I have a Windows Service that performs a long-running process. It is triggered by a timer and the entire process can take a few minutes to complete. When the timer elapses the service instantiates a management object that performs the various tasks, logs the results and then exits.
I have not implemented anything to handle those occasions when the server is shutdown during the middle of the process. It could cause some problems. What is the best practice to handle this?
Can only give vague suggestions since I don't know what task you are actually doing.
If it is something to do w/ database, there is transaction that can be rolled back if it is not committed.
If it involves some file manipulation, perhaps take a look at this article on Transactional NTFS. You can use it in combination w/ TransactionScope object to ensure atomic transaction.
If you are dealing with web services, well the service boundary will dictate when one transaction starts / ends and when the other one begins, use compensation model (if you break something on your part, you need to provide a way later on, after recovery, a way to notify / execute compensation scripts on the other end. (Think about ordering book online and how to handle backorder, cancellation, etc.)
For tracking mechanism, log every steps and the timelines for troubleshooting if something like shutdown occurs.
If your describing essentially a batch process its ok to have a timer that does work at an interval - much of the world works that way.
If its long running, try to keep your units of work, or batches, small enough that your process can at least check to see if its been signaled to stop or not. This will allow the service to exit gracefully instead of essentially ignoring the service stop message.
Somewhere in your timer function you have a property, IsShutdownRequired or some such, that your checking (assuming some loop processing). This property is set to true in the service stop control message, which allows your process to gracefully exit by either not trying to do more work, or as Jimmy suggested, rolling back that work if in a transaction.
Ideally, smaller batches would be better than one big one.