We Keep Coding

HttpClient seems to be causing my app to slowdown every ~3 minutes while freeing up a ton of memory

So basically I am running a program which is able to send up to 7,000 HTTP requests every second in average, 24/7, in order to detect last changes on a website as quickly as possible.
However, every 2.5 to 3 minutes in average, my program slowdowns for around 10-15 seconds and goes from ~7K rq/s to less than 1000.
Here are logs from my program, where you can see the amount of requests it sends every second:
https://pastebin.com/029VLxZG
When scrolling down through the logs, you can see it goes slower every ~3 minutes. Example: https://i.imgur.com/US0wPzm.jpeg
At first I thought it was my server's ethernet connection going in a temporary "restricted" mode, and I even tried contacting my host about it. But then I ran 2 instances of my program simulteanously just to see what would happen and I noticed that, even though the issue (downtime) was happening on both, it wasn't always happening at the same time (depending on when the program was started, if you get what I mean), which meant the problem wasn't coming from the internet connection, but my program itself.
I investigated a little bit more, and found out that as soon as my program goes from ~7K rq/s to ~700, a lot of RAM is being freed up on my server.
I have taken 2 screenshots of the consecutive seconds before and once the downtime occurs (including RAM metrics), to compare, and you can view them here: https://imgur.com/a/sk2TYQZ (please note that I was using less threads here, which is why the average "normal" speed is ~2K rq/s instead of ~7K as mentioned before)
If you'd like to see more of it, here is the full record of the issue, in a video which lasts about 40 seconds: https://i.imgur.com/z27FlVP.mp4 - As you can see, after the RAM is freed up, its usage slowly goes up again, before the same process repeats every ~3 minutes.
For more context, here is the method I am using to send the HTTP requests (it is being called from a lot of threads concurrently, as my app is multi-threaded in order to be super fast):
public static async Task<bool> HasChangedAsync(string endpoint, HttpClient httpClient)
{
const string baseAddress = "https://example.com/";
string response = await httpClient.GetStringAsync(baseAddress + endpoint);
return response.Contains("example");
}
One thing I did is I tried replacing the whole method by await Task.Delay(25) then return false, and that fixed the issue, RAM usage was barely increasing.
This lead me to believe the issue is HttpClient / my HTTP requests, and even though I tried replacing the GetStringAsync method by GetAsync using both a HttpRequestMessage and HttpResponseMessage (and disposing them with using), the behavior ended up being the exact same.
So here I am, desperate for a fix, and without enough knowledge about memory, garbage collector etc (if that's even needed here) to be able to fix this myself.
Please, Stack Overflow, do you have any idea?
Thanks a lot.

Your best bet would be to stream the response and then use chunks of it to find what your are looking for. An example implementation could be something as follows:
using var response = await Client.GetAsync(BaseUrl, HttpCompletionOption.ResponseHeadersRead);
await using var stream = await response.Content.ReadAsStreamAsync();
using var reader = new StreamReader(stream);
string line = null;
while ((line = await reader.ReadLineAsync()) != null)
{
if(line.Contains("example"))// do whatever
}

Task.WhenAny with timeout waits more than timeout value

I have this block of code:
var client = new TcpClient();
HttpRequestInfo.AddTimestamp("Connecting");
await Task.WhenAny(client.ConnectAsync(serverAddress, serverPort),
Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromMilliseconds(300)));
HttpRequestInfo.AddTimestamp("Connected");
if(client.Connected){ ... }
Where HttpRequestInfo.AddTimestamp simply logs named timestamps with Stopwatch class.
In logs I sometimes see:
"Connecting":110ms - "Connected":747ms
"Connecting":35ms - "Connected":3120ms
"Connecting":38ms - "Connected":3053ms
I assumed that this approach will give me the opportunity to limit the connection by timeout (300ms). However, I see that this line of code sometimes (very rarely) runs longer than 300 ms.
What is the reason for this behavior?

The docs states:
This method depends on the system clock. This means that the time
delay will approximately equal the resolution of the system clock if
the delay argument is less than the resolution of the system clock,
which is approximately 15 milliseconds on Windows systems.
So it can explain the longer timeouts if they are approximately 15 milliseconds more than 300 milliseconds, because the delay will have to adjust itself to the system clock resolution.
It does not explain your longer timeouts that are in a larger scale.
I assume that for some reason ConnectAsync may block for a while before returning to the calling method, if it is true it will take time between your first log and when you actually fire Task.Delay and the problem is not related to the delay at all.
You can try this code and monitor the logs, maybe the lost time is hiding when launching ConnectAsync:
var client = new TcpClient();
HttpRequestInfo.AddTimestamp("Launching ConnectAsync");
var connectAsyncTask = client.ConnectAsync(serverAddress, serverPort);
HttpRequestInfo.AddTimestamp("ConnectAsync launched");
HttpRequestInfo.AddTimestamp("Launching Delay");
var delayTask= Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromMilliseconds(300));
HttpRequestInfo.AddTimestamp("Delay launched");
var firstTask = await Task.WhenAny(connectAsyncTask, delayTask);
if(firstTask == connectAsyncTask)
{
HttpRequestInfo.AddTimestamp("Connected");
}
else
{
HttpRequestInfo.AddTimestamp("Timeout");
}

Does delaying blocks data receiving

I am working on a project on Visual Studio C#.
I am collecting data from a device connected to PC via serial port.
First I send a request command, and wait for response.
There is a 1 sec delay of device to response after sending request command.
The thing is device may not be reached and may not response sometimes.
In order to wait response (if any) and not to sent next data request command early, I make a delay by: System.Threading.Thread method.
My question is, if I make that delay time longer, do I loose serial port data receiving.
The Delay function I use is:
private void Delay(byte WaitMiliSec)
{
// WaitTime here is increased by a WaitTimer ticking at every 100msec
WaitTime = 0;
while (WaitTime < WaitMiliSec)
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(25);
Application.DoEvents();
}
}

no - you won't loose any data - the serial-port has it's own buffer which does not depend on your application at all. The OS and the hardware will handle this for your.
I would suggest to refactor the data-send/receive into it's own task/thread. That way you don't need the Application.DoEvents();
If you post some more of your send/receive code I might help you with this.
PS: it seems to me that your code will not work anyhow (WaitTime is allways zero) but I guess it's just a snippet right?

MSMQ Receive() method timeout

My original question from a while ago is MSMQ Slow Queue Reading, however I have advanced from that and now think I know the problem a bit more clearer.
My code (well actually part of an open source library I am using) looks like this:
queue.Receive(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10), MessageQueueTransactionType.Automatic);
Which is using the Messaging.MessageQueue.Receive function and queue is a MessageQueue. The problem is as follows.
The above line of code will be called with the specified timeout (10 seconds). The Receive(...) function is a blocking function, and is supposed to block until a message arrives in the queue at which time it will return. If no message is received before the timeout is hit, it will return at the timeout. If a message is in the queue when the function is called, it will return that message immediately.
However, what is happening is the Receive(...) function is being called, seeing that there is no message in the queue, and hence waiting for a new message to come in. When a new message comes in (before the timeout), it isn't detecting this new message and continues waiting. The timeout is eventually hit, at which point the code continues and calls Receive(...) again, where it picks up the message and processes it.
Now, this problem only occurs after a number of days/weeks. I can make it work normally again by deleting & recreating the queue. It happens on different computers, and different queues. So it seems like something is building up, until some point when it breaks the triggering/notification ability that the Receive(...) function uses.
I've checked a lot of different things, and everything seems normal & isn't different from a queue that is working normally. There is plenty of disk space (13gig free) and RAM (about 350MB free out of 1GB from what I can tell). I have checked registry entries which all appear the same as other queues, and the performance monitor doesn't show anything out of the normal. I have also run the TMQ tool and can't see anything noticably wrong from that.
I am using Windows XP on all the machines and they all have service pack 3 installed. I am not sending a large amount of messages to the queues, at most it would be 1 every 2 seconds but generally a lot less frequent than that. The messages are only small too and nowhere near the 4MB limit.
The only thing I have just noticed is the p0000001.mq and r0000067.mq files in C:\WINDOWS\system32\msmq\storage are both 4,096KB however they are that size on other computers also which are not currently experiencing the problem. The problem does not happen to every queue on the computer at once, as I can recreate 1 problem queue on the computer and the other queues still experience the problem.
I am not very experienced with MSMQ so if you post possible things to check can you please explain how to check them or where I can find more details on what you are talking about.
Currently the situation is:
ComputerA - 4 queues normal
ComputerB - 2 queues experiencing problem, 1 queue normal
ComputerC - 2 queues experiencing problem
ComputerD - 1 queue normal
ComputerE - 2 queues normal
So I have a large number of computers/queues to compare and test against.

Any particular reason you aren't using an event handler to listen to the queues? The System.Messaging library allows you to attach a handler to a queue instead of, if I understand what you are doing correctly, looping Receive every 10 seconds. Try something like this:
class MSMQListener
{
public void StartListening(string queuePath)
{
MessageQueue msQueue = new MessageQueue(queuePath);
msQueue.ReceiveCompleted += QueueMessageReceived;
msQueue.BeginReceive();
}
private void QueueMessageReceived(object source, ReceiveCompletedEventArgs args)
{
MessageQueue msQueue = (MessageQueue)source;
//once a message is received, stop receiving
Message msMessage = null;
msMessage = msQueue.EndReceive(args.AsyncResult);
//do something with the message
//begin receiving again
msQueue.BeginReceive();
}
}

We are also using NServiceBus and had a similar problem inside our network.
Basically, MSMQ is using UDP with two-phase commits. After a message is received, it has to be acknowledged. Until it is acknowledged, it cannot be received on the client side as the receive transaction hasn't been finalized.
This was caused by different things in different times for us:
once, this was due to the Distributed Transaction Coordinator unable to communicate between machines as firewall misconfiguration
another time, we were using cloned virtual machines without sysprep which made internal MSMQ ids non-unique and made it receive a message to one machine and ack to another. Eventually, MSMQ figures things out but it takes quite a while.

Try this
public Message Receive( TimeSpan timeout, Cursor cursor )
overloaded function.
To get a cursor for a MessageQueue, call the CreateCursor method for that queue.
A Cursor is used with such methods as Peek(TimeSpan, Cursor, PeekAction) and Receive(TimeSpan, Cursor) when you need to read messages that are not at the front of the queue. This includes reading messages synchronously or asynchronously. Cursors do not need to be used to read only the first message in a queue.
When reading messages within a transaction, Message Queuing does not roll back cursor movement if the transaction is aborted. For example, suppose there is a queue with two messages, A1 and A2. If you remove message A1 while in a transaction, Message Queuing moves the cursor to message A2. However, if the transaction is aborted for any reason, message A1 is inserted back into the queue but the cursor remains pointing at message A2.
To close the cursor, call Close.

If you want to use something completely synchronous and without event you can test this method
public object Receive(string path, int millisecondsTimeout)
{
var mq = new System.Messaging.MessageQueue(path);
var asyncResult = mq.BeginReceive();
var handles = new System.Threading.WaitHandle[] { asyncResult.AsyncWaitHandle };
var index = System.Threading.WaitHandle.WaitAny(handles, millisecondsTimeout);
if (index == 258) // Timeout
{
mq.Close();
return null;
}
var result = mq.EndReceive(asyncResult);
return result;
}

How do I obtain the latency between server and client in C#?

I'm working on a C# Server application for a game engine I'm writing in ActionScript 3. I'm using an authoritative server model as to prevent cheating and ensure fair game. So far, everything works well:
When the client begins moving, it tells the server and starts rendering locally; the server, then, tells everyone else that client X has began moving, among with details so they can also begin rendering. When the client stops moving, it tells the server, which performs calculations based on the time the client began moving and the client render tick delay and replies to everyone, so they can update with the correct values.
The thing is, when I use the default 20ms tick delay on server calculations, when the client moves for a rather long distance, there's a noticeable tilt forward when it stops. If I increase slightly the delay to 22ms, on my local network everything runs very smoothly, but in other locations, the tilt is still there. After experimenting a little, I noticed that the extra delay needed is pretty much tied to the latency between client and server. I even boiled it down to a formula that would work quite nicely: delay = 20 + (latency / 10).
So, how would I proceed to obtain the latency between a certain client and the server (I'm using asynchronous sockets). The CPU effort can't be too much, as to not have the server run slowly. Also, is this really the best way, or is there a more efficient/easier way to do this?

Sorry that this isn't directly answering your question, but generally speaking you shouldn't rely too heavily on measuring latency because it can be quite variable. Not only that, you don't know if the ping time you measure is even symmetrical, which is important. There's no point applying 10ms of latency correction if it turns out that the ping time of 20ms is actually 19ms from server to client and 1ms from client to server. And latency in application terms is not the same as in networking terms - you may be able to ping a certain machine and get a response in 20ms but if you're contacting a server on that machine that only processes network input 50 times a second then your responses will be delayed by an extra 0 to 20ms, and this will vary rather unpredictably.
That's not to say latency measurement it doesn't have a place in smoothing predictions out, but it's not going to solve your problem, just clean it up a bit.
On the face of it, the problem here seems to be that that you're sent information in the first message which you use to extrapolate data from until the last message is received. If all else stays constant then the movement vector given in the first message multiplied by the time between the messages will give the server the correct end position that the client was in at roughly now-(latency/2). But if the latency changes at all, the time between the messages will grow or shrink. The client may know he's moved 10 units, but the server simulated him moving 9 or 11 units before being told to snap him back to 10 units.
The general solution to this is to not assume that latency will stay constant but to send periodic position updates, which allow the server to verify and correct the client's position. With just 2 messages as you have now, all the error is found and corrected after the 2nd message. With more messages, the error is spread over many more sample points allowing for smoother and less visible correction.
It can never be perfect though: all it takes is a lag spike in the last millisecond of movement and the server's representation will overshoot. You can't get around that if you're predicting future movement based on past events, as there's no real alternative to choosing either correct-but-late or incorrect-but-timely since information takes time to travel. (Blame Einstein.)

One thing to keep in mind when using ICMP based pings is that networking equipment will often give ICMP traffic lower priority than normal packets, especially when the packets cross network boundaries such as WAN links. This can lead to pings being dropped or showing higher latency than traffic is actually experiencing and lends itself to being an indicator of problems rather than a measurement tool.
The increasing use of Quality of Service (QoS) in networks only exacerbates this and as a consequence though ping still remains a useful tool, it needs to be understood that it may not be a true reflection of the network latency for non-ICMP based real traffic.
There is a good post at the Itrinegy blog How do you measure Latency (RTT) in a network these days? about this.

You could use the already available Ping Class. Should be preferred over writing your own IMHO.

Have a "ping" command, where you send a message from the server to the client, then time how long it takes to get a response. Barring CPU overload scenarios, it should be pretty reliable. To get the one-way trip time, just divide the time by 2.

We can measure the round-trip time using the Ping class of the .NET Framework.
Instantiate a Ping and subscribe to the PingCompleted event:
Ping pingSender = new Ping();
pingSender.PingCompleted += PingCompletedCallback;
Add code to configure and action the ping.
Our PingCompleted event handler (PingCompletedEventHandler) has a PingCompletedEventArgs argument. The PingCompletedEventArgs.Reply gets us a PingReply object. PingReply.RoundtripTime returns the round trip time (the "number of milliseconds taken to send an Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) echo request and receive the corresponding ICMP echo reply message"):
public static void PingCompletedCallback(object sender, PingCompletedEventArgs e)
{
...
Console.WriteLine($"Roundtrip Time: {e.Reply.RoundtripTime}");
...
}
Code-dump of a full working example, based on MSDN's example. I have modified it to write the RTT to the console:
public static void Main(string[] args)
{
string who = "www.google.com";
AutoResetEvent waiter = new AutoResetEvent(false);
Ping pingSender = new Ping();
// When the PingCompleted event is raised,
// the PingCompletedCallback method is called.
pingSender.PingCompleted += PingCompletedCallback;
// Create a buffer of 32 bytes of data to be transmitted.
string data = "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa";
byte[] buffer = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(data);
// Wait 12 seconds for a reply.
int timeout = 12000;
// Set options for transmission:
// The data can go through 64 gateways or routers
// before it is destroyed, and the data packet
// cannot be fragmented.
PingOptions options = new PingOptions(64, true);
Console.WriteLine("Time to live: {0}", options.Ttl);
Console.WriteLine("Don't fragment: {0}", options.DontFragment);
// Send the ping asynchronously.
// Use the waiter as the user token.
// When the callback completes, it can wake up this thread.
pingSender.SendAsync(who, timeout, buffer, options, waiter);
// Prevent this example application from ending.
// A real application should do something useful
// when possible.
waiter.WaitOne();
Console.WriteLine("Ping example completed.");
}
public static void PingCompletedCallback(object sender, PingCompletedEventArgs e)
{
// If the operation was canceled, display a message to the user.
if (e.Cancelled)
{
Console.WriteLine("Ping canceled.");
// Let the main thread resume.
// UserToken is the AutoResetEvent object that the main thread
// is waiting for.
((AutoResetEvent)e.UserState).Set();
}
// If an error occurred, display the exception to the user.
if (e.Error != null)
{
Console.WriteLine("Ping failed:");
Console.WriteLine(e.Error.ToString());
// Let the main thread resume.
((AutoResetEvent)e.UserState).Set();
}
Console.WriteLine($"Roundtrip Time: {e.Reply.RoundtripTime}");
// Let the main thread resume.
((AutoResetEvent)e.UserState).Set();
}
You might want to perform several pings and then calculate an average, depending on your requirements of course.