Logo
programming4us
programming4us
programming4us
programming4us
Home
programming4us
XP
programming4us
Windows Vista
programming4us
Windows 7
programming4us
Windows Azure
programming4us
Windows Server
programming4us
Windows Phone
 
Windows Azure

SOA with .NET and Windows Azure : Service Performance Optimization Techniques

6/4/2011 6:34:08 PM
- Windows 10 Product Activation Keys Free 2019
- How to active Windows 8 without product key
- Malwarebytes Premium 3.7.1 Serial Keys (LifeTime) 2019
Tuning service runtime performance will improve the utilization of individual services as well as the performance of service compositions that aggregate these services. Even though it is important to optimize every service architecture, agnostic services in particular, need to be carefully tuned to maximize their potential for reuse and recomposition.

Because the logic within a service is comprised of the collective logic of service capabilities, we need to begin by focusing on performance optimization on the service capability level.

In this section we will explore several approaches for reducing the duration of service capability processing. The upcoming techniques specifically focus on avoiding redundant processing, minimizing idle time, minimizing concurrent access to shared resources, and optimizing the data transfer between service capabilities and service consumers.

Caching to Avoid Costly Processing

Let’s first look at the elimination of unnecessary processing inside a service capability.

Specifically what we’ll be focusing on is:

  • avoidance of repeating calculations if the result doesn’t change

  • avoidance of costly database access if the data doesn’t change

  • developing a better performing implementation of capability logic

  • delegating costly capability logic to specialized hardware solutions

  • avoidance of costly XML transformations by designing service contracts with canonical schemas

A common means of reducing the quantity of processing is to avoid duplication of redundant capabilities through caching. Instead of executing the same capability twice, you simply store the results of the capability the first time and return the stored results the next time they are requested. Figure 1 shows a flow chart that illustrates a simple caching solution.

Figure 1. Caching the results of expensive business process activities can significantly improve performance.

For example, it doesn’t make sense to retrieve data from a database more than once if the data is known to not change (or at least known not to change frequently). Reading data from a database requires communication between the service logic and the database. In many cases it even requires communication over a network connection.

There is a lot of overhead just in setting up this type of communication and then there’s the effort of assembling the results of the query in the database. You can avoid all of this processing by avoiding database calls after the initial retrieval of the results. If the results change over time, you can still improve average performance by re-reading every 100 requests (or however often).

Caching can also be effective for expensive computations, data transformations or service invocations as long as:

  • results for a given input do not change or at least do not change frequently

  • delays in visibility of different results are acceptable

  • the number of computation results or database queries is limited

  • the same results are requested frequently

  • a local cache can be accessed faster than a remotely located database

  • computation of the cache key is not more expensive than computing the output

  • increased memory requirements due to large caches do not increase paging to disk (which slows down the overall throughput)

If your service capability meets this criteria, you can remove several blocks from the performance model and replace them with cache access, as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. The business logic, resource access, and message transformation blocks are removed.

To build a caching solution you can:

  • explicitly implement caching in the code of the service

  • intercept incoming messages before the capability logic is invoked

  • centralize the caching logic into a utility caching service

Each solution has its own strengths and weaknesses. For example, explicitly implementing caching logic inside of a service capability allows you to custom-tailor this logic to that particular capability. In this case you can be selective about the cache expiration and refresh algorithms or which parameters make up the cache key. This approach can also be quite labor intensive.

Intercepting messages, on the other hand, can be an efficient solution because messages for more than one service capability can be intercepted, potentially without changing the service implementation at all.

You can intercept messages in several different places:

Intermediary

An intermediary between the service and the consumer can transparently intercept messages, inspect them to compute a cache key for the parameters, and then only forward messages to the destination service if no response for the request parameters is present in the cache (Figure 3). This approach relies on the application of Service Agent.

Figure 3. Passive intermediaries can cache responses without requiring modifications to the service or the consumer.

Service Container

This is a variation of the previous technique, but here the cache lives inside the same container as the service to avoid introducing a scalability bottleneck with the intermediary (Figure 4). Service frameworks, such as ASMX and WCF, allow for the interception of messages with an HTTP Module or a custom channel.

Figure 4. Message interception inside the service container enables caching to occur outside the service implementation without involving an intermediary.


Service Proxy

With WCF we can build consumer-side custom channels that can make the caching logic transparent to service consumers and services. Figure 5 illustrates how the cache acts as a service proxy on the consumer side before sending the request to the service. Note that with this approach you will only realize significant performance benefits if the same consumer frequently requests the same data.

Figure 5. Message interception by a service proxy inside the service consumer introduces caching logic that avoids unnecessary network communication.


Caching Utility Service

An autonomous utility service (Figure 6) can be used to provide reusable caching logic, as per the Stateful Services pattern. For this technique to work, the performance savings of the caching logic need to outweigh the performance impact introduced by the extra utility service invocation and communication. This approach can be justified if autonomy and vendor neutrality are high design priorities.

Figure 6. A utility service is explicitly invoked to handle caching.

Comparing Caching Techniques

Each option has its own trade-offs between potential performance increases and additional overhead. Table 1 provides a summary.

Table 1. The pros and cons of different service caching architectures.
 intermediaryservice containerservice proxyutility service
potential savingsmedium: service invocationmedium: service invocationhigh:

service invocation

network access
low: service invocation
extra overheadhigh:

computing cache key

additional network hop for cache miss
medium:

computing cache key

additional memory consumption on service
low:

computing cache key

additional memory consumption on service
medium:

computing cache key

additional memory consumption on service
efficiencyhigh: cache shared between all consumershigh: cache shared between all consumerslow: client specifichigh: cache shared between all consumers
change impactnone: intermediaries can be implemented without affecting existing serviceslow: server-side configuration file, not service implementationhigh: client-side configuration file, not service implementationhigh: service implementation

Cache Implementation Technologies

When you decide on a caching architecture, keep in mind that server-side message interception can still impact performance because your service will need to compute a cache key and if it ends up with an oversized cache, the cache itself can actually decrease performance (especially if multiple services run on a shared server).

The higher memory requirements of a service that caches data can lead to increased paging activity on the server as a whole. Modern 64 bit servers equipped with terabytes of memory can reduce the amount of paging activity and thus avoid any associated performance reduction. Hardware-assisted virtualization further enables you to partition hardware resources and isolate services running on the same physical hardware from each other.

You can also leverage existing libraries such as the System.Web.Caching namespace for Web applications. Solutions like System.Runtime.Caching on .NET 4.0 or the Caching Application Block from the Enterprise Library are available for all .NET-based services. These libraries include some more specialized caching features, such as item expiration and cache scavenging. REST services hosted within WCF can leverage ASP.NET caching profiles for output caching and controlling caching headers.

Furthermore, a distributed caching extension is provided with Windows Server AppFabric that offers a distributed, in-memory cache for high performance requirements associated with large-scale service processing. This extension in particular addresses the following problems of distributed and partitioned caching:

  • storing cached data in memory across multiple servers to avoid costly database queries

  • synchronizing cache content across multiple caching nodes for low latency and high scale and high availability

  • caching partitions for fast look ups and load balancing across multiple caching servers

  • local in-memory caching of cache subsets within services to reduce look up times beyond savings realized by optimizations on the caching tier

You also have several options for implementing the message interceptor. ASMX and WCF both offer extensibility points to intercept message processing before the service implementation is invoked. WCF even offers the same extensibility on the service consumer side. Table 2 lists the technology options for these caching architectures.

Table 2. Technology choices for implementing caching architectures.
 interceptioncaching
intermediaryASMX WCFcaching application block
System.Web.Caching

.NET 4: System.Runtime.Caching

AppFabric
service containerASMX: HTTP Module WCF: Custom Channelcaching application block
System.Web.Caching

.NET 4: System.Runtime.Caching

AppFabric
service proxyASMX: Custom Proxy Class WCF: Custom Channelcaching application block

AppFabric

REST: System.Net.WebClient

REST: System.Net.HttpWebRequest

.NET 4: System.Runtime.Caching
utility servicenonecaching application block

System.Web.Caching

.NET 4: System.Runtime.Caching

AppFabric

Computing Cache Keys

Let’s take a closer look at the moving parts that comprise a typical caching solution. First, we need to compute the cache key from the request message to check if we already have a matching response in the cache. Computing a generic key before the message has been deserialized is straightforward when:

  • the document format does not vary (for example, there is no optional content)

  • the messages are XML element-centric and don’t contain data in XML attributes or mixed mode content

  • the code is already working with XML documents (for example, as with XmlDocument, XmlNode or XPathNavigator objects)

  • the message design only passes reference data (not fully populated business documents)

  • the services expose RESTful endpoints where URL parameters or partial URLs contain all reference data

In these situations, you can implement a simple, generic cache key algorithm. For example, you can load the request into an XmlDocument object and get the request data by examining the InnerText property of the document’s root node. The danger here is that you could wind up with a very long and comprehensive cache key if your request message contains many data elements.

Computing a message type-specific cache key requires much more coding work and you may have to embed code for each message type. For server-side caching with ASMX Web services, for example, you would add an HTTP Module to the request processing pipeline for the service call. Inside the custom module, you can then inspect data items in the XML message content that uniquely identifies a service request and possibly bypasses the service call.

For client-side caching with ASMX, on the other hand, there is no transparent approach for adding caching logic. Custom proxy classes would have to perform all the caching-related processing. Depending on requirements and the number of service consumers, it might be easier to implement caching logic in the service consumer’s code or switch to WCF for adding caching logic transparently.

For WCF-based services, you would define a custom binding with a custom caching channel as part of the channel stack for either the service or the consumer. A custom channel allows access to perform capabilities on the Message object. Oftentimes that’s more convenient than programming against the raw XML message.

Other -----------------
- Service-Oriented Presentation Layers with .NET : A Simple Service-Oriented User Interface
- Service-Oriented Presentation Layers with .NET : Design Patterns for Presentation Logic
- Service-Oriented Presentation Layers with .NET : Windows Presentation Foundation and the Prism Library
- Working with Windows Azure Platform AppFabric Service Bus (part 2) - Defining a REST-Based Service Bus Contract & Creating the Service Bus Message Buffer
- Working with Windows Azure Platform AppFabric Service Bus (part 1) - Setting up the AppFabric Service Bus
- Windows Azure Platform AppFabric Service Bus : Service Bus Connectivity Models
- Windows Azure Platform AppFabric Service Bus : Introducing the Service Bus
- SOA with .NET and Windows Azure : Orchestration Patterns with BizTalk Server - State Repository & Compensating Service Transaction
- SOA with .NET and Windows Azure : Orchestration Patterns with BizTalk Server - Process Centralization
- Orchestration Patterns with BizTalk Server : Example
 
 
Top 10
- Microsoft Visio 2013 : Adding Structure to Your Diagrams - Finding containers and lists in Visio (part 2) - Wireframes,Legends
- Microsoft Visio 2013 : Adding Structure to Your Diagrams - Finding containers and lists in Visio (part 1) - Swimlanes
- Microsoft Visio 2013 : Adding Structure to Your Diagrams - Formatting and sizing lists
- Microsoft Visio 2013 : Adding Structure to Your Diagrams - Adding shapes to lists
- Microsoft Visio 2013 : Adding Structure to Your Diagrams - Sizing containers
- Microsoft Access 2010 : Control Properties and Why to Use Them (part 3) - The Other Properties of a Control
- Microsoft Access 2010 : Control Properties and Why to Use Them (part 2) - The Data Properties of a Control
- Microsoft Access 2010 : Control Properties and Why to Use Them (part 1) - The Format Properties of a Control
- Microsoft Access 2010 : Form Properties and Why Should You Use Them - Working with the Properties Window
- Microsoft Visio 2013 : Using the Organization Chart Wizard with new data
Popular tags
Microsoft Access Microsoft Excel Microsoft OneNote Microsoft PowerPoint Microsoft Project Microsoft Visio Microsoft Word Active Directory Biztalk Exchange Server Microsoft LynC Server Microsoft Dynamic Sharepoint Sql Server Windows Server 2008 Windows Server 2012 Windows 7 Windows 8 windows Phone 7 windows Phone 8
programming4us programming4us
Celebrity Style, Fashion Trends, Beauty and Makeup Tips.
 
programming4us
Windows Vista
programming4us
Windows 7
programming4us
Windows Azure
programming4us
Windows Server