Implications of using AzureSearch SDK with static

问题:

I have an ASP.NET Web Application that uses 30-40 different search indexes across 5-6 search services (various clients are in different pricing tiers).

Currently I am marshaling a new instance of the ISearchServiceClient followed by the appropriate ISearchIndexClient for the specific index needed based on the client making the call.

In an effort to increase performance I was thinking about marshaling up ALL of the ISearchIndexClients at application startup and placing them into a Dictionary object:

public static Dictionary<String, SearchIndexClient> SearchIndexes;

so that any specific index can be called up directly from the static Dictionary and used like so:

SearchIndexes["IndexName"].Documents.Search(searchText, searchParameters);

My hope is that this will speed up query and index update times especially on a "hot" index. My concern is that this may introduce memory leaks, performance issues and other unknowns.

I have not seen any examples using a statically available SearchServiceClient or SearchIndexClient so I am a bit uneasy going forward with this approach. My questions to the community are:

1. Is my plan sound?
2. Will it actually increase performance.
3. What are the drawbacks or implications (if any?)
4. If the amount of Indexes increases over time (to 60-70 for example) will I start to see drawbacks then?

5. Would it make more sense to marshal up the SearchServiceClients into a dictionary and connect to the appropriate SearchIndexClient from there as needed like so:

   public static Dictionary<String, SearchServiceClient> SearchServices;
   
   var searchIndexClient = SearchServices["ServiceName"].Indexes.GetClient("IndexName");
   searchIndexClient.Documents.Search(searchText, searchParameters);
   

回答1:

This strategy will probably not scale to the number of indexes you want. The most likely outcome is that you will exhaust the pool of available TCP connections. A better approach would be to implement a cache of SearchIndexClient instances keyed by index name. On a cache miss, you could get exclusive access to the least-recently-used client and set the IndexName property on it. That settable property was added to SearchIndexClient for exactly this scenario (note that it replaces the deprecated TargetDifferentIndex method).

You can find more discussions and background information about the implications of sharing SearchIndexClients on GitHub, the MSDN forums, and this related StackOverflow question.