The new feature shown in this post was built by JasperFx Software as part of a client engagement. This is exactly the kind of novel or challenging issue we frequently help our clients solve. If there’s something in your shop’s ongoing efforts where you could use some extra technical help, reach out to sales@jasperfx.net and we’ll be happy to talk with you.

Wolverine 3.4 was released today with a large new feature for multi-tenancy through asynchronous messaging. This feature set was envisioned for usage in an IoT system using the full “Critter Stack” (Marten and Wolverine) where “our system” is centralized in the cloud, but has to communicate asynchronously with physical devices deployed at different client sites:

The system in question already uses Marten’s support for separating per tenant information into separate PostgreSQL databases. Wolverine itself works with Marten’s multi-tenancy to make that a seamless process within Wolverine messaging workflows. All of that arguably quite robust already support was envisioned to be running within either HTTP web services or asynchronous messaging workflows completely controlled by the deployed application and its peer services. What’s new with Wolverine 3.4 is the ability to isolate the communication with remote client (tenant) devices and the centralized, cloud deployed “our system.”

We can isolate the traffic between each client site and our system first by using a separate Rabbit MQ broker or at least a separate virtual host per tenant as implied in the code sample from the docs below:

var builder = Host.CreateApplicationBuilder();

builder.UseWolverine(opts =>
{
    // At this point, you still have to have a *default* broker connection to be used for 
    // messaging. 
    opts.UseRabbitMq(new Uri(builder.Configuration.GetConnectionString("main")))
        
        // This will be respected across *all* the tenant specific
        // virtual hosts and separate broker connections
        .AutoProvision()

        // This is the default, if there is no tenant id on an outgoing message,
        // use the default broker
        .TenantIdBehavior(TenantedIdBehavior.FallbackToDefault)

        // Or tell Wolverine instead to just quietly ignore messages sent
        // to unrecognized tenant ids
        .TenantIdBehavior(TenantedIdBehavior.IgnoreUnknownTenants)

        // Or be draconian and make Wolverine assert and throw an exception
        // if an outgoing message does not have a tenant id
        .TenantIdBehavior(TenantedIdBehavior.TenantIdRequired)

        // Add specific tenants for separate virtual host names
        // on the same broker as the default connection
        .AddTenant("one", "vh1")
        .AddTenant("two", "vh2")
        .AddTenant("three", "vh3")

        // Or, you can add a broker connection to something completel
        // different for a tenant
        .AddTenant("four", new Uri(builder.Configuration.GetConnectionString("rabbit_four")));

    // This Wolverine application would be listening to a queue
    // named "incoming" on all virtual hosts and/or tenant specific message
    // brokers
    opts.ListenToRabbitQueue("incoming");

    opts.ListenToRabbitQueue("incoming_global")
        
        // This opts this queue out from being per-tenant, such that
        // there will only be the single "incoming_global" queue for the default
        // broker connection
        .GlobalListener();

    // More on this in the docs....
    opts.PublishMessage<Message1>()
        .ToRabbitQueue("outgoing").GlobalSender();
});

With this solution, we now have a “global” Rabbit MQ broker we can use for all internal communication or queueing within “our system”, and a separate Rabbit MQ virtual host for each tenant. At runtime, when a message tagged with a tenant id is published out of “our system” to a “per tenant” queue or exchange, Wolverine is able to route it to the correct virtual host for that tenant id. Likewise, Wolverine is listening to the queue named “incoming” on each virtual host (plus the global one), and automatically tags messages coming from the per tenant virtual host queues with the correct tenant id to facilitate the full Marten/Wolverine workflow downstream as the incoming messages are handled.

Now, let’s switch it up and use Azure Service Bus instead to basically do the same thing. This time though, we can register additional tenants to use a separate Azure Service Bus fully qualified namespace or connection string:

var builder = Host.CreateApplicationBuilder();

builder.UseWolverine(opts =>
{
    // One way or another, you're probably pulling the Azure Service Bus
    // connection string out of configuration
    var azureServiceBusConnectionString = builder
        .Configuration
        .GetConnectionString("azure-service-bus");

    // Connect to the broker in the simplest possible way
    opts.UseAzureServiceBus(azureServiceBusConnectionString)

        // This is the default, if there is no tenant id on an outgoing message,
        // use the default broker
        .TenantIdBehavior(TenantedIdBehavior.FallbackToDefault)

        // Or tell Wolverine instead to just quietly ignore messages sent
        // to unrecognized tenant ids
        .TenantIdBehavior(TenantedIdBehavior.IgnoreUnknownTenants)

        // Or be draconian and make Wolverine assert and throw an exception
        // if an outgoing message does not have a tenant id
        .TenantIdBehavior(TenantedIdBehavior.TenantIdRequired)

        // Add new tenants by registering the tenant id and a separate fully qualified namespace
        // to a different Azure Service Bus connection
        .AddTenantByNamespace("one", builder.Configuration.GetValue<string>("asb_ns_one"))
        .AddTenantByNamespace("two", builder.Configuration.GetValue<string>("asb_ns_two"))
        .AddTenantByNamespace("three", builder.Configuration.GetValue<string>("asb_ns_three"))

        // OR, instead, add tenants by registering the tenant id and a separate connection string
        // to a different Azure Service Bus connection
        .AddTenantByConnectionString("four", builder.Configuration.GetConnectionString("asb_four"))
        .AddTenantByConnectionString("five", builder.Configuration.GetConnectionString("asb_five"))
        .AddTenantByConnectionString("six", builder.Configuration.GetConnectionString("asb_six"));
    
    // This Wolverine application would be listening to a queue
    // named "incoming" on all Azure Service Bus connections, including the default
    opts.ListenToAzureServiceBusQueue("incoming");

    // This Wolverine application would listen to a single queue
    // at the default connection regardless of tenant
    opts.ListenToAzureServiceBusQueue("incoming_global")
        .GlobalListener();
    
    // Likewise, you can override the queue, subscription, and topic behavior
    // to be "global" for all tenants with this syntax:
    opts.PublishMessage<Message1>()
        .ToAzureServiceBusQueue("message1")
        .GlobalSender();

    opts.PublishMessage<Message2>()
        .ToAzureServiceBusTopic("message2")
        .GlobalSender();
});

This is a lot to take in, but the major point is to keep client messages completely separate from each other while also enabling the seamless usage of multi-tenanted workflows all the way through the Wolverine & Marten pipeline. As we deal with the inevitable teething pains, the hope is that the behavioral code within the Wolverine message handlers never has to be concerned with any kind of per-tenant bookkeeping. For more information, see:

• Multi-Tenancy with Database per Tenant from the Marten documentation
• Multi-Tenancy with Wolverine
• Multi-Tenancy and Marten from the Wolverine documentation
• Multi-Tenancy with Rabbit MQ from the Wolverine documentation
• Multi-Tenancy with Azure Service Bus from the Wolverine documentation

And as I typed all of that out, I do fully realize that there would be some value in having a comprehensive “Multi-Tenancy with the Critter Stack” guide in one place.

Summary

I honestly don’t know if this feature set gets a lot of usage, but it came out of what’s been a very productive collaboration with JasperFx’s original customer as we’ve worked together on their IoT system. Quite a bit of improvements to Wolverine have come about as a direct reaction to friction or opportunities that we’ve spotted with our collaboration.

As far as multi-tenancy goes, I think the challenges for the Critter Stack toolset has been to give our users all the power they need to keep data and now messaging completely separate across tenants while relentlessly removing repetitive code ceremony or usability issues. My personal philosophy is that lower ceremony code is an important enabler of successful software development efforts over time.

JasperFx Software frequently helps our customers wring better performance or scalability out of our customer’s systems. A somewhat frequent opportunity for improving the responsiveness and throughput of systems is merely identifying ways to batch up requests from middle tier, server side code to the backing database or databases. There’s a certain amount of overhead in making any network round trips between processes, and it often pays off in terms of performance to batch up queries or commands to reduce the number of network round trips.

Today I’m merely going to focus on Marten as a persistence tool and a bit on Wolverine as “Mediator” and show some ways that Marten reduces network round trips. Just know though that this general idea of reducing network round trips by batching up database queries or commands is certainly going to apply to improving performance with any other persistence tooling.

Batching Writes

First off, let’s just look at doing a mixed bag of “writes” with a Marten session to add, delete, or modify user data:

    public static async Task modify_some_users(IDocumentSession session)
    {
        // Mixed bag of document operations
        session.Insert(new User{FirstName = "Hans", LastName = "Gruber"});
        session.Store(new User{FirstName = "John", LastName = "McClane"});
        session.DeleteWhere<User>(x => x.LastName == "Miller");

        session.Patch<User>(x => x.LastName == "May").Set(x => x.Nickname, "Mayday");

        // Let's append some events too just for fun!
        session.Events.StartStream<User>(new UserCreated("Harry", "Ellis"));

        // Commit all the changes
        await session.SaveChangesAsync();
    }

What’s important to note in the code up above is that all the logical operations to insert, “upsert”, delete, patch, or start event streams is batched up into a single database round trip when session.SaveChangesAsync() is called. In the early days of Marten we tried a lot of different things to improve throughput in Marten, including alternative serializers, reducing string concatenation, code generation techniques, and alternative data structures internally. Our consistent finding was that the single biggest improvements always came from reducing network round trips, with alternative JSON serializers being a distant second, and every other factor far behind that.

If you’re curious about the technical underpinnings, Marten 7+ is creating a single NpgsqlBatch for all the commands and even using positional parameters because that’s a touch more efficient for the interaction with PostgreSQL.

Moving to another example, let’s say that you have workflow where you need to apply logical changes to a batch of Item entities using a mix of Marten and Wolverine. Here’s a first, naive cut at this handler:

public static class ApproveItemsHandler
{
    // I'm passing in CancellationToken because:
    // a. It's probably a good idea anyway
    // b. That's how Wolverine "enforces" message timeouts
    public static async Task HandleAsync(
        ApproveItems message,
        IDocumentSession session,
        CancellationToken token)
    {
        foreach (var id in message.Ids)
        {
            var existing = await session.LoadAsync<Item>(id, token);
            if (existing != null)
            {
                existing.Approved = true;
                session.Store(existing);
            }
        }

        await session.SaveChangesAsync(token);
    }
}

Now, let’s assume that we could easily be getting 100-1000 different ids of Item entities to approve at any one time, which would make this operation chatty and potentially slow. Let’s make it a little worse though and add in Wolverine as a “mediator” to handle each individual Item inline:

public static class ApproveItemHandler
{
    public static async Task HandleAsync(
        ApproveItem message, 
        IDocumentSession session, 
        CancellationToken token)
    {
        var existing = await session.LoadAsync<Item>(message.Id, token);
        if (existing == null) return;

        existing.Approved = true;

        await session.SaveChangesAsync(token);
    }
}

public static class ApproveItemsHandler
{
    // I'm passing in CancellationToken because:
    // a. It's probably a good idea anyway
    // b. That's how Wolverine "enforces" message timeouts
    public static async Task HandleAsync(
        ApproveItems message,
        IMessageBus bus,
        CancellationToken token)
    {
        foreach (var id in message.Ids)
        {
            await bus.InvokeAsync(new ApproveItem(id), token);
        }
    }
}

In terms of performance, the second version is even worse. We compounded the existing chattiness problem with looking up each Item individually by separating out the database “writes” to separate database calls and separate transactions within “Wolverine as Mediator” usage through that InvokeAsync()call. You should be aware that when you use any kind of in process “Mediator” tool like Wolverine, MediatR, Brighter, or MassTransit’s in process mediator functionality that each call to InvokeAsync() involves a certain amount of overhead and very likely means a nested transaction that gets committed independently from the parent message handling or HTTP request that triggered the InvokeAsync() call. I think I might go so far as to say that calling IMessageBus.InvokeAsync() from another message handler is a “guilty until proven innocent” type of approach.

I’d of course argue here that the performance may or may not end up being a big deal, but not having a transactional boundary around the original message processing can easily lead to inconsistent state in our system if any of the individual Item updates fail.

Let’s make one last version of this batch approve item handler with an eye toward reducing network round trips and keeping a strongly consistent transaction boundary around all the approvals (meaning they all succeed or all fail, no in between “who knows what really happened” state):

public static class ApproveItemsHandler
{
    // I'm passing in CancellationToken because:
    // a. It's probably a good idea anyway
    // b. That's how Wolverine "enforces" message timeouts
    public static async Task HandleAsync(
        ApproveItems message,
        IDocumentSession session,
        CancellationToken token)
    {
        // Find all the related items in *one* network round trip
        var items = await session.LoadManyAsync<Item>(token, message.Ids);
        foreach (var item in items)
        {
            item.Approved = true;
            session.Store(item);
        }

        await session.SaveChangesAsync().ConfigureAwait(false);
    }
}

In the usage above, we’re making one database call to fetch the matching Item entities, and updating all of the impacted Item entities in a single batched database command within the IDocumentSession.SaveChangesAsync(). This version should almost always be much faster than the earlier versions where we issued individual queries for each Item, plus we have better transactional consistency in the case of system errors.

Lastly of course for the sake of completeness, we could just do this with one network round trip:

public static class ApproveItemsHandler
{
    // Assuming here that Wolverine "auto-transaction"
    // middleware is in place
    public static void Handle(
        ApproveItems message,
        IDocumentSession session)
    {
        session
            .Patch<Item>(x => x.Id.IsOneOf(message.Ids))
            .Set(x => x.Approved, true);
    }
}

That last version eliminates the usage of current state to validate the operation first or give us any indication of what exactly was changed, but hey, that’s the fastest possible way to code this with Marten and it might be suitable sometimes in your own system.

Batch Querying

Marten has strong support for batch querying where you can combine any number of disparate queries in a batch to the database, and read the results one at a time afterward. Here’s an example from the Marten documentation, but just know that session in this case is a Marten IQuerySession:

// Start a new IBatchQuery from an active session
var batch = session.CreateBatchQuery();

// Fetch a single document by its Id
var user1 = batch.Load<User>("username");

// Fetch multiple documents by their id's
var admins = batch.LoadMany<User>().ById("user2", "user3");

// User-supplied sql
var toms = batch.Query<User>("where first_name == ?", "Tom");

// Where with Linq
var jills = batch.Query<User>().Where(x => x.FirstName == "Jill").ToList();

// Any() queries
var anyBills = batch.Query<User>().Any(x => x.FirstName == "Bill");

// Count() queries
var countJims = batch.Query<User>().Count(x => x.FirstName == "Jim");

// The Batch querying supports First/FirstOrDefault/Single/SingleOrDefault() selectors:
var firstInternal = batch.Query<User>().OrderBy(x => x.LastName).First(x => x.Internal);

// Kick off the batch query
await batch.Execute();

// All of the query mechanisms of the BatchQuery return
// Task's that are completed by the Execute() method above
var internalUser = await firstInternal;
Debug.WriteLine($"The first internal user is {internalUser.FirstName} {internalUser.LastName}");

That’s a little more code and complexity than you might have otherwise if you just make the queries independently, but there’s some significant performance gains to be made from batching queries.

This is a much, much longer discussion than I have ambition for today, but the rampant usage of repository abstractions around raw persistence tooling like Marten has a tendency to knock out more powerful functionality like query batching. That’s especially compounded with “noun-centric” code organization where you may have IOrderRepository and IInvoiceRepository wrapping your raw persistence tooling, but yet frequently have logical operations that deal with both Order and Invoice data at the same time. With Wolverine especially, I’m pushing JasperFx clients and our users to try to get away with eschewing these kinds of abstractions and leaning hard into Wolverine’s “A-Frame Architecture” approach so you can utilize the full power of Marten (or EF Core or RavenDb or whatever else you actually use).

What I can tell you is that for a current JasperFx client, we’re looking in the long run to collapse and simplify and inline their current usage of Railway Programming and MediatR-calling-other-MediatR handlers as a way to enable us to utilize query batching to optimize some of their very complicated operations that today end up being very chatty between the server and database.

Including Related Entities when Querying

There are plenty of times you’ll have an operation in your system that needs information from multiple, related entity types. Marten provides its version of Include() in its LINQ provider as a way to batch query related documents in fewer network round trips, and hence better performance like this example from the tests:

[Fact]
public async Task simple_include_for_a_single_document()
{
    var user = new User();
    var issue = new Issue { AssigneeId = user.Id, Title = "Garage Door is busted" };

    using var session = theStore.IdentitySession();
    session.Store<object>(user, issue);
    await session.SaveChangesAsync();

    using var query = theStore.QuerySession();

    // The following query will fetch both the Issue document
    // and the related User document for the Issue in one
    // network round trip
    User included = null;
    var issue2 = query
        .Query<Issue>()
        .Include<User>(x => included = x).On(x => x.AssigneeId)
        .Single(x => x.Title == issue.Title);

    included.ShouldNotBeNull();
    included.Id.ShouldBe(user.Id);

    issue2.ShouldNotBeNull();
}

I’ll refer you to the documentation for more alternative usages, but just know that Marten has this capability and it’s a valuable way to improve performance in your system by reducing the number of network roundtrips between your code and the backend.

Marten’s Include() functionality was originally inspired/copied from RavenDb. We’ve unfortunately had some confusion in the past from folks coming over from EF Core where its Include() means something very different. Oh, and just to pull aside the curtain, it’s not doing any kind of JOIN behind the scenes, but a temporary table + multiple SELECT() statements.

Summary

I just wanted to get a handful of things across in this post:

1. Network round trips can easily be expensive and a contributing factor in poor system performance. Reducing the number of network round trips by batching queries can sometimes pay off overall even if that sometimes means more complex code
2. Marten has several features specifically meant to improve system performance by batching database queries that you can utilize. Both Marten and Wolverine are absolutely built with this philosophy of reducing network round trips as much as possible
3. Any coding or architectural strategy that results in excessive layering, long call stacks (A calls B that calls C that calls D that finally calls to a database), or really just obfuscates your understanding of how system operations lead to increased numbers of network round trips can easily be harmful to your system’s performance because you can’t easily “see” what your system is really doing