blocks|key|2173014|text|也许是吧。docs声明|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|2173015|2173016|+Close方法允许在返回之前完成任何未完成的工作。例如，完成所有缓冲消息的发送。|blockquote|2173017|2173018|2173019|Close()有一个重载，它需要一个TimeSpan+(如果超过timespan，则为throws+)|style|CODE|2173020|Abort()看起来是无延迟停止WCF主机的最好方法。|2173021|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms405496.aspx^0|5|4|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|7|I|8|17|6|0|0|7|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@$A|Y|B|Z|1|10]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|11|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|E|3|F|5|G|7|12|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|13|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|I|3|-4|5|6|7|14|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|15|8|@$A|16|B|17|L|M]|$A|18|B|19|L|M]|$A|1A|B|1B|L|M]]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|N|3|O|5|6|7|1C|8|@$A|1D|B|1E|L|M]]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|P|3|-4|5|6|7|1F|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|Q|$R|$5|S|T|U|C|$V|W]]]]

It may be. The <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms405496.aspx" rel="noreferrer">docs</a> state that

<blockquote>
 The Close method allows any unfinished
 work to be completed before returning.
 For example, finish sending any
 buffered messages.
</blockquote>

There is an overload to <code>Close()</code> which takes a <code>TimeSpan</code> (and <code>throws</code> if the timespan is exceeded)

<code>Abort()</code> looks like the best way to stop a WCF host without delay.

blocks|key|258898|text|确保关闭客户端连接，如下所示：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|258899|var+channel+=+factory.CreateChannel();
var+channel.DoSomethingForMe();
(channel+as+ICommunicationObject).Close();|code-block|syntax|javascript|258900|如果不在通道上执行Close()，那么服务器上的Close()会等待很长一段时间，即使您指定了很短的超时。|258901|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|G|3|H|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|I|3|-4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|J|$]]

Make sure you're closing the client-side connection, like this:

<pre><code>var channel = factory.CreateChannel();
var channel.DoSomethingForMe();
(channel as ICommunicationObject).Close();
</code></pre>

If you don't do this Close() on the channel, Close() on the server waits a very, very long time, even if you specify a short timeout.

blocks|key|2166621|text|如果您不介意终止任何正在进行的服务调用，那么Abort()是可行的方法。Close()是关闭服务的一种礼貌方式。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|2166622|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

If you are ok with killing any in-progress service calls then Abort() is the way to go. Close() is the polite way of closing down a service.

blocks|key|5216365|text|为了权宜之计，我可以看到Abort()比Close()的好处，但我可以想象可能会发生一些不好的事情。在我的例子中，我想等待Close()，这样我就可以重用端口。此代码将等待服务实际关闭后再恢复。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|5216366|Semaphore+cont=new+Semaphore(0,+1);
foreach+(ServiceHost+s+in+WCFServices)+{
++++try+{
++++++++s.Closed+%2B=+delegate(Object+o,+System.EventArgs+n)+{
++++++++++++cont.Release();
++++++++};
++++++++s.Close();
++++++++cont.WaitOne();+++++++++++++++++
++++}+catch+(Exception)+{
++++}//try
}//for|code-block|syntax|javascript|5216367|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|G|3|-4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|H|$]]

I could see the benefit of Abort() over Close() for expediency, but I would imagine something bad may happen. In my case, I want to wait for Close() so I can reuse the port(s). This code will wait for the services to be actually closed before resuming.

<pre><code>Semaphore cont=new Semaphore(0, 1);
foreach (ServiceHost s in WCFServices) {
 try {
 s.Closed += delegate(Object o, System.EventArgs n) {
 cont.Release();
 };
 s.Close();
 cont.WaitOne(); 
 } catch (Exception) {
 }//try
}//for
</code></pre>

blocks|key|2173048|text|我也注意到了这个问题。我的代码最初看起来是这样的：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|2173049|[TestMethod]
[Timeout(2000)]
public+void+ApiClientTest()
++++{
++++++++bool+ApiSuccessSet,+ClientSuccessSet+=+ApiSuccessSet+=+false;
++++++++Api+apiService+=+new+ApiTestService();
++++++++var+clientService+=+new+ClientTestService();

++++++++ServiceHost+clientHost+=+new+ServiceHost(clientService,+new+Uri(PipeService));
++++++++ServiceHost+apiHost+=+new+ServiceHost(apiService,+new+Uri(PipeService));

++++++++//To+let+us+know+the+services+were+successfully+opened
++++++++clientHost.Opened+%2B=+(s,+e)+=>+ClientSuccessSet+=+true;
++++++++apiHost.Opened+%2B=+(s,+e)+=>+ApiSuccessSet+=+true;
++++++++clientHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IClientService),+new+NetNamedPipeBinding(),+ClientPipeServiceName);
++++++++apiHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IApiService),+new+NetNamedPipeBinding(),+ApiPipeServiceName);
++++++++clientHost.BeginOpen(OnOpen,+clientHost);
++++++++apiHost.BeginOpen(OnOpen,+apiHost);

++++++++//This+allows+both+services+to+be+open+for+communication.
++++++++while+(!ApiSuccessSet+%7C%7C+!ClientSuccessSet)
++++++++++++Thread.Yield();


++++++++EndpointAddress+ApiEndpoint+=+new+EndpointAddress(PipeService+%2B+@"/"+%2B+ApiPipeServiceName);
++++++++EndpointAddress+clientEndpoint+=+new+EndpointAddress(PipeService+%2B+@"/"+%2B+ClientPipeServiceName);

++++++++InstanceContext+context+=+new+InstanceContext((IClientCallback)new+TestClientCallback());
++++++++var+ClientChannelFactory+=+new+DuplexChannelFactory<IClientService>(context,+new+NetNamedPipeBinding(),+clientEndpoint);
++++++++var+ApiChannelFactory+=+new+ChannelFactory<IApiService>(new+NetNamedPipeBinding(),+ApiEndpoint);
++++++++var+ClientChannel+=+ClientChannelFactory.CreateChannel();
++++++++var+ApiChannel+=+ApiChannelFactory.CreateChannel();


++++++++clientHost.Close();
++++++++apiHost.Close();
++++}

void+OnOpen(IAsyncResult+ar)
++++{
++++++++ServiceHost+service+=+(ServiceHost)ar.AsyncState;
++++++++service.EndOpen(ar);
++++}|code-block|syntax|javascript|2173050|我注意到this代码花了20秒来运行。然后我决定像这样关闭通道工厂：|2173051|++++[TestMethod]
++++[Timeout(2000)]
++++public+void+ApiClientTest()
++++{
++++++++bool+ApiSuccessSet,+ClientSuccessSet+=+ApiSuccessSet+=+false;
++++++++Api+apiService+=+new+ApiTestService();
++++++++var+clientService+=+new+ClientTestService();

++++++++ServiceHost+clientHost+=+new+ServiceHost(clientService,+new+Uri(PipeService));
++++++++ServiceHost+apiHost+=+new+ServiceHost(apiService,+new+Uri(PipeService));

++++++++//To+let+us+know+the+services+were+successfully+opened
++++++++clientHost.Opened+%2B=+(s,+e)+=>+ClientSuccessSet+=+true;
++++++++apiHost.Opened+%2B=+(s,+e)+=>+ApiSuccessSet+=+true;
++++++++clientHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IClientService),+new+NetNamedPipeBinding(),+ClientPipeServiceName);
++++++++apiHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IApiService),+new+NetNamedPipeBinding(),+ApiPipeServiceName);
++++++++clientHost.BeginOpen(OnOpen,+clientHost);
++++++++apiHost.BeginOpen(OnOpen,+apiHost);


++++++++//This+allows+both+services+to+be+open+for+communication.
++++++++while+(!ApiSuccessSet+%7C%7C+!ClientSuccessSet)
++++++++++++Thread.Yield();


++++++++EndpointAddress+ApiEndpoint+=+new+EndpointAddress(PipeService+%2B+@"/"+%2B+ApiPipeServiceName);
++++++++EndpointAddress+clientEndpoint+=+new+EndpointAddress(PipeService+%2B+@"/"+%2B+ClientPipeServiceName);

++++++++InstanceContext+context+=+new+InstanceContext((IClientCallback)new+TestClientCallback());
++++++++var+ClientChannelFactory+=+new+DuplexChannelFactory<IClientService>(context,+new+NetNamedPipeBinding(),+clientEndpoint);
++++++++var+ApiChannelFactory+=+new+ChannelFactory<IApiService>(new+NetNamedPipeBinding(),+ApiEndpoint);
++++++++var+ClientChannel+=+ClientChannelFactory.CreateChannel();
++++++++var+ApiChannel+=+ApiChannelFactory.CreateChannel();


++++++++ClientChannelFactory.Close();
++++++++ApiChannelFactory.Close();
++++++++clientHost.Close();
++++++++apiHost.Close();
++++}|2173052|这让我相信，处理客户端的实例上下文所需的时间很长。|2173053|我怀疑有3种方法可以更好地处理这个解决方案。|2173054|第一种方法是在客户机上创建一个管理结束会话的函数。这样，您就可以在服务计划关闭之前调用该方法，这将加快关闭时间。|2173055|第二种方法是异步关闭，并在连接关闭时执行其他处理。|2173056|第三种方法是在关闭连接时对客户端进行编程(特别是在同时控制客户端和服务的情况下)，以便客户端可以自行终止会话，并且服务可以优雅而快速地关闭。|2173057|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|W|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|G|3|H|5|6|7|Y|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|I|3|J|5|D|7|Z|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|K|3|L|5|6|7|10|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|M|3|N|5|6|7|11|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|O|3|P|5|6|7|12|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|Q|3|R|5|6|7|13|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|S|3|T|5|6|7|14|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|U|3|-4|5|6|7|15|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|V|$]]

I noticed this problem as well. 
My code looks originally looked like this :

<pre><code>[TestMethod]
[Timeout(2000)]
public void ApiClientTest()
 {
 bool ApiSuccessSet, ClientSuccessSet = ApiSuccessSet = false;
 Api apiService = new ApiTestService();
 var clientService = new ClientTestService();

 ServiceHost clientHost = new ServiceHost(clientService, new Uri(PipeService));
 ServiceHost apiHost = new ServiceHost(apiService, new Uri(PipeService));

 //To let us know the services were successfully opened
 clientHost.Opened += (s, e) =&gt; ClientSuccessSet = true;
 apiHost.Opened += (s, e) =&gt; ApiSuccessSet = true;
 clientHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IClientService), new NetNamedPipeBinding(), ClientPipeServiceName);
 apiHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IApiService), new NetNamedPipeBinding(), ApiPipeServiceName);
 clientHost.BeginOpen(OnOpen, clientHost);
 apiHost.BeginOpen(OnOpen, apiHost);

 //This allows both services to be open for communication.
 while (!ApiSuccessSet || !ClientSuccessSet)
 Thread.Yield();


 EndpointAddress ApiEndpoint = new EndpointAddress(PipeService + @"/" + ApiPipeServiceName);
 EndpointAddress clientEndpoint = new EndpointAddress(PipeService + @"/" + ClientPipeServiceName);

 InstanceContext context = new InstanceContext((IClientCallback)new TestClientCallback());
 var ClientChannelFactory = new DuplexChannelFactory&lt;IClientService&gt;(context, new NetNamedPipeBinding(), clientEndpoint);
 var ApiChannelFactory = new ChannelFactory&lt;IApiService&gt;(new NetNamedPipeBinding(), ApiEndpoint);
 var ClientChannel = ClientChannelFactory.CreateChannel();
 var ApiChannel = ApiChannelFactory.CreateChannel();


 clientHost.Close();
 apiHost.Close();
 }

void OnOpen(IAsyncResult ar)
 {
 ServiceHost service = (ServiceHost)ar.AsyncState;
 service.EndOpen(ar);
 }
</code></pre>

I noticed that the this code took 20 secondsto run. I then decided to close the channel factories like this :

<pre><code> [TestMethod]
 [Timeout(2000)]
 public void ApiClientTest()
 {
 bool ApiSuccessSet, ClientSuccessSet = ApiSuccessSet = false;
 Api apiService = new ApiTestService();
 var clientService = new ClientTestService();

 ServiceHost clientHost = new ServiceHost(clientService, new Uri(PipeService));
 ServiceHost apiHost = new ServiceHost(apiService, new Uri(PipeService));

 //To let us know the services were successfully opened
 clientHost.Opened += (s, e) =&gt; ClientSuccessSet = true;
 apiHost.Opened += (s, e) =&gt; ApiSuccessSet = true;
 clientHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IClientService), new NetNamedPipeBinding(), ClientPipeServiceName);
 apiHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IApiService), new NetNamedPipeBinding(), ApiPipeServiceName);
 clientHost.BeginOpen(OnOpen, clientHost);
 apiHost.BeginOpen(OnOpen, apiHost);


 //This allows both services to be open for communication.
 while (!ApiSuccessSet || !ClientSuccessSet)
 Thread.Yield();


 EndpointAddress ApiEndpoint = new EndpointAddress(PipeService + @"/" + ApiPipeServiceName);
 EndpointAddress clientEndpoint = new EndpointAddress(PipeService + @"/" + ClientPipeServiceName);

 InstanceContext context = new InstanceContext((IClientCallback)new TestClientCallback());
 var ClientChannelFactory = new DuplexChannelFactory&lt;IClientService&gt;(context, new NetNamedPipeBinding(), clientEndpoint);
 var ApiChannelFactory = new ChannelFactory&lt;IApiService&gt;(new NetNamedPipeBinding(), ApiEndpoint);
 var ClientChannel = ClientChannelFactory.CreateChannel();
 var ApiChannel = ApiChannelFactory.CreateChannel();


 ClientChannelFactory.Close();
 ApiChannelFactory.Close();
 clientHost.Close();
 apiHost.Close();
 }
</code></pre>

This leads me to believe that the long time it takes is disposing the client's instance context.

I suspect that there are 3 ways to handle this solution better. 

The first is to create a function on the client that manages ending the session. This way you can call that method before the service plans to shut down and it will speed up the shut down time.

the second is to close asynchronously and do other processing while the connection is closing. 

The third is to program into the client when to close the connection (especially if you control both the client and the service) so that the client can terminate the session itself and the service can shut down gracefully and quickly.

I have a simple WCF duplex TCP service that I am trying to stop programmatically. If I don't have any connected users, ServiceHost.Close() is very quick but if I even have one connected user, I find the Close() function to take quite a bit of time, sometimes >30seconds. Is this usual behavior? 

On the other hand, Abort() is almost instantaneous and I am tempted to use that instead.

WCF ServiceHost.Close() Delay

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

教程

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云智能顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云AI代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

功能1上新10个字符

功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符。

功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符。

功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符

功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符

功能4上新

文章&问答评论现已支持表情

全新交互，全新视觉，新增快捷键、悬浮工具栏、高亮块等功能并同时优化现有功能，全面提升创作效率和体验

社区富文本编辑器全新改版！诚邀体验～ 

精选全网热门MCP server，让你的AI更好用 🚀

💥开发者 MCP广场重磅上线！

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

聚焦“写作效率、视觉美观与运行性能”三方面进行全面升级，为您提供更高效、稳定的创作环境

社区富文本&Markdown编辑器全新改版上线，欢迎大家体验!

诚挚邀请您参与本次调研，分享您的真实使用感受与建议。您的反馈至关重要，感谢您的支持与参与！

社区新版编辑器体验调研

我有一个简单的WCF双工TCP服务，我试图以编程方式停止它。如果我没有任何连接的用户，ServiceHost.Close()是非常快的，但是如果我有一个连接的用户，我发现Close()函数花费了相当多的时间，有时超过30秒。这是常见的行为吗？另一方面，Abort()几乎是瞬间的，我很想用它来代替。

问WCF ServiceHost.Close()延迟
EN

回答 5

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问WCF ServiceHost.Close()延迟EN

回答 5

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问WCF ServiceHost.Close()延迟
EN