Maik Posts - Answer Overflow

Maik

•Created by Maik on 1/17/2025 in #help

DI Service Usage in Quartz.NET registration

I am using Quartz.NET as my scheduling framework, because Quartz.NET has a built-in support for persistent storage, which solves many problems for me out of the box. The problem is the configuration of the connection string for the database. I got a scoped service which resolves the database connection string, since the appsettings.json only includes the template connection string. The actual user and password comes from a vault during startup. Therefore I have to use the service. As far as I know, Quartz.NET has no overload to utilize the IServiceProvider. Because of that I created this overload method

public static IServiceCollection AddQuartz(
  this IServiceCollection services,
  Action<IServiceProvider, IServiceCollectionQuartzConfigurator> configure)
{
  var serviceProvider = services.BuildServiceProvider();

  services.AddQuartz(configurator => configure(serviceProvider, configurator));

  return services;
}

public static IServiceCollection AddQuartz(
  this IServiceCollection services,
  Action<IServiceProvider, IServiceCollectionQuartzConfigurator> configure)
{
  var serviceProvider = services.BuildServiceProvider();

  services.AddQuartz(configurator => configure(serviceProvider, configurator));

  return services;
}

Which allows me to do this

services.AddQuartz((serviceProvider, configuration) =>
{
  // Other configuration...

  var connectionString = serviceProvider
    .GetRequiredService<ISecretConnectionStringProvider>()
    .GetDatabaseConnectionString();

  configuration.UsePersistentStore(storeOptions =>
  {
    // Other configuration...

    storeOptions.UsePostgres(postgresOptions =>
    {
      postgresOptions.ConnectionString = connectionString;
    });
  });
});

services.AddQuartz((serviceProvider, configuration) =>
{
  // Other configuration...

  var connectionString = serviceProvider
    .GetRequiredService<ISecretConnectionStringProvider>()
    .GetDatabaseConnectionString();

  configuration.UsePersistentStore(storeOptions =>
  {
    // Other configuration...

    storeOptions.UsePostgres(postgresOptions =>
    {
      postgresOptions.ConnectionString = connectionString;
    });
  });
});

My question is if there is a better alternative? Somehow I am unhappy with the solution. I dont know why but it feels wrong.

38 replies

CC#

•Created by Maik on 6/7/2024 in #help

Resolving correct DbContext depending on ???

Hey everyone, I'm building a modular application with ASP.NET 8 and using the inbox/outbox pattern for communication between modules. Scenario: - Module A receives an integration event. - I want to store this event in the database using a generic IInboxRepository. - Challenge: Each module has its own DbContext for its specific data. How can I design my IInboxRepository to resolve the correct DbContext and save the integration event in the appropriate inbox table for the originating module? Right now I am thinking about something like this, but I don't like it to be honest. I don't know why lol

public interface IDbContext
{
    DbSet<TEntity> Set<TEntity>() where TEntity : class;

    Task<int> SaveChangesAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
}

public interface IInboxRepository<T>
    where T : IDbContext
{
    Task AddAndSaveAsync(IIntegrationEvent integrationEvent, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
}

public sealed class GenericIntegrationEventHandler<TEvent, TDbContext>(
    IInboxRepository<TDbContext> inboxRepository)
    : IIntegrationEventHandler<TEvent>
    where TEvent : class, IIntegrationEvent
    where TDbContext : IDbContext
{
    private readonly IInboxRepository<TDbContext> _inboxRepository = inboxRepository;

    public async Task Handle(TEvent notification, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
    {
        await _inboxRepository.AddAndSaveAsync(notification, cancellationToken);
    }
}

public sealed class InboxRepository<T>(T dbContext)
    : IInboxRepository<T>
    where T : IDbContext
{
    private readonly T _dbContext = dbContext;

    public async Task AddAndSaveAsync(IIntegrationEvent integrationEvent, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default)
    {
        // Do stuff here
    }
}

public interface IDbContext
{
    DbSet<TEntity> Set<TEntity>() where TEntity : class;

    Task<int> SaveChangesAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
}

public interface IInboxRepository<T>
    where T : IDbContext
{
    Task AddAndSaveAsync(IIntegrationEvent integrationEvent, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
}

public sealed class GenericIntegrationEventHandler<TEvent, TDbContext>(
    IInboxRepository<TDbContext> inboxRepository)
    : IIntegrationEventHandler<TEvent>
    where TEvent : class, IIntegrationEvent
    where TDbContext : IDbContext
{
    private readonly IInboxRepository<TDbContext> _inboxRepository = inboxRepository;

    public async Task Handle(TEvent notification, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
    {
        await _inboxRepository.AddAndSaveAsync(notification, cancellationToken);
    }
}

public sealed class InboxRepository<T>(T dbContext)
    : IInboxRepository<T>
    where T : IDbContext
{
    private readonly T _dbContext = dbContext;

    public async Task AddAndSaveAsync(IIntegrationEvent integrationEvent, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default)
    {
        // Do stuff here
    }
}

Does anybody know how I could design this better? Or maybe someone has a complete different approach? I highly appreciate any kind of help

3 replies

Gaming

Programming