I have this function that executes an async task run and return results
public bool CheckNetworkDrive(string drive)
{
var task = new Task<bool>(() => { return CheckNetworkDriveMethod(drive); });
task.Start();
//make async call to check network path to avoid lock in case of not exist
if (task.Wait(5000) && task.Result)
return true;
return false;
}
in local host everything works fine but in webgarden its not seems to work and I can’t figure the exact reason, so can you help or suggest an alternative !
ps, the check method will check network path, if it’s not responding it will block the whole code, so that why I need fire and async wait method.
sorry for inconvenience, it turned out that the problem is not with the parallel task in particular,I'm using window identity impersonation to access network drives and somehow the task is seems to lose impersonation so after I passed the impersonated user to the task everything worked fine.
I found this that helped
How do I set the user identity for tasks when calling Task.WaitAll()
Related
I have an async Task with a method signature defined like this:
public async Task<bool> HandleFooAsync()
When executing this task in an async way and discarding the results, exceptions happening in this task do not show up in our logs.
_ = _slackResponseService.HandleFooAsync();
When I await the execution of the task I see the error in our logs
var result = await _slackResponseService.HandleFooAsync();
Is this expected behaviour? Is there a way to achieve a solution in between: "do not wait for the result, but log errors nevertheless.." ? We invested hours debugging our logging setup, just to learn that our logging setup is correct, but discard means in dotnet that everything is discarded - even logs. Which is a quite a new perspective for us, coming from a Python background.
Our logging setup follows the default logging setup for dotnet core 3 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/fundamentals/logging/?view=aspnetcore-3.1
Yes, it is an expected behavior. Call in that way can be considered like an anti-pattern. You can read about it C# Async Antipatterns
You need something which is called as "Fire and forget". One of its implementation can be find in repo AsyncAwaitBestPractices (nuget available too).
A Task in .net and netcore is meant to be awaited. If it is not awaited, the scope might be destroyed before the async method has finished.
If you want to run tasks in the background and not wait for a result you can use BackgroundService in .netcore or a third party such as Hangfire which supports fire and forget jobs out of the box
https://medium.com/#daniel.sagita/backgroundservice-for-a-long-running-work-3debe8f8d25b
https://www.hangfire.io/
One solution is to subscribe to the TaskScheduler.UnobservedTaskException event. It is not ideal because the event is raised when the faulted Task is garbage collected, which may happen long after the actual fault.
Another solution could be to use an extension method every time a task is fired and forgotten. Like this:
_slackResponseService.HandleFooAsync().FireAndForget();
Here is a basic implementation of the FireAndForget method:
public async static void FireAndForget(this Task task)
{
try
{
await task;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// log the exception here
}
}
I am using Azure web job to run some logic continuously. The function is a singleton function. However, I am getting "Waiting for lock" message after I tried to run this function after a restart of the web app. Does it mean that another instance of the same function is keeping the lock? How can I resolve this?
The function:
namespace Ns
{
public class Functions
{
[Singleton]
[NoAutomaticTriggerAttribute]
public static async Task ProcessMethod()
{
while(true){
//process logic here
await Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(20));}
}
}
}
The main program:
namespace ns
{
class Program
{
static void Main()
{
var host = new JobHost();
host.RunAndBlock();
}
}
}
The message that I got:
According to the Singleton attribute description the lock is adquired during function execution by a Blob lease.
If another function instance is triggered while this function is
running it will wait for the lock, periodically polling for it.
If you have more than one instance of your App Service Plan, this means that there are more than one Webjob and thus the Dashboard might be showing the locked status of the other Webjobs while one is running.
You can view the blob lease locks that are created on your storage account.
Another option is to try Listener Singletons but I never tried it with Manual triggers.
I disabled the production function in Azure and set the listenerlockPeriod to 15 seconds as described above.
This lessened the locking behavior significantly.
I am writing a web app where the application runs a command on the system using System.Diagnostics class.
I wanted to display realtime output from a command which takes a lot of time to complete. After searching a bit, I found that BeginOutputReadLine can stream output to an event handler.
I am also using jquery ajax to call this method and have the process run asynchronously.
So far, I am trying to do it this way:
Process p2= new Process();
p2.OutputDataReceived += new DataReceivedEventHandler(opHandler);
p2= Process.Start (psi2);
p2.BeginOutputReadLine();
I have declared a class with a static variable to store the output of the command as a Label on the page wont be accessible from a static method.
public class ProcessOutput
{
public static string strOutput;
[WebMethod]
public static string getOutput()
{
return strOutput;
}
}
In the event handler for BeginOutputReadLine, set the variable with the line from output.
private static void opHandler(object sendingProcess,DataReceivedEventArgs outLine)
{
if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(outLine.Data))
{
ProcessOutput.strOutput= outLine.Data;
}
}
and from the aspx page, I am calling the method to get the value of strOutput
$(document).ready(function() {
setInterval(function() {
$.ajax({
type: "GET",
url: "newscan.aspx/getOutput",
data: "",
success: function(msg){
$('#txtAsyncOp').append(msg.d);
}
});
}, 1000);
});
I dont know why, but the lable is not getting updated. If I put alert, I get 'undefined' in the alert box every 10 seconds.
Can anybody suggest me how to do it correctly?
Each request begins a new thread as a part of the Request pipeline. This is by design. Each thread has its own stack and can't access each others stacks. When a thread starts running a new method it stores the arguments and local variables in that method on its own stack. Long story short you won't be able to assign that variable and expect to retrieve its value from another Request.
There are a couple approaches you can take, you can scope it to the session variable (most common) with:
System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Session["variable"] = value ;
Or you set it to application scope using:
if (System.Web.Caching.Cache["Key1"] == null)
System.Web.Caching.Cache.Add("Key1", "Value 1", null, DateTime.Now.AddSeconds(60), Cache.NoSlidingExpiration, CacheItemPriority.High, onRemove);
Alternatively, you can log the output to a database or file and echo out the results via the WebMethod. If your long running process is running asynchronously, you won't have access to the HttpContext -- so the Session state bag will not be available; the application Cache could be used, however it is generally not used for this type of mechanism (cache is available for performance reasons, not a persistence mechanism -- its important to remember that you cannot control when your web application recycles).
I'd highly suggest writing to a database or log file. Asynchronous processes commonly require logged output or trace to diagnose potential problems and to validate results.
Furthermore, because you cannot control when the web app recycles, you can easily lose control of that child process you're launching. A better design would start an asynchronous method in-process, or an out-of-process application or service that polls a database to pick up jobs (possibly use the task scheduler or cron depending on your platform).
I have a web service that can be broken down into two main sections:
[WebMethod]
MyServiceCall()
{
//Do stuff the client cares about
//Do stuff I care about
}
What I'd like to do is run that 2nd part on another thread, so that the client isn't waiting on it: once the user's logic has completed, send them their information immediately, but continue processing the stuff I care about (logging, etc).
From a web service, what is the recommended way of running that 2nd piece asynchronously, to get the user back their information as quickly as possible? BackgroundWorker? QueueUserWorkItem?
You may want to look into Tasks which are new to .NET 4.0.
It lets you kick off an asynchronous operation, but also gives you an easy way to see if it's done or not later.
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() => DoSomeWork());
It'll kick off DoSomeWork() and continue without waiting so you can continue doing your other processing. When you get to the point where you don't want to process anymore until your asynchronous task has finished, you can call:
task.Wait();
Which will wait there until the task has completed. If you want to get a result back from the task, you can do this:
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(3000);
return "dummy value";
});
Console.WriteLine(task.Result);
A call to task.Result blocks until the result is available.
Here's a tutorial that covers Tasks in greater detail: http://www.codethinked.com/net-40-and-systemthreadingtasks
The easiest way to fire off a new thread is probably:
new Thread(() =>
{
/// do whatever you want here
}).Start();
Be careful, though - if the service is hit very frequently, you could wind up creating a lot of threads that block each other.
is it possible to stop a web service from executing?
I have a flex web application that searches clients with both full name and client id, when searching by name sometimes the usuer just types the last name and it takes a long time.
Since the app is used when clients are waiting in line, I would like to be able to stop the search and use their full name or id instead, and avoid waiting for the results and then having to search the user manually within the results.
thanks
edit: Sorry, I didn't explain myself correctly, when I meant "web service" I actually meant mx.rpc.soap.mxml.WebService, I want to stop it from waiting for the result event and the fault event. thanks.
There is actually a cancel(..) method explicitly for this purpose, though it is a little burried. Using the cancel method will cause the result and fault handlers not to be called and will also remove the busy cursor etc.
Depending on how you run your searches (ie. separate worker process etc), it is also possible to extend this by added in a cancelSearch() web service method to kill these worker processes and free up server resources etc.
private var _searchToken:AsyncToken;
public function doSearch(query:String):void
{
_searchToken = this.searchService.doSearch(query);
}
protected function doSearch_resultHandler(event:ResultEvent):void
{
trace("doSearch result");
trace("TODO: Do stuff with results");
_searchToken = null;
}
protected function doSearch_faultHandler(event:FaultEvent):void
{
trace("doSearch fault: " + event.fault);
_searchToken = null;
}
public function cancelSearch():void
{
var searchMessageId:String = _searchToken.message.messageId;
// Cancels the last service invocation or an invokation with the
// specified ID. Even though the network operation may still
// continue, no result or fault event is dispatched.
searchService.getOperation("doSearch").cancel(searchMessageId);
_searchToken = null;
trace("The search was cancelled, result/fault handlers not called");
// TODO: If your web service search method is using worker processes
// to do a search and is likely to continue processing for some time,
// you may want to implement a 'cancel()' method on the web service
// to stop any search threads that may be running.
}
Update
You could use disconnect() to remove any pending request responders, but it also disconnects the service's connection. Then call initialize().
/Update
You cannot stop the web service from executing, because that's beyond the Flex app's control, but you can limit the processing of the web service's response. For instance on the app, have a button like Cancel Search which sets a boolean bSearchCanceled to true.
The result handler for the web service call checks bSearchCanceled; if true just return.