Over a million developers have joined DZone.

Important WCF Performance Issue + Workaround

DZone's Guide to

Important WCF Performance Issue + Workaround

· Integration Zone
Free Resource

Share, secure, distribute, control, and monetize your APIs with the platform built with performance, time-to-value, and growth in mind. Free 90-day trial of 3Scale by Red Hat

I have written about Wcf performance issues before, but this one seems to be the biggest. Valery had published in the Wcf forum an interesting performance issue. In short, a WCF client tries to consume a non-WCF service where the contract looks something like this:

class Foo
   byte[] picture;

In soap, byte arrays are encoded as base64 strings so it can look like this:


or with line breaks after each 73 characters, like this:

both options are valid according to the  base64 RFC:

Implementations MUST NOT add line feeds to base-encoded data unless the specification referring to this document explicitly directs base encoders to add line feeds after a specific number of characters.

Ok so it does not really advocate this... But it is a fact that many soap stacks still use this MIME-originated format and also Wcf supports it.

So what is the problem?
It seems that when Wcf gets a message which contains base64 with CRLF, the processing is slower in a few seconds(!). A drill down shows that the problem is in the DataContract serializer. Take a look at this program:

public class Foo
    public byte[] picture;

class Program
        static void Main(string[] args)
            var t1 = getTime(@"C:\temp\base64_with_line_breaks.txt");
            var t2 = getTime(@"C:\temp\base64_without_line_breaks.txt");            
            Console.WriteLine("Time with breaks: " + t1);
            Console.WriteLine("Time with no breaks: " + t2);


        static double getTime(string path)
            var ser = new DataContractSerializer(typeof (Foo));
            var stream = new FileStream(path, FileMode.Open);
            var start = DateTime.Now;

            for (int i = 0; i < 40; i++)
                stream.Position = 0;

            var end = DateTime.Now;
            var t = end - start;
            return t.TotalSeconds;

For those of you who are interested to test this, the files are here and here.

The output is:
Time with breaks: 10.8998196 seconds
Time with no breaks: 0.0029994 seconds

This clearly reveals a performance problem.

Why does this happen?

While debugging the .Net source code, I have found this in the XmlBaseReader class (code comments were in the source - they are not mine):

int ReadBytes(...)

 catch (FormatException exception)
      // Something was wrong with the format, see if we can strip the spaces

      int i = 0;
      int j = 0;
      while (true)
          while (j < charCount && XmlConverter.IsWhitespace(chars[j]))
          if (j == charCount)
          chars[i++] = chars[j++];

So the data contract serializer tries to read the base64 string, but for some reason succeeds only if the string does not have white spaces inside it (we can further debug to see how that happens but it is exhausting for one post :). The serializer then removes all the white spaces (which requires copying the buffer again) and tries again. This is definitely a performance issue.


  • This happens with both .Net framework 3.5 and 4.0.

  • This is a DataContract specific issue - it does not happen when you use other .Net mechanisms such as Convert.FromBase64String

    I have reported this in Microsoft connect, you are welcome to vote this issue up.


    There a few workarounds. The trade-offs are generally convenience of API (or "where you prefer to put the 'dirty' stuff").

    1. As Valery noticed, you can change the contract to use String instead of byte[]. Then Convert.FromBase64String will give you the byte array.

    2. Change your contracts to use the XmlSerializer instead of DataContract serializer. The former does not experience this issue. The XmlSerializer is generally slower (when base64 does not appear that it) so this is what you loose. You get a better API here as clients do not need to manipulate the base64 string.

    3. The best of course is to change the service implementation to return base64 without line breaks. Also if large binaries are returned anyway it may be a better idea to employ MTOM.

    4. A Wcf custom encoder can strip the spaces from the message before it is deserialized. However this also involves copy of strings and this is beneficial only in rare cases.
  • Explore the core elements of owning an API strategy and best practices for effective API programs. Download the API Owner's Manual, brought to you by 3Scale by Red Hat


    Published at DZone with permission of Yaron Naveh, DZone MVB. See the original article here.

    Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

    {{ parent.title || parent.header.title}}

    {{ parent.tldr }}

    {{ parent.urlSource.name }}