Retrieving SQL Server data with type providers and exposing it with ASP.NET Web APIs in F#
Luca Bolognese -For a good introduction on how to use Web APIs in F#, read here. The starting point for type providers is here. This post is about how I solved a practical problem using these technologies.
First, let’s discuss the scenario. In my company, we needed to log usage information for our various applications to a central repository and build a web site to access such information. I went through three different architectures for such a requirement, ending with the set of technologies described in the title.
I found the intersection of the SQL type provider with the ASP.NET Web Api to be very sweet. Personally, I think this mix is much better than using the WFC Data Services, because the code you have to write and the infrastructure to maintain is significantly less.
I suspect that the F# team and ASP.Net team didn’t talk to each other. It all happens because of a well defined interface (IQueryable) that both teams happen to work against.
1st version, heavy Javascript
- SQL Server Express backend
- WFC Data Services middle tier in C# (autogenerated REST service from a table, you can query from the JS code)
- Plenty of Javascript in the browser, calling back to the REST web services through Ajax
Here is an example of the kind of manipulation done in the JS layer:
function extractVersions(sessions) {
var versions = {}
$.each(sessions, function (i, s) {
if (typeof versions[s.Version] == 'undefined') {
versions[s.Version] = 0
} else {
versions[s.Version] = versions[s.Version] + 1
}
})
var vs = []
for (var prop in versions) {
if (versions.hasOwnProperty(prop))
vs.push({ Version: prop, Sessions: versions[prop] })
}
return vs;
}
Pros:
- Back-end autogenerated
- I’ve learned JS pretty well
Cons:
- Plenty of autogenerated code (crap) to debug into when things go wrong
- Difficult to customize the back-end
- Somehow slow, even if today’s JS engines are pretty good
- More time consuming to create and maintain JS code (compared to F# or C#)
- Aesthetically unsatisfying, as you really would like to do most manipulations on the server
2nd version, SOAP like web services
- SQL Server Express backend
- SOAP like web services middle tier in C# (coded by hand), still using the WCF Data Services infrastructure
- Little Javascript in the browser exclusively for presentation, calling back to the REST web services through Ajax
Here is how one of the web services would look like:
[WebGet]
public IEnumerable<VersionSessions> GetVersionsForMonth(string application,
bool isQS, bool isAD)
{
var sessions = GetSessionsForMonth(application, isQS, isAD);
var hash = new Dictionary<string, VersionSessions>();
foreach (var s in sessions)
{
VersionSessions vs;
var found = hash.TryGetValue(s.Version, out vs);
if (!found)
hash[s.Version] = new VersionSessions { Version = s.Version,
Sessions = 0 };
else
vs.Sessions += 1;
}
return hash.Values;
}
Pros:
- Maintainable business logic code (C# instead of JS)
- Somehow faster
- Easier to customize the back-end (just add another web service with the signature you want)
Cons:
- Still plenty of manipulation code (at least now on the back-end), not very RESTy
- Feels that the webservice are very ad-hoc for this particular presentation (i.e. a ViewModel, not a model)
- Still not trivial to customize the back-end logic, mostly because I was using WCF Data Services, which are opaque
3rd version, using SQL Views and F# type providers
- Moved the whole app to a dedicated VM
- SQL Server backend with a significant layer of Views and inline table-value functions
- Proper REST web services created through ASP.NET Web API and F# type providers
- Little Javascript in the browser exclusively for presentation, calling back to the REST web services through Ajax
- Moved all external ‘reference file’ (i.e. people in QS) to the DB. Before I was keeping business info in the database and config info in files.
Here is an example of an inline table value function:
ALTER FUNCTION [dbo].[FUsers] (@App nvarchar(40))
RETURNS TABLE
AS
RETURN
(
SELECT UserAlias, MAX(Application) AS Application, MAX(Start) AS LastSessionStart, MAX(Finish) AS LastSessionFinish, DATEDIFF(MINUTE, MAX(Start), MAX(Finish)) AS LastSessionTotalTime, COUNT(*) AS Sessions, MAX(Machine) AS Machine, MAX(Version) AS Version, MAX(Qs) AS Qs
FROM dbo.VTotalSessions AS s
WHERE (TotalTime > 30) and (Application = @App)
GROUP BY UserAlias)
And here is an example of a type provider based web service. Most of my code works like this:
type usersController() =
inherit ApiController()
let db = dbSchema.GetDataContext()
member x.Get() =
query {
for u in db.VUsers do
select u
}
member x.Get(app) =
query {
for u in db.FUsers(app) do
select u
}
member x.Post (value:string) = ()
member x.Put (id:int) (value:string) = ()
member x.Delete (id:int) = ()
Here is how a query is represented in JS (the whole query gets passed through to SQL, both the JS part and the F# part, IQueryable magick):
function loadOpenSessions(app, qs, cont) {
var query = new oQuery()
.From("/users/" + app)
.Let("lastMonth", lastMonth)
.Let("twoMinutesAgo", twoMinutesAgo)
.Where("item => item.LastSessionFinish > $twoMinutesAgo")
.Orderby("UserAlias")
commonCall(query, qs, cont)
}
Pros:
- Purely functional business logic code (SQL), very easy to debug problems by just running the query/view
- Maximum usage of SQL Server optimizer. As they say in the SQL Engine Team: “we’ve spent decades optimizing sql query engines. You are unlikely to do better with your ‘for’ loops …”
- Very easy to customize the back-end, just write F# code to implement GET/POST/PUT/DELETE etc…
- Moving all the state for the app (reference files included) in the DB, makes it much easier to integrate it into the business logic. It all becomes a big query for the optimizer to sort out.
- No autogenerated code anywhere in the architecture
- More separation between model and viewmodel. Tables are model, Views are ViewModel, F# is just a way to expose such view model to the world at large
Cons:
- Routing algorithm for ASP.NET Web API is mysterious. It’s the only black box piece in the architecture (aka that I don’t understand it).
- Sometimes either SQL is not powerful enough (I abhor Stored procedures on religious grounds) or something doesn’t map well to a REST metaphor. In such cases I have diluted the metaphor as in the code below. The good thing is that, being just code, I can do that. I’m not blocked.
type statsController() =
inherit ApiController()
let db = dbSchema.GetDataContext()
member x.Get(app:string, isQs:string, call:string) =
match call with
| "WeeklyUsers" ->
let sessions = query {
for s in db.VTotalSessionsAndWeeks do
where (s.Application = app && s.Qs = Nullable (Int32.Parse(isQs)))
select s
}
weeklyUsers sessions
| "WeeklyTime" ->
let sessions = query {
for s in db.FTotalTime(app, Nullable (Int32.Parse(isQs))) do
select s
}
weeklyTime sessions
| "HourlyUsers"->
let users = query {
for u in db.FHourlyUsers(app, Nullable (Int32.Parse(isQs))) do
select u }
hourlyUsers users
| _ -> failwith "No call with that name"
Tags
- FSHARP
2 Comments
Comments
tomas.k
2012-09-04T16:09:41ZHi. You could do even better with WebSharper ;) I recommend it from my own experience - it is pure F# - no need to know ASP.NET Web API, REST…
Cheers,
Tomas
lucabol
2012-09-04T16:59:16ZI’m sure it is lovely. I am a bit scared by the amount of magic involved, but I’m sure I’ll get over it.