it shouldn't flush all of HttpRuntime.Cache, right?
EDIT:
I've made this super reproducible if wants to try this on their own machine. (I'm running VS2008 Pro w/ MVC2 targeting .NET 3.5) Just start up a new MVC2 project and paste the following into the HomeController over whatever is already there:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Web;
using System.Web.Mvc;
using System.Web.Configuration;
using System.Configuration;........
Start-up the app in debug mode. Click on the "About" link. This loads a string into the Cache. Click on the "Home" link. String is pulled from the Cache and stuck in ViewMessage dictionary. Some key/value pair is written to web.config and saved. String from cache should appear on the Home page. Click on the "Home" link again. String should be pulled from the cache, but it's not. Stop program. Comment out the 3 lines that start with "Config". Restart the program. Try steps 1 thru 4 again. Notice how the HttpRuntime.Cache has not been emptied.
My servers are behind F5 load balancer, I wanna use HttpRuntime.Cache in my web application but I didn't find out the way for to use that method for those using network load balancing server. Or can we store that HttpRuntime.Cache to sql server like the session we do in web.config file?
View 4 RepliesI am trying to remove the cache using the HttpRuntime.Cache.Remove(key) but invain. I wonder what are the best practices for using HttpRuntime.Cache.
View 2 RepliesWhat is an appropriate use case for all of the above? It seems session and cache are quite similar, and I can't think of much use for application.
View 3 RepliesWhat is the difference between; Deploying an application Releasing an application Implementing an application
View 1 RepliesI've gone rounds with this ever since I started programming classic ASP 12 (or so) years ago and I've never found a great solution because the architecture of ASP and ASP.NET has always been a swamp of bad practices, magic shared singletons, etc. My biggest issue is with the HttpApplication object with its non-event events (Application_Start, Application_End, etc.).
If you want to do stuff once for the entire lifespan of an HTTP application, Application_Start is the obvious place to do it. Right? Not exactly. Firstly, this is not an event per se, it's a magic naming convention that, when followed, causes the method to be called once per AppDomain created by IIS.
Besides magic naming conventions being a horrible practice, I've started to think it might be a reason there exist no such thing as a Start event on the HttpApplication object. So I've experimented with events that do exist, such as Init. Well, this isn't really an event either, it's an overridable method, which is the next best thing.
It seems that the Init() method is called for every instantiation of an HttpApplication object, which happens a lot more than once per AppDomain. This means that I might as just put my startup logic inside the HttpApplication object's constructor.
Now my question is, why shouldn't I put my startup logic in the constructor? Why does even Init() exist and do I need to care about Application_Start? If I do, can anyone explain why there is no proper event or overridable method for this pseudo-event in the HttpApplication object?
And can anyone explain to me why in a typical ASP.NET application, 8 instances of my HttpApplication are created (which causes the constructor and Init to run just as many times, of course; this can be mitigated with locking and a shared static boolean called initialized) when my application only has a single AppDomain?
Is it correct to implement my caching object like this in my controller :
[code]....
And I Use it like this :
[code]....
I'm having a bit of trouble trying to get this to work right:
[Code]....
I'm working on Windows 2008R2 with IIS 7.5. In web.config there is config value:
[Code]....
Now, web request calls WCF service, which is very time consuming (timeouts for WCF are set to 5minutes). Whilst waiting for WCF to finish, web application throws exception:
[Code]....
As far as I make it out, it's exception caused by exceeding 90seconds limit. But... I get that exception after about 150seconds. Is it common that request doesn't break instantaneously?
I did some tests:
- set executionTimeout to 90seconds
- set WCF timeout to 500seconds
- play with Thread.Sleep in WCF service, and pass it a value between 90seconds and 500seconds.
It turned out that I got that
[Code]....
exception exactly after the time passed to Thread.Sleep method. Conclusion: web request thread has to wait for wcf call to return in order to be aborted?
We have a wfc layer that wraps the business classes and database access and use a client that lives on the database layer. Amongst our group we are attempting to form standards. Some want to have the client call the web method and pass the page they are requesting and the page size. Pass that to the database and then page in SQL Server use RowNum.Some want to cache the full list of objects in http cache on the service tier and page in memory. They concern here is memory use on the server.
Which would be best for a medium number of users with potentially large number of records to manage (say 30K) Is it better to cache them all in memory and work from there or page at the database as the application scales?
What are the "optimal" parameters for creating an AppFabric cache when you will be storing session state in the cache? MSDN Cache-Related Commands
Powershell command line:
New-Cache [-CacheName] <String> [-Eviction <String>] [-Expirable <String>] [-Force [<SwitchParameter>]] [-NotificationsEnabled <String>] [-Secondaries <Int32>] [-TimeToLive <Int64>]
[code]...
Since I don't want my sessions to be removed unless the session has been abandoned either via code or Session Timeout...For eviction, I would think "None" and for expireable, I would think False.I have tested and calling Session.Abandon does remove the object from the cache. I have also tested to see if by extending my session, the session object in cache is also extended. This does seem to work the "correct" way.
We have a data driven ASP.NET website which has been written using the standard pattern for data caching (adapted here from MSDN):
public DataTable GetData()
{
string key = "DataTable";
object item = Cache[key] as DataTable;
[code]...
The trouble with this is that the call to GetDataFromSQL() is expensive and the use of the site is fairly high. So every five minutes, when the cache drops, the site becomes very 'sticky' while a lot of requests are waiting for the new data to be retrieved.
What we really want to happen is for the old data to remain current while new data is periodically reloaded in the background. (The fact that someone might therefore see data that is six minutes old isn't a big issue - the data isn't that time sensitive). This is something that I can write myself, but it would be useful to know if any alternative caching engines (I know names like Velocity, memcache) support this kind of scenario. Or am I missing some obvious trick with the standard ASP.NET data cache?
I have use Nhibernate in my MVC Project by me known, Nhibernate have cache on Session and Object. now, I want use HttpContext.Current.Cache (system.web) for cache data something in project. my code same that have problem, haven't it. and that's right or wrong.
View 2 RepliesI've got a web application that runs of a state server. It looks like soon it may need to distributed and there will be two web servers behind a load balancer.
This works great for session state but my next challenge is Cache
My application leverages heavily of cache. I understand ASP.Net 4.0 will be offering more here but nothing much has been said about the how too.
There are two challenges that I face
1). Each webserver will have its own copy of cache whereas it would be more efficient to put this to a third server the same as session state is put to state server.
2). The real challenge is keeping cache in sync if a simple dataset derived from the database is changed my code dumps that cache item and reloads the cache. That's all well on one webserver but webserver number two wont know to drop that particular cache item and reload it. This could cause some unexpected problems in the application.
For scenario number 2 I could attempt to do some smart coding so server number two knows to dump the cache and reload it.
My guess is someone else has already been here before and there's probably a better implementation approach rather than writing extra code.
Does anyone know how I could achieve the goal of keeping Cache in sync between multiple webservers or even better farm Cache management to another server?
I need to enable caching in my asp.net application, but I do not want to use the webserver's memory for holding cache objects. If I add the page directive for output caching will the page be stored in the asp.net cache object?
View 2 RepliesI want to be able to maintain certain objects between application restarts.
To do that, I want to write specific cached items out to disk in Global.asax Application_End() function and re-load them back on Application_Start().
I currently have a cache helper class, which uses the following method to return the cached value:
return HttpContext.Current.Cache[key];
Problem: during Application_End(), HttpContext.Current is null since there is no web request (it's an automated cleanup procedure) - therefore, I cannot access .Cache[] to retrieve any of the items to save to disk.
Question: how can I access the cache items during Application_End()?
We have a function which sends out a bunch of e-mails. The problem is that a HttpException is thrown on the server after a while.
I managed to find out the the solution is to increase the executionTimeout in web.config, but I only want this on one page, not the whole application.
Is there a way to set the executionTimeout configuration only on one page?
actually i need the maxRequestLength value of the httpRuntime section in web.config to check if a postedfile's size is greater. What's the best way to read it?
View 1 Replies