Skip to main content

ASP.NET Core–Factory based vs Convention based middleware

Today I had to create my own ASP.NET Core middleware. I forgot how to exactly do this but I noticed that an IMiddleware interface existed. I wasn't aware of this interface which brought me to the discovery that there in fact multiple ways to define and create middleware in ASP.NET Core.

Let’s explain each one of them and discuss the differences.

Inline middleware

The simplest solution is to use an inline request delegate:

This is a great way for simple use cases but once your middleware gets more complex it is time to move to one of the 2 other approaches.

Convention based middleware

The convention based middleware is the one I was aware of that it existed and that I had used before. To use the convention based middleware you create a separate class that follows these rules:

  • It has a public constructor with a parameter of type RequestDelegate.
  • It contains a public method named Invoke or InvokeAsync. This method must:
    • Return a Task.
    • Accept a first parameter of type HttpContext.

Remark: If you want to inject extra dependencies, you can use constructor injection for the dependencies with a singleton lifetime and add extra parameters to the InvokeAsync() method for your transient and scoped dependencies:

To add this middleware to the request pipeline, you need to use the UseMiddleware() method:

Factory based middleware

The last option is the factory based middleware. To use this approach you need to implement the IMiddleware interface I was mentioning in the introduction.

The advantage is that there is no longer conventional magic and that dependencies are injected through the constructor. As the factory based middleware is activated per client request (connection), scoped services can be injected into the middleware's constructor without issues.

Adding this middleware can be done in the same way as with the previous approach:

The only thing you may not forget is that you have to register the middleware class in your IoC container:

More information:

Popular posts from this blog

Podman– Command execution failed with exit code 125

After updating WSL on one of the developer machines, Podman failed to work. When we took a look through Podman Desktop, we noticed that Podman had stopped running and returned the following error message: Error: Command execution failed with exit code 125 Here are the steps we tried to fix the issue: We started by running podman info to get some extra details on what could be wrong: >podman info OS: windows/amd64 provider: wsl version: 5.3.1 Cannot connect to Podman. Please verify your connection to the Linux system using `podman system connection list`, or try `podman machine init` and `podman machine start` to manage a new Linux VM Error: unable to connect to Podman socket: failed to connect: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:2655: connectex: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. That makes sense as the podman VM was not running. Let’s check the VM: >podman machine list NAME         ...

Azure DevOps/ GitHub emoji

I’m really bad at remembering emoji’s. So here is cheat sheet with all emoji’s that can be used in tools that support the github emoji markdown markup: All credits go to rcaviers who created this list.

VS Code Planning mode

After the introduction of Plan mode in Visual Studio , it now also found its way into VS Code. Planning mode, or as I like to call it 'Hannibal mode', extends GitHub Copilot's Agent Mode capabilities to handle larger, multi-step coding tasks with a structured approach. Instead of jumping straight into code generation, Planning mode creates a detailed execution plan. If you want more details, have a look at my previous post . Putting plan mode into action VS Code takes a different approach compared to Visual Studio when using plan mode. Instead of a configuration setting that you can activate but have limited control over, planning is available as a separate chat mode/agent: I like this approach better than how Visual Studio does it as you have explicit control when plan mode is activated. Instead of immediately diving into execution, the plan agent creates a plan and asks some follow up questions: You can further edit the plan by clicking on ‘Open in Editor’: ...