Monday, March 10, 2008

I've been working on the PostSharp4EF project of EFContrib. I'm pleased to announce relationships are now supported.

This actually proved to be somewhat more work, because of all the things that are happening behind the scenes.
Entity Framework expects EdmRelationshipNavigationProperty attributes on top of the property that points to a relationship. But there is also the giant EdmRelationshipAttribute with about 8 constructor parameters.
So, I now generate these for you.

The next step was to actually get the relationship for you. I do that by removing the backing field, and replacing it with methods that access the relationshipmanager to get the relationship.

I do not want you to work directly with EF types, but you will need a way to Load relationships. So, I've introduced an interface with the appropriate Load and IsLoaded methods. Just in case you do want to hook into the EntityCollection and EntityReference, I've also supplied methods on that interface that will get you these types.

Let's look at a domain model:

  0 [Poco("SimpleRelationshipTestEntities")]
  1  public class Customer
  2 {
  3   public int CustomerID { get; set; }
  4   public string Name { get; set; }
  6   public ICollection<Car> Cars { get; set; }
  8   public ICollection<Order> Orders { get; set; }
  9 }
  11 [Poco("SimpleRelationshipTestEntities")]
  12  public class Car
  13 {
  14   public int CarID { get; set; }
  15   public string Make { get; set; }
  17   public Customer Customer { get; set; }
  19 }
  21 [Poco("SimpleRelationshipTestEntities")]
  22  public class Order
  23 {
  24   public int OrderID { get; set; }
  25   public int Amount { get; set; }
  27   public Customer Customer { get; set; }
  30 }

You might notice that I do not expose the concrete EF types, but instead expose ICollections.
After compilation, you can use this domainmodel like this:

  0    using (SimpleRelationshipTestEntities context = new SimpleRelationshipTestEntities())
  1    {
  3     foreach (Car oldCar in context.Car)
  4     {
  5      IRelationshipLoader noLazyLoading = PostSharp.Post.Cast<Car, IRelationshipLoader>(oldCar);
  7      bool wasLoaded = noLazyLoading.IsLoaded("Customer");
  9      EntityReference<Customer> cu = noLazyLoading.GetRelatedReference<Customer>("Customer");
  10      cu.Load();
  12      wasLoaded = noLazyLoading.IsLoaded("Customer");
  13     }
  17     // clear out database
  18     foreach (Customer old in context.Customer)
  19     {
  20      IRelationshipLoader noLazyLoading = PostSharp.Post.Cast<Customer, IRelationshipLoader>(old);
  22      bool wasLoaded = noLazyLoading.IsLoaded("Orders");
  24      noLazyLoading.Load("Orders");
  25      wasLoaded = noLazyLoading.IsLoaded("Orders");
  27      EntityCollection<Order> orders = noLazyLoading.GetRelatedCollection<Order>("Orders");
  29      context.DeleteObject(old);
  30     }
  31     context.SaveChanges();
  34     Customer c = new Customer { Name = "Ruurd Boeke" };
  35     Customer c2 = new Customer { Name = "Test Customer" };
  36     Car car = new Car { Make = "Ferrari" };
  37     Order o1 = new Order { Amount = 10 };
  38     Order o2 = new Order { Amount = 20 };
  39     Order o3 = new Order { Amount = 30 };
  41     car.Customer = c;
  42     car.Customer = c2// can re assign test
  44     // add customer on order
  45     o1.Customer = c;
  46     o2.Customer = c;
  47     // add order on customer, new way
  48     c.Orders.Add(o3);
  52     context.AddToCustomer(c);
  53     context.AddToCustomer(c2);
  54     context.SaveChanges();
  55    }
  56   }

Points of interest:
Line 5 casts your object to the implemented interface. This is checked at compile-time, so no worries about breaking at runtime. Using this cast, I can get to the EF types like I do at line 9 and line 27. Obviously, if you were inclined, you could place these methods on your domain classes. It does couple you to EF more though and clutters the code.

Next up are complex types. When that's done, I'm finished.

Quite pleased with this actually! ;-)

Monday, March 10, 2008 5:56:40 PM (Romance Standard Time, UTC+01:00)  #    Comments [5]  |  Trackback
 Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Finally, very exciting!! Scott released it at Mix 08.

Go get it here.

It seems they have released an Expression Blend version to match. Cool!
Also 2000 thousand unittests are released.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:33:26 PM (Romance Standard Time, UTC+01:00)  #    Comments [0]  |  Trackback

the Oredev-conference posted video's of it's sessions online here.

I've just browsed the sessions that were held at this big conference, and it looks interesting. Many famous names, like Erik Meijer, Joe Duffy, Jimmy Nilsson (I read his book), Mats Helander and many others.

The conference has specific tracks: Java, .Net, Methods & Tools, Test, Project Management, Embedded System, Architecture and User Experience.

So sit back, relax, have a beer and hear great people explain important topics to you.

Just a quick tip: you can only watch the video's inside a browser. If you try to download, you will get a very small file. Open that with notepad and look for the rts: address at the very end. Copy paste the url into a good media player like VLC which knows how to deal with streams, and you will be able to watch more comfortably. I did this, because I could not scale the webversion and I had no way of scrubbing through the video.

kick it on

Wednesday, March 05, 2008 5:48:13 PM (Romance Standard Time, UTC+01:00)  #    Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Ever since I first got into workflow foundation, I've taken a fancy to statemachines. Once you wrap your head around them, they are a natural fit for most business processes.
The main problem everybody seems to be having with workflow though, is the versioning story. There is none!
That might be a bit harsh, you can certainly version your workflows, but to tell you the truth, you will be in a world of hurt.

The sample solution can be downloaded at the end of the post. It contains two workflows and a console application that you can play with.

Why is this updating so tough?
The workflow template is serialized to the persistence store. Any change in the workflow (adding or removing an activity) will make it impossible to deserialize the workflow again. It's serialized as a blob, so no easy transformation. I've written extensively about problems surrounding updating workflows here.

Your options pretty much exist of running side by side (which gives you a world of even more hurt, because now you have your data exchange services to version as well, and the activity library you have built) or use dynamic changes to alter the structure.
The latter being your best bet, but so much work that it takes away from the flexibility and speed of development that workflow brings to the table.

In my previous post I concluded that you would be best of just destroying your old workflow and create a new one. I stand by that! Today I was finally able to revisit the problem, and I hacked together a solution that might be interesting to people.

This solution has the following restriction:

It will only work for statemachines, that are waiting inside a state for an eventdriven activity, not inside an eventdriven activity. In other words: it is only able to update workflows that have entered a state and started waiting, not ones that have executed a few activities and is now waiting on some other input within a sequence.

Luckily for me, that is no problem at all, and it should not be a problem for you either. Statemachines should be modeled such that waiting happens when entered in a state, never inside a sequence. You can model waits inside a sequence, but I would suggest you make the delays short (minutes, as opposed to days/months/years).

My goal here is to be able to do a relatively easy update, where I have control over how I update (what to do with state etc.) and get my delays initialized to the correct timeouts again. So, in workflow1 I had a delay of 11 months, with 8 months left. When I start workflow2 and update, I need to have 8 months left again, and not 11.

Getting the delays right is the hard part.

I use some nice reflection to get to the actual type of a workflow instance. I described how to do that here. However, I was being silly. It's much easier:

            Workflow1 oldWF = workflowRuntime.GetRootActivity(instance) as Workflow1;

Made possible by these extensions:

    public static class WFExtensions
        public static object GetExecutor(this WorkflowRuntime workflowRuntime, WorkflowInstance instance)
            return workflowRuntime.GetType().InvokeMember(
                "Load", BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.InvokeMethod, null, workflowRuntime,
                new object[] { instance.InstanceId, null, instance });
        public static object GetRootActivity(this WorkflowRuntime workflowRuntime, WorkflowInstance instance)
            object executor = workflowRuntime.GetExecutor(instance);
            return executor.GetType().GetField("rootActivity",
                    BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.GetField).GetValue(executor) as CompositeActivity;

So, here goes:

  1. Get to your old workflow instance. In my sample I use types Workflow1 and Workflow2.
                WorkflowInstance instance = runtime.GetWorkflow(g);
                WorkflowRuntime workflowRuntime = runtime;
                Workflow1 oldWF = workflowRuntime.GetRootActivity(instance) as Workflow1;
                if (oldWF == null)
                object executor = workflowRuntime.GetExecutor(instance);
                instance.Suspend("asdf");   // need not to unload, otherwise the database record would be unlocked

    I suspend the workflow, so it does not get into the way, but I can not unload, or worse: terminate. That would kill the record in the database.

  2. Create a new workflow, of your desired type, and copy the workflowInstanceID to it:
                // get a handle to the instanceid property
                DependencyProperty instanceidDP = (DependencyProperty)executor.GetType().GetField("WorkflowInstanceIdProperty",
                    BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.Instance).GetValue(executor);
                // create new wf2, not starting it yet
                WorkflowInstance newWFInstance = workflowRuntime.CreateWorkflow(typeof(Workflow2));
                Workflow2 newWF = workflowRuntime.GetRootActivity(newWFInstance) as Workflow2;
                // copy the guid
                newWF.SetValue(instanceidDP, instance.InstanceId);
  3. Build up a list of activities that are on timers and remember their name and when they expire:
                Dictionary<string, DateTime> activitiesExpireList = new Dictionary<string, DateTime>();
                TimerEventSubscriptionCollection subscriptions = ((TimerEventSubscriptionCollection)
                foreach (TimerEventSubscription subscription in subscriptions)
                    // find out what activity was subscribed
                    var x = from queueInfo in instance.GetWorkflowQueueData()
                            where subscription.QueueName.GetType().Equals(queueInfo.QueueName.GetType())
                            where subscription.QueueName.CompareTo(queueInfo.QueueName) == 0
                            select new { ExpiresAt = subscription.ExpiresAt, Activities = queueInfo.SubscribedActivityNames };
                    foreach (var combination in x)
                        foreach (string activityname in combination.Activities)
                            activitiesExpireList.Add(activityname, combination.ExpiresAt);

    The weird part being the fact that the queue names are mostly guids (for delays atleast).

  4. Call a method on your new type. See how cool it is we can actually communicate this way with it, instead of having to go through communication services!!
                // allow new workflow to read information from old workflow to init itself.
                newWF.Update(oldWF, instance, activitiesExpireList);
  5. Copy the new workflow to the rootactivity of our executor. Ouch.. yeah.. don't worry.
                // copy the new rootactivity to the executor
                    BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.GetField).SetValue(executor, newWF);
  6. Last bits:
                // start it up
                newWFInstance.Unload(); // overwrites current record in persistence store
                instance.Abort();   // kills of our original
                newWFInstance = runtime.GetWorkflow(g);
                StateMachineWorkflowInstance statemachine = new StateMachineWorkflowInstance(runtime, g);
                // still need to unload or unload the runtime to get all timers correctly!
                Console.WriteLine("updated" + newWFInstance.InstanceId);

    You can see me starting and unloading, then killing our old instance. Finally I am trying to be smart by using the statemachineworkflowinstance to do a transition to a new state on the new workflow. The newstate can be determined by the new workflow (who has knowledge of these things) but is usually the same as in your old workflow. (This was build so that you could rename a state).

  7. That's it. In the Workflow2 class, I have an update method, which will set a boolean to true. The initialization activity will look for it in an if/else and not do anything if it is set to true. All the delays in the new workflow have an initTimeout method like so:
            private void initTimeout(object sender, EventArgs e)
                DelayActivity delay = (DelayActivity)sender;
                if (activitiesExpireList.ContainsKey(delay.Name))
                    delay.TimeoutDuration = activitiesExpireList[delay.Name].Subtract(DateTime.Now.ToUniversalTime());

I have uploaded the complete sample here.

When you run it, you can press 'c' to create a new workflow of type Workflow1. Then you can press 'u' and paste in the guid of the workflow just created. It will update the workflow. Pressing 'b' will break and unload the workflow.
Your created workflow has this state:


Where the delay is 40 seconds. Workflow2 has the same state, but has a delay of only 10 seconds.

As a test you can see that after updating, you will have a workflow2 running (there is another activity present that will print out debug information). The delay was set correctly.

Obviously, you might want to deal with the delays your own way. Because you have all the information in your workflow codebehind, you can think of your own rules on how the delay timeouts should be set.

Realize that touching the internals of WF like this is not what Microsoft envisioned and should be done with care.

Have fun, and let me know what you think.

kick it on

Tuesday, March 04, 2008 11:56:35 PM (Romance Standard Time, UTC+01:00)  #    Comments [15]  |  Trackback