3

I'm using Windows Azure and WF4 and my workflow service is hosted in a web-role (with N instances). My job now is find out how to do an affinity, in a way that I can send messages to the right workflow instance. To explain this scenario, my workflow (attached) starts with a "StartWorkflow" receive activity, creates 3 "Person" and, in a parallel-for-each, waits for the confirmation of these 3 people ("ConfirmCreation" Receive Activity).

I then started to search how the affinity is made in others NLB environments (mainly looked for informations about how this works on Windows Server AppFabric), but I didn't find a precise answer. So how is it done in others NLB environments?

My next task is find out how I could implement a system to handle this affinity on Windows Azure and how much would this solution cost (in price, time and amount of work) to see if its viable or if it's better to work with only one web-role instance while we wait for the WF4 host for the Azure AppFabric. The only way I found was to persist the workflow instance. Is there other ways of doing this?

My third, but not last, task is to find out how WF4 handles multiple messages received at the same time. In my scenario, this means how it would handle if the 3 people confirmed at the same time and the confirmation messages are also received at the same time. Since the most logical answer for this problem seems to be to use a queue, I started looking for information about queues on WF4 and found people speaking about MSQM. But what is the native WF4 messages handler system? Is this handler really a queue or is it another system? How is this concurrency handled?

abatishchev
  • 98,240
  • 88
  • 296
  • 433
Bruno Lima
  • 33
  • 3
  • Its traditional to ask a single question at a time. –  Mar 21 '11 at 15:09
  • I thought that explaining my whole scenario would be better to you all understand my situation. But I'll ask one question at a time for now on. – Bruno Lima Mar 22 '11 at 17:27
  • You can always link back to a question in a series, if each question is different but adds context to the current question... –  Mar 22 '11 at 18:45

2 Answers2

2

You shouldn't need any affinity. In fact that's kinda the whole point of durable Workflows. Whilst your workflow is waiting for this confirmation it should be persisted and unloaded from any one server.

As far as persistence goes for Windows Azure you would either need to hack the standard SQL persistence scripts so that they work on SQL Azure or write your own InstanceStore implementation that sits on top of Azure Storage. We have done the latter for a workflow we're running in Azure, but I'm unable to share the code. On a scale of 1 to 10 for effort, I'd rank it around an 8.

As far as multiple messages, what will happen is the messages will be received and delivered to the workflow instance one message at a time. Now, it's possible that every one of those messages goes to the same server or maybe each one goes to a diff. server. No matter how it happens, the workflow runtime will attempt to load the workflow from the instance store, see that it is currently locked and block/retry until the workflow becomes available to process the next message. So you don't have to worry about concurrent access to the same workflow instance as long as you configure everything correctly and the InstanceStore implementation is doing its job.

Here's a few other suggestions:

  • Make sure you use the PersistBeforeSend option on your SendReply actvities
  • Configure the following workflow service options
    • <workflowIdle timeToUnload="00:00:00" />
    • <sqlWorkflowInstanceStore ... instanceLockedExceptionAction="AggressiveRetry" />
Drew Marsh
  • 33,111
  • 3
  • 82
  • 100
1

Using the out of the box SQL instance store with SQL Azure is a bit of a problem at the moment with the Azure 1.3 SDK as each deployment, even if you made 0 code changes, results in a new service deployment meaning that already persisted workflows can't continue. That is a bug that will be solved but a PITA for now.

As Drew said your workflow instance should just move from server to server as needed, no need to pin it to a specific machine. And even if you could that would hurt scalability and reliability so something to be avoided.

Sending messages through MSMQ using the WCF NetMsmqBinding works just fine. Internally WF uses a completely different mechanism called bookmarks that allow a workflow to stop and resume. Each Receive activity, as well as others like Delay, will create a bookmark and wait for that to be resumed. You can only resume existing bookmarks. Even resuming a bookmark is not a direct action but put into an internal queue, not MSMQ, by the workflow scheduler and executed through a SynchronizationContext. You get no control over the scheduler but you can replace the SynchronizationContext when using the WorkflowApplication and so get some control over how and where activities are executed.

Maurice
  • 27,582
  • 5
  • 49
  • 62