Skip to main content

Configuration files horror

Nowadays, working with services is pretty simple. Almost anybody can create a WCF service and expose functionalists  The same thing is with WCF clients. .NET development environment can create the client proxy very easily.
When we are creating the client proxy, a part of the configuration will be added to the configuration file. In the configuration files we will find the URL of the service, which will be modified a lot of time during the development phase. We can have a testing service, a mock service, a development service and so on.
If the client and the service can be hosted on the same machine, than developers will be happy, but the configuration files will be a mess. They will forget that they change the URL address and they will make commits with this change. A part of them will use “localhost”, other part will use the machine name.
When you end up in a project with 40, 50 or almost 100 configuration files, changing the URL can become a time consuming process. Not only this, but you cannot use find and replace because each developer had a different machine name.
What we can do in this case? The simplest solution is to try to use different configuration file. From some time ago, Visual Studio support to have different configuration files for debug, release and we can even define custom versions. Each developer can have a version of the configuration file that will not end up on the source control.
To help developers, we can create a script that will generate the local configuration files for developers. In this way they will not have any kind of excuse that they change the configuration files.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to check in AngularJS if a service was register or not

There are cases when you need to check in a service or a controller was register in AngularJS.
For example a valid use case is when you have the same implementation running on multiple application. In this case, you may want to intercept the HTTP provider and add a custom step there. This step don’t needs to run on all the application, only in the one where the service exist and register.
A solution for this case would be to have a flag in the configuration that specify this. In the core you would have an IF that would check the value of this flag.
Another solution is to check if a specific service was register in AngularJS or not. If the service was register that you would execute your own logic.
To check if a service was register or not in AngularJS container you need to call the ‘has’ method of ‘inhector’. It will return TRUE if the service was register.
if ($injector.has('httpInterceptorService')) { $httpProvider.interceptors.push('httpInterceptorService&#…

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 4.51EF 6.0.2VS2013
It seems that there …

Entity Framework (EF) TransactionScope vs Database.BeginTransaction

In today blog post we will talk a little about a new feature that is available on EF6+ related to Transactions.
Until now, when we had to use transaction we used ‘TransactionScope’. It works great and I would say that is something that is now in our blood.
using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required)) { using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("...")) { conn.Open(); SqlCommand sqlCommand = new SqlCommand(); sqlCommand.Connection = conn; sqlCommand.CommandText = ... sqlCommand.ExecuteNonQuery(); ... } scope.Complete(); } Starting with EF6.0 we have a new way to work with transactions. The new approach is based on Database.BeginTransaction(), Database.Rollback(), Database.Commit(). Yes, no more TransactionScope.
In the followi…