It’s been nearly a year since I published my method for getting one NHibernate session per WCF operation using Castle’s NHibernate Facility and AutoTx AOP Facility — a method I developed for an application which was having serious session management issues (it was using one session per SQL statement). However, today I ripped it all out.
The method itself still works. There’s nothing wrong with it. As long as you’re only doing one session per WCF operation (or one session per ASP.NET MVC request for that matter), it works great. However, problems arise when you mix other session styles.
For example, our application has a series of long-running background threads for processing jobs on a queue (up to an hour each) — as well as synchronous WCF operations — all requiring NHibernate. In this case, the one-size-fits-all approach using AOP and the container simply couldn’t give us the control we needed over each session’s lifetime, so we removed the Facility from our Windsor container, and instead now do:
- Register the ISessionFactory in the container, singleton scoped.
- Inject ISessionFactory and call
ITransaction.Commit()at outer boundaries of your application (e.g. WCF service implementations), and background jobs executing outside the context of a WCF operation.
- Pass ISession down through your application as a parameter into any methods that access the database. Callees must not hold any reference to it, or try to manage its lifestyle (e.g. closing it, opening their own transactions etc).
(Note: all NHibernate calls are wrapped in a transaction and committed. Even if they are only SELECT statements, it’s still a good practice.)
It has more-or-less the same end effect as AutoTx facility and CallContext-scoped SessionManager, but with the added control of being able to explicitly manage session lifetimes in other situations. It’s a few more lines of code, but it’s also a good example of stop trying to hide your ORM, and just embrace the ISession directly. And a reminder that technical solutions are never infallible, no matter how elegant they might seem.April 22, 2011