Skip to main content

Short brief - Request-Response, Asynchron and Fire and Forget patterns

Un apel spre un serviciu poate sa fie facut in diferite moduri. Cele mai uzuale moduri sunt cele care respecta paternul Request-Response si Asynchron. Pe langa aceste doua paternuri mai exista inca unul, dar care este mai rar folosit Fire and Forget.
Request-Response pattern- se refera la faptul ca pentru fiecare request facut se asteapta raspunsul.
Response response = service.CallService(request)
Asynchron pattern - este un patern bazat pe evenimente. Odata ce un apel a fost facut, aplicatia nu asteapta raspunsul de la server. Cel care face apelul trebuie sa se inregistreze la un eveniment care o sa fie declansat cand raspunsul soseste.
service.ResponseEvent += new EventHandler(ResponseReceived);
service.CallServiceAsync(request);
Fire and Forget pattern - este destul de asemanator cu paternul Asynchron, doar ca odata comanda trimisa nu ne mai intereseaza ce se intampla cu aceasta.
service.CalService(request);    // Metoda nu returneaza nimica
Exista diferite scenarii cand Fire and Forget este recomandat sa fie folosit. Conditia principala care trebuie sa fie implinita ca sa putem folostii acest patern este ca sa ne putem asigura ca request-ul ajunge la server - avem un protocol ce ne garanteaza ca mesajele au ajuns la destinatie( de exemplu daca folosim cozi de mesaje care ne asigura ca mesajele nu se pierd - de exemplul MQ).
In cazul in care avem servicii cu un volum mare de request-uri, atunci poate pentru unele tipuri de request-uri putem sa folosim acest patern. De exemplu pentru cele in care rezultatul este format din mesaje precum Okay.
Cele mai mari dezavantaje apar in momentul in care ceva nu functioneaza bine. Debug-ul este destul de complicat si de obicei necesita interventia umana pentru a putea gasi problema. Problemele care pot sa apara sunt la nivelului protocolului care ar trebui sa ne garanteze ca mesajele ajung la destinatie.
Un alt mod de a apela un serviciu este de a face unu sau mai multe request-uri de tipul Fire and Forget, iar apoi la un moment dat sa se verifice daca a venit un raspuns( intr-un cache, in baza de date etc) - in cazul in care raspunsul se pune intr-o locatie unde atat clientul cat si serverul le pot accesa
Nu trebuie confundat un apel de forma:
service.CallService(request,()=>{ ... });
ca si cum ar fi un apel de tip Fire and Forget. Orice metoda sau lambda expresion specificata ca si al doilea parametru care este apelata in momentul in care raspunsul soseste de la server reprezinta un apel de tip asincron.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to audit an Azure Cosmos DB

In this post, we will talk about how we can audit an Azure Cosmos DB database. Before jumping into the problem let us define the business requirement: As an Administrator I want to be able to audit all changes that were done to specific collection inside my Azure Cosmos DB. The requirement is simple, but can be a little tricky to implement fully. First of all when you are using Azure Cosmos DB or any other storage solution there are 99% odds that you’ll have more than one system that writes data to it. This means that you have or not have control on the systems that are doing any create/update/delete operations. Solution 1: Diagnostic Logs Cosmos DB allows us activate diagnostics logs and stream the output a storage account for achieving to other systems like Event Hub or Log Analytics. This would allow us to have information related to who, when, what, response code and how the access operation to our Cosmos DB was done. Beside this there is a field that specifies what was th...

Can User Technical Profile Influence AI Architecture Decisions?

In the last few days, I ran a small experiment on Devin/Windsurf/Cascade, BMAD, and LLM-based architecture decisions. The initial concern was simple: if an AI coding assistant knows something about the user, for example, that the user is a Java developer or a .NET developer, can this information influence the architecture and technology stack that the AI will propose? This question is important because many companies are starting to use AI tools not only for coding but also for product discovery, architecture, documentation, and technical decision-making. If the AI is influenced by the developer's personal profile, the result may not be fully neutral. It may look like a business or architecture decision, but in reality, it may be partially shaped by the context of the person using the tool. The test was done using BMAD with Devin/Windsurf/Cascade. The scenario was a unified field service operations platform. The task was to let BMAD refine the product, define the architecture and s...

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see...