0

I have a MVC application and a web api. The Web api contain all business logic and the mvc controller has only ui logic.

I want build a web api proxy but I don't know if it's a good idea.

With the web api proxy The controller is decoupled from the name of the action in the web api and from the verbs and dto used in the web api. With one code row, I call the web api and i receive a response. If i want call the action in many controller, i have to use only one line of code and if there is a change, i change only the proxy.

Without proxy It's simpler, because in the controller I use httpclient for calling the web api, but if a want call the same action from many controller mvc, i have to replicate the code.

The proxy I want create is registered with autofac in the global asax, and in the controller constructor i inject the proxy.

For example if i want a list of prople, with proxy I have to Register the PeopleProxy in the global asax create the constructor of the mvc controller with the IProxyPeople

private IProxyPeople peopleProxy;
MyController(IProxyPeople peopleProxy){
    this.peopleProxy = peopleProxy;
}

Call with a code like

peopleProxy.GetPeople()

Without proxy

I call the web apri directly from mvc controller with code like

using (HttpClient client = CreateHttpClient())
{
    var peoples;
    try
    {
        HttpResponseMessage result = client.GetAsync("api/People").Result;
        peoples = result.Content.ReadAsAsync<List<People>>().Result;
    }
    catch (Exception exc)
    {
         CLog.LogError(exc);
    }                   
}

Someone thinks that it's better call the web api directly from the controller because is more simpler than create the proxy and there aren't overhead with autofac. Should be a good idea create a web api proxy?

  • I go further. I add one more abstraction layer. A facade to decouple the API data model from my domain. So yes, IMO you are doing right. – Laiv Jul 11 '17 at 19:47
  • What do you mean specifically by "good" and "better" in this context? – Robert Harvey Jul 12 '17 at 2:21
3

The service (proxy) doesn't just abstract the endpoint, it also encapsulates the response parsing and error handling logic. It's a good abstraction.

It's my experience that people who argue for inlining code and shun abstraction have not yet gathered enough experience to know how that behavior will burn them later. Do it your way.

  • 1
    SoC, SPR, abstractions all good design cualities that make your code resilient. Usually, software is made to last, the benefits of the design are rarely appreciable in the short run. What seems unecessary complexity now is often translated into costs saving in the future. – Laiv Jul 11 '17 at 19:17
3

You should definitely go the proxy route, for several reasons.

  1. You won't have to repeated yourself (see DRY).

  2. You will maintain better separation of concerns.

  3. You will be able to unit test the proxy separately, or write automated integration tests to test the proxy.

  4. You can stub out the proxy and test the web site independently, if for example you are running it in a development lab without access to the service.

  5. If you ever change the way the proxy works (e.g. if one day the service starts requiring client certificates) you will only have to update it in one place in code.

  6. If you ever wish to add additional features to the service call, e.g. caching, you will have a place to put it.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.