Get result of Func<Task<IResponse>> inside timeout check - c#

I'm kinda new at async programming so don't uderstand many things. Please, I need a little bit more help. I did as was recommened in my other question.
public async Task<TResponse> SendRequestAsync<TResponse>(Func<Task<TResponse>> sendAsync)
{
int timeout = 15;
if (await Task.WhenAny(sendAsync, Task.Delay(timeout) == sendAsync))
{
return await sendAsync();
}
else
{
throw new Exception("time out!!!");
}
}
But I need to get a result of sendAsync() and return it. So have I questions:
1) What the best way to do that and how to use Task.Delay with Func<Task<TResponse>>(or may be something instead of it)? I can't figure out how convert(or something) Func to Task.
2) It seems that return await sendAsync() inside if permorms request once more. It is not great. Can I get result of my Func<Task<..>> inside if somehow?

Since you are new in async programming - it's better to not put too much stuff in one statement and better split that:
public async Task<TResponse> SendRequestAsync<TResponse>(Func<Task<TResponse>> sendAsync) {
int timeout = 15;
// here you create Task which represents ongoing request
var sendTask = sendAsync();
// Task which will complete after specified amount of time, in milliseconds
// which means your timeout should be 15000 (for 15 seconds), not 15
var delay = Task.Delay(timeout);
// wait for any of those tasks to complete, returns task that completed first
var taskThatCompletedFirst = await Task.WhenAny(sendTask, delay);
if (taskThatCompletedFirst == sendTask) {
// if that's our task and not "delay" task - we are fine
// await it so that all exceptions if any are thrown here
// this will _not_ cause it to execute once again
return await sendTask;
}
else {
// "delay" task completed first, which means 15 seconds has passed
// but our request has not been completed
throw new Exception("time out!!!");
}
}

Request is sent twice because sendAsync is a Func returning Task, different on each call. You call it first under Task.WhenAny() and repeat in operator return await sendAsync().
To avoid this duplicated call you should save a task to variable and pass that task to both calls:
public async Task<TResponse> SendRequestAsync<TResponse>(Func<Task<TResponse>> sendAsync)
{
int timeout = 15;
var task = sendAsync();
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout) == task))
{
return await task;
}
else
{
throw new Exception("time out!!!");
}
}
await on completed task will just return its result without rerunning the task.

Related

Calling AWS RDS CreateDBSnapshotAsync Asynchronously "Set It And Forget It"

In an AWS Lambda function, I would like to be able to call a component to create a RDS DB Snapshot. There is an async method on the client named CreateDBSnapshotAsync. But, because this is AWS Lambda, I only have 5 minutes to complete the task. So, if I await it, the AWS Lambda function will timeout. And, apparently when it times out, the call is cancelled and then the snapshot is not completed.
Is there some way I can make the call in a COMPLETELY asynchronously way so that once I invoke it, it will complete no matter if my Lambda function times out or not?
In other words, I don't care about the result, I just want to invoke the process and move on, a "set it and forget it" mentality.
My call (without the await, obviously) is as below
using (var rdsClient = new AmazonRDSClient())
{
Task<CreateDBSnapshotResponse> response = rdsClient.CreateDBSnapshotAsync(new CreateDBSnapshotRequest($"MySnapShot", instanceId));
}
As requested, here's the full method:
public async Task<CloudFormationResponse> MigrateDatabase(CloudFormationRequest request, ILambdaContext context)
{
LambdaLogger.Log($"{nameof(MigrateDatabase)} invoked: " + JsonConvert.SerializeObject(request));
if (request.RequestType != "Delete")
{
try
{
var migrations = this.Context.Database.GetPendingMigrations().OrderBy(b=>b).ToList();
for (int i = 0; i < migrations.Count(); i++)
{
string thisMigration = migrations [i];
this.ApplyMigrationInternal(thisMigration);
}
this.TakeSnapshotAsync(context,migrations.Last());
return await CloudFormationResponse.CompleteCloudFormationResponse(null, request, context);
}
catch (Exception e)
{
LambdaLogger.Log(e.ToString());
if (e.InnerException != null) LambdaLogger.Log(e.InnerException.ToString());
return await CloudFormationResponse.CompleteCloudFormationResponse(e, request, context);
}
}
return await CloudFormationResponse.CompleteCloudFormationResponse(null, request, context);
}
internal void TakeSnapshotAsync(ILambdaContext context, string migration)
{
var instanceId = this.GetEnvironmentVariable(nameof(DBInstance));
using (var rdsClient = new AmazonRDSClient())
{
Task<CreateDBSnapshotResponse> response = rdsClient.CreateDBSnapshotAsync(new CreateDBSnapshotRequest($"{instanceId}{migration.Replace('_','-')}", instanceId));
while (context.RemainingTime > TimeSpan.FromSeconds(15))
{
Thread.Sleep(15000);
}
}
}
First refactor that sub function to use proper async syntax along with the use of Task.WhenAny.
internal async Task TakeSnapshotAsync(ILambdaContext context, string migration) {
var instanceId = this.GetEnvironmentVariable(nameof(DBInstance));
//don't wrap in using block or it will be disposed before you are done with it.
var rdsClient = new AmazonRDSClient();
var request = new CreateDBSnapshotRequest($"{instanceId}{migration.Replace('_','-')}", instanceId);
//don't await this long running task
Task<CreateDBSnapshotResponse> response = rdsClient.CreateDBSnapshotAsync(request);
Task delay = Task.Run(async () => {
while (context.RemainingTime > TimeSpan.FromSeconds(15)) {
await Task.Delay(15000); //Don't mix Thread.Sleep. use Task.Delay and await it.
}
}
// The call returns as soon as the first operation completes,
// even if the others are still running.
await Task.WhenAny(response, delay);
}
So if the RemainingTime runs out, it will break out of the call even if the snap shot task is still running so that the request does not time out.
Now you should be able to await the snapshot while there is still time available in the context
public async Task<CloudFormationResponse> MigrateDatabase(CloudFormationRequest request, ILambdaContext context) {
LambdaLogger.Log($"{nameof(MigrateDatabase)} invoked: " + JsonConvert.SerializeObject(request));
if (request.RequestType != "Delete") {
try {
var migrations = this.Context.Database.GetPendingMigrations().OrderBy(b=>b).ToList();
for (int i = 0; i < migrations.Count(); i++) {
string thisMigration = migrations [i];
this.ApplyMigrationInternal(thisMigration);
}
await this.TakeSnapshotAsync(context, migrations.Last());
return await CloudFormationResponse.CompleteCloudFormationResponse(null, request, context);
} catch (Exception e) {
LambdaLogger.Log(e.ToString());
if (e.InnerException != null) LambdaLogger.Log(e.InnerException.ToString());
return await CloudFormationResponse.CompleteCloudFormationResponse(e, request, context);
}
}
return await CloudFormationResponse.CompleteCloudFormationResponse(null, request, context);
}
This should also allow for any exceptions thrown by the RDS client to be caught by the currently executing thread. Which should help with troubleshooting any exception messages.
Some interesting information from documentation.
Using Async in C# Functions with AWS Lambda
If you know your Lambda function will require a long-running process, such as uploading large files to Amazon S3 or reading a large stream of records from DynamoDB, you can take advantage of the async/await pattern. When you use this signature, Lambda executes the function synchronously and waits for the function to return a response or for execution to time out.
From docs about timeouts
Function Settings
...
Timeout – The amount of time that Lambda allows a function to run before stopping it. The default is 3 seconds. The maximum allowed value is 900 seconds.
If getting a HTTP timeout then shorten the delay but leave the long running task. You still use the Task.WhenAny to give the long running task an opportunity to finish first even if that is not the expectation.
internal async Task TakeSnapshotAsync(ILambdaContext context, string migration) {
var instanceId = this.GetEnvironmentVariable(nameof(DBInstance));
//don't wrap in using block or it will be disposed before you are done with it.
var rdsClient = new AmazonRDSClient();
var request = new CreateDBSnapshotRequest($"{instanceId}{migration.Replace('_','-')}", instanceId);
//don't await this long running task
Task<CreateDBSnapshotResponse> response = rdsClient.CreateDBSnapshotAsync(request);
Task delay = Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(2.5));
// The call returns as soon as the first operation completes,
// even if the others are still running.
await Task.WhenAny(response, delay);
}

C#: wait async operation to finish for fixed amount of time, and then do some action based on the result [duplicate]

I want to wait for a Task<T> to complete with some special rules:
If it hasn't completed after X milliseconds, I want to display a message to the user.
And if it hasn't completed after Y milliseconds, I want to automatically request cancellation.
I can use Task.ContinueWith to asynchronously wait for the task to complete (i.e. schedule an action to be executed when the task is complete), but that doesn't allow to specify a timeout.
I can use Task.Wait to synchronously wait for the task to complete with a timeout, but that blocks my thread.
How can I asynchronously wait for the task to complete with a timeout?
How about this:
int timeout = 1000;
var task = SomeOperationAsync();
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout)) == task) {
// task completed within timeout
} else {
// timeout logic
}
And here's a great blog post "Crafting a Task.TimeoutAfter Method" (from MS Parallel Library team) with more info on this sort of thing.
Addition: at the request of a comment on my answer, here is an expanded solution that includes cancellation handling. Note that passing cancellation to the task and the timer means that there are multiple ways cancellation can be experienced in your code, and you should be sure to test for and be confident you properly handle all of them. Don't leave to chance various combinations and hope your computer does the right thing at runtime.
int timeout = 1000;
var task = SomeOperationAsync(cancellationToken);
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout, cancellationToken)) == task)
{
// Task completed within timeout.
// Consider that the task may have faulted or been canceled.
// We re-await the task so that any exceptions/cancellation is rethrown.
await task;
}
else
{
// timeout/cancellation logic
}
Here's a extension method version that incorporates cancellation of the timeout when the original task completes as suggested by Andrew Arnott in a comment to his answer.
public static async Task<TResult> TimeoutAfter<TResult>(this Task<TResult> task, TimeSpan timeout) {
using (var timeoutCancellationTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource()) {
var completedTask = await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout, timeoutCancellationTokenSource.Token));
if (completedTask == task) {
timeoutCancellationTokenSource.Cancel();
return await task; // Very important in order to propagate exceptions
} else {
throw new TimeoutException("The operation has timed out.");
}
}
}
From .Net 6 (Preview 7) or later, there is a new build-in method Task.WaitAsync to achieve this.
// Using TimeSpan
await myTask.WaitAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10));
// Using CancellationToken
await myTask.WaitAsync(cancellationToken);
// Using both TimeSpan and CancellationToken
await myTask.WaitAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10), cancellationToken);
If the task isn't finished before the TimeSpan or CancellationToken then it throws TimeoutException or TaskCanceledException respectively
try
{
await myTask.WaitAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10), cancellationToken);
}
catch (TaskCanceledException)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task didn't get finished before the `CancellationToken`");
}
catch (TimeoutException)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task didn't get finished before the `TimeSpan`");
}
You can use Task.WaitAny to wait the first of multiple tasks.
You could create two additional tasks (that complete after the specified timeouts) and then use WaitAny to wait for whichever completes first. If the task that completed first is your "work" task, then you're done. If the task that completed first is a timeout task, then you can react to the timeout (e.g. request cancellation).
This is a slightly enhanced version of previous answers.
In addition to Lawrence's answer, it cancels the original task when timeout occurs.
In addtion to sjb's answer variants 2 and 3, you can provide CancellationToken for the original task, and when timeout occurs, you get TimeoutException instead of OperationCanceledException.
async Task<TResult> CancelAfterAsync<TResult>(
Func<CancellationToken, Task<TResult>> startTask,
TimeSpan timeout, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
using (var timeoutCancellation = new CancellationTokenSource())
using (var combinedCancellation = CancellationTokenSource
.CreateLinkedTokenSource(cancellationToken, timeoutCancellation.Token))
{
var originalTask = startTask(combinedCancellation.Token);
var delayTask = Task.Delay(timeout, timeoutCancellation.Token);
var completedTask = await Task.WhenAny(originalTask, delayTask);
// Cancel timeout to stop either task:
// - Either the original task completed, so we need to cancel the delay task.
// - Or the timeout expired, so we need to cancel the original task.
// Canceling will not affect a task, that is already completed.
timeoutCancellation.Cancel();
if (completedTask == originalTask)
{
// original task completed
return await originalTask;
}
else
{
// timeout
throw new TimeoutException();
}
}
}
Usage
InnerCallAsync may take a long time to complete. CallAsync wraps it with a timeout.
async Task<int> CallAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
var timeout = TimeSpan.FromMinutes(1);
int result = await CancelAfterAsync(ct => InnerCallAsync(ct), timeout,
cancellationToken);
return result;
}
async Task<int> InnerCallAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
return 42;
}
Using Stephen Cleary's excellent AsyncEx library, you can do:
TimeSpan timeout = TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10);
using (var cts = new CancellationTokenSource(timeout))
{
await myTask.WaitAsync(cts.Token);
}
TaskCanceledException will be thrown in the event of a timeout.
Here is a fully worked example based on the top voted answer, which is:
int timeout = 1000;
var task = SomeOperationAsync();
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout)) == task) {
// task completed within timeout
} else {
// timeout logic
}
The main advantage of the implementation in this answer is that generics have been added, so the function (or task) can return a value. This means that any existing function can be wrapped in a timeout function, e.g.:
Before:
int x = MyFunc();
After:
// Throws a TimeoutException if MyFunc takes more than 1 second
int x = TimeoutAfter(MyFunc, TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
This code requires .NET 4.5.
using System;
using System.Threading;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace TaskTimeout
{
public static class Program
{
/// <summary>
/// Demo of how to wrap any function in a timeout.
/// </summary>
private static void Main(string[] args)
{
// Version without timeout.
int a = MyFunc();
Console.Write("Result: {0}\n", a);
// Version with timeout.
int b = TimeoutAfter(() => { return MyFunc(); },TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
Console.Write("Result: {0}\n", b);
// Version with timeout (short version that uses method groups).
int c = TimeoutAfter(MyFunc, TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
Console.Write("Result: {0}\n", c);
// Version that lets you see what happens when a timeout occurs.
try
{
int d = TimeoutAfter(
() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(123));
return 42;
},
TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
Console.Write("Result: {0}\n", d);
}
catch (TimeoutException e)
{
Console.Write("Exception: {0}\n", e.Message);
}
// Version that works on tasks.
var task = Task.Run(() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
return 42;
});
// To use async/await, add "await" and remove "GetAwaiter().GetResult()".
var result = task.TimeoutAfterAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(2)).
GetAwaiter().GetResult();
Console.Write("Result: {0}\n", result);
Console.Write("[any key to exit]");
Console.ReadKey();
}
public static int MyFunc()
{
return 42;
}
public static TResult TimeoutAfter<TResult>(
this Func<TResult> func, TimeSpan timeout)
{
var task = Task.Run(func);
return TimeoutAfterAsync(task, timeout).GetAwaiter().GetResult();
}
private static async Task<TResult> TimeoutAfterAsync<TResult>(
this Task<TResult> task, TimeSpan timeout)
{
var result = await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout));
if (result == task)
{
// Task completed within timeout.
return task.GetAwaiter().GetResult();
}
else
{
// Task timed out.
throw new TimeoutException();
}
}
}
}
Caveats
Having given this answer, its generally not a good practice to have exceptions thrown in your code during normal operation, unless you absolutely have to:
Each time an exception is thrown, its an extremely heavyweight operation,
Exceptions can slow your code down by a factor of 100 or more if the exceptions are in a tight loop.
Only use this code if you absolutely cannot alter the function you are calling so it times out after a specific TimeSpan.
This answer is really only applicable when dealing with 3rd party library libraries that you simply cannot refactor to include a timeout parameter.
How to write robust code
If you want to write robust code, the general rule is this:
Every single operation that could potentially block indefinitely, must have a timeout.
If you do not observe this rule, your code will eventually hit an operation that fails for some reason, then it will block indefinitely, and your app has just permanently hung.
If there was a reasonable timeout after some time, then your app would hang for some extreme amount of time (e.g. 30 seconds) then it would either display an error and continue on its merry way, or retry.
What about something like this?
const int x = 3000;
const int y = 1000;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
// Your scheduler
TaskScheduler scheduler = TaskScheduler.Default;
Task nonblockingTask = new Task(() =>
{
CancellationTokenSource source = new CancellationTokenSource();
Task t1 = new Task(() =>
{
while (true)
{
// Do something
if (source.IsCancellationRequested)
break;
}
}, source.Token);
t1.Start(scheduler);
// Wait for task 1
bool firstTimeout = t1.Wait(x);
if (!firstTimeout)
{
// If it hasn't finished at first timeout display message
Console.WriteLine("Message to user: the operation hasn't completed yet.");
bool secondTimeout = t1.Wait(y);
if (!secondTimeout)
{
source.Cancel();
Console.WriteLine("Operation stopped!");
}
}
});
nonblockingTask.Start();
Console.WriteLine("Do whatever you want...");
Console.ReadLine();
}
You can use the Task.Wait option without blocking main thread using another Task.
Use a Timer to handle the message and automatic cancellation. When the Task completes, call Dispose on the timers so that they will never fire. Here is an example; change taskDelay to 500, 1500, or 2500 to see the different cases:
using System;
using System.Threading;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
class Program
{
private static Task CreateTaskWithTimeout(
int xDelay, int yDelay, int taskDelay)
{
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var token = cts.Token;
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
// Do some work, but fail if cancellation was requested
token.WaitHandle.WaitOne(taskDelay);
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
Console.WriteLine("Task complete");
});
var messageTimer = new Timer(state =>
{
// Display message at first timeout
Console.WriteLine("X milliseconds elapsed");
}, null, xDelay, -1);
var cancelTimer = new Timer(state =>
{
// Display message and cancel task at second timeout
Console.WriteLine("Y milliseconds elapsed");
cts.Cancel();
}
, null, yDelay, -1);
task.ContinueWith(t =>
{
// Dispose the timers when the task completes
// This will prevent the message from being displayed
// if the task completes before the timeout
messageTimer.Dispose();
cancelTimer.Dispose();
});
return task;
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var task = CreateTaskWithTimeout(1000, 2000, 2500);
// The task has been started and will display a message after
// one timeout and then cancel itself after the second
// You can add continuations to the task
// or wait for the result as needed
try
{
task.Wait();
Console.WriteLine("Done waiting for task");
}
catch (AggregateException ex)
{
Console.WriteLine("Error waiting for task:");
foreach (var e in ex.InnerExceptions)
{
Console.WriteLine(e);
}
}
}
}
}
Also, the Async CTP provides a TaskEx.Delay method that will wrap the timers in tasks for you. This can give you more control to do things like set the TaskScheduler for the continuation when the Timer fires.
private static Task CreateTaskWithTimeout(
int xDelay, int yDelay, int taskDelay)
{
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var token = cts.Token;
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
// Do some work, but fail if cancellation was requested
token.WaitHandle.WaitOne(taskDelay);
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
Console.WriteLine("Task complete");
});
var timerCts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var messageTask = TaskEx.Delay(xDelay, timerCts.Token);
messageTask.ContinueWith(t =>
{
// Display message at first timeout
Console.WriteLine("X milliseconds elapsed");
}, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
var cancelTask = TaskEx.Delay(yDelay, timerCts.Token);
cancelTask.ContinueWith(t =>
{
// Display message and cancel task at second timeout
Console.WriteLine("Y milliseconds elapsed");
cts.Cancel();
}, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
task.ContinueWith(t =>
{
timerCts.Cancel();
});
return task;
}
With .Net 6 (preview 7 as the date of this answer), it is possible to use the new WaitAsync(TimeSpan, CancellationToken) which answers to this particular need.
If you can use .Net6, this version is moreover described to be optimized if we compare to the majority of good solutions proposed in this posts.
(Thanks for all participants because I used your solution for years)
Another way of solving this problem is using Reactive Extensions:
public static Task TimeoutAfter(this Task task, TimeSpan timeout, IScheduler scheduler)
{
return task.ToObservable().Timeout(timeout, scheduler).ToTask();
}
Test up above using below code in your unit test, it works for me
TestScheduler scheduler = new TestScheduler();
Task task = Task.Run(() =>
{
int i = 0;
while (i < 5)
{
Console.WriteLine(i);
i++;
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
})
.TimeoutAfter(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5), scheduler)
.ContinueWith(t => { }, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
scheduler.AdvanceBy(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(6).Ticks);
You may need the following namespace:
using System.Threading.Tasks;
using System.Reactive.Subjects;
using System.Reactive.Linq;
using System.Reactive.Threading.Tasks;
using Microsoft.Reactive.Testing;
using System.Threading;
using System.Reactive.Concurrency;
A generic version of #Kevan's answer above, using Reactive Extensions.
public static Task<T> TimeoutAfter<T>(this Task<T> task, TimeSpan timeout, IScheduler scheduler)
{
return task.ToObservable().Timeout(timeout, scheduler).ToTask();
}
With optional Scheduler:
public static Task<T> TimeoutAfter<T>(this Task<T> task, TimeSpan timeout, Scheduler scheduler = null)
{
return scheduler is null
? task.ToObservable().Timeout(timeout).ToTask()
: task.ToObservable().Timeout(timeout, scheduler).ToTask();
}
BTW: When a Timeout happens, a timeout exception will be thrown
For the fun of it I made a 'OnTimeout' extension to Task. On timeout Task executes the desired inline lambda Action() and returns true, otherwise false.
public static async Task<bool> OnTimeout<T>(this T t, Action<T> action, int waitms) where T : Task
{
if (!(await Task.WhenAny(t, Task.Delay(waitms)) == t))
{
action(t);
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
The OnTimeout extension returns a bool result that can be assigned to a variable like in this example calling an UDP socket Async:
var t = UdpSocket.ReceiveAsync();
var timeout = await t.OnTimeout(task => {
Console.WriteLine("No Response");
}, 5000);
The 'task' variable is accessible in the timeout lambda for more processing.
The use of Action receiving an object may inspire to various other extension designs.
Create a extension to wait for the task or a delay to complete, whichever comes first. Throw an exception if the delay wins.
public static async Task<TResult> WithTimeout<TResult>(this Task<TResult> task, TimeSpan timeout)
{
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout)) != task)
throw new TimeoutException();
return await task;
}
I felt the Task.Delay() task and CancellationTokenSource in the other answers a bit much for my use case in a tight-ish networking loop.
And although Joe Hoag's Crafting a Task.TimeoutAfter Method on MSDN blogs was inspiring, I was a little weary of using TimeoutException for flow control for the same reason as above, because timeouts are expected more frequently than not.
So I went with this, which also handles the optimizations mentioned in the blog:
public static async Task<bool> BeforeTimeout(this Task task, int millisecondsTimeout)
{
if (task.IsCompleted) return true;
if (millisecondsTimeout == 0) return false;
if (millisecondsTimeout == Timeout.Infinite)
{
await Task.WhenAll(task);
return true;
}
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<object>();
using (var timer = new Timer(state => ((TaskCompletionSource<object>)state).TrySetCanceled(), tcs,
millisecondsTimeout, Timeout.Infinite))
{
return await Task.WhenAny(task, tcs.Task) == task;
}
}
An example use case is as such:
var receivingTask = conn.ReceiveAsync(ct);
while (!await receivingTask.BeforeTimeout(keepAliveMilliseconds))
{
// Send keep-alive
}
// Read and do something with data
var data = await receivingTask;
A few variants of Andrew Arnott's answer:
If you want to wait for an existing task and find out whether it completed or timed out, but don't want to cancel it if the timeout occurs:
public static async Task<bool> TimedOutAsync(this Task task, int timeoutMilliseconds)
{
if (timeoutMilliseconds < 0 || (timeoutMilliseconds > 0 && timeoutMilliseconds < 100)) { throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); }
if (timeoutMilliseconds == 0) {
return !task.IsCompleted; // timed out if not completed
}
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
if (await Task.WhenAny( task, Task.Delay(timeoutMilliseconds, cts.Token)) == task) {
cts.Cancel(); // task completed, get rid of timer
await task; // test for exceptions or task cancellation
return false; // did not timeout
} else {
return true; // did timeout
}
}
If you want to start a work task and cancel the work if the timeout occurs:
public static async Task<T> CancelAfterAsync<T>( this Func<CancellationToken,Task<T>> actionAsync, int timeoutMilliseconds)
{
if (timeoutMilliseconds < 0 || (timeoutMilliseconds > 0 && timeoutMilliseconds < 100)) { throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); }
var taskCts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var timerCts = new CancellationTokenSource();
Task<T> task = actionAsync(taskCts.Token);
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeoutMilliseconds, timerCts.Token)) == task) {
timerCts.Cancel(); // task completed, get rid of timer
} else {
taskCts.Cancel(); // timer completed, get rid of task
}
return await task; // test for exceptions or task cancellation
}
If you have a task already created that you want to cancel if a timeout occurs:
public static async Task<T> CancelAfterAsync<T>(this Task<T> task, int timeoutMilliseconds, CancellationTokenSource taskCts)
{
if (timeoutMilliseconds < 0 || (timeoutMilliseconds > 0 && timeoutMilliseconds < 100)) { throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); }
var timerCts = new CancellationTokenSource();
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeoutMilliseconds, timerCts.Token)) == task) {
timerCts.Cancel(); // task completed, get rid of timer
} else {
taskCts.Cancel(); // timer completed, get rid of task
}
return await task; // test for exceptions or task cancellation
}
Another comment, these versions will cancel the timer if the timeout does not occur, so multiple calls will not cause timers to pile up.
sjb
So this is ancient, but there's a much better modern solution. Not sure what version of c#/.NET is required, but this is how I do it:
... Other method code not relevant to the question.
// a token source that will timeout at the specified interval, or if cancelled outside of this scope
using var timeoutTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5));
using var linkedTokenSource = CancellationTokenSource.CreateLinkedTokenSource(token, timeoutTokenSource.Token);
async Task<MessageResource> FetchAsync()
{
try
{
return await MessageResource.FetchAsync(m.Sid);
} catch (TaskCanceledException e)
{
if (timeoutTokenSource.IsCancellationRequested)
throw new TimeoutException("Timeout", e);
throw;
}
}
return await Task.Run(FetchAsync, linkedTokenSource.Token);
the CancellationTokenSource constructor takes a TimeSpan parameter which will cause that token to cancel after that interval has elapsed. You can then wrap your async (or syncronous, for that matter) code in another call to Task.Run, passing the timeout token.
This assumes you're passing in a cancellation token (the token variable). If you don't have a need to cancel the task separately from the timeout, you can just use timeoutTokenSource directly. Otherwise, you create linkedTokenSource, which will cancel if the timeout ocurrs, or if it's otherwise cancelled.
We then just catch OperationCancelledException and check which token threw the exception, and throw a TimeoutException if a timeout caused this to raise. Otherwise, we rethrow.
Also, I'm using local functions here, which were introduced in C# 7, but you could easily use lambda or actual functions to the same affect. Similarly, c# 8 introduced a simpler syntax for using statements, but those are easy enough to rewrite.
If you use a BlockingCollection to schedule the task, the producer can run the potentially long running task and the consumer can use the TryTake method which has timeout and cancellation token built in.
I'm recombinging the ideas of some other answers here and this answer on another thread into a Try-style extension method. This has a benefit if you want an extension method, yet avoiding an exception upon timeout.
public static async Task<bool> TryWithTimeoutAfter<TResult>(this Task<TResult> task,
TimeSpan timeout, Action<TResult> successor)
{
using var timeoutCancellationTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
var completedTask = await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout, timeoutCancellationTokenSource.Token))
.ConfigureAwait(continueOnCapturedContext: false);
if (completedTask == task)
{
timeoutCancellationTokenSource.Cancel();
// propagate exception rather than AggregateException, if calling task.Result.
var result = await task.ConfigureAwait(continueOnCapturedContext: false);
successor(result);
return true;
}
else return false;
}
async Task Example(Task<string> task)
{
string result = null;
if (await task.TryWithTimeoutAfter(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1), r => result = r))
{
Console.WriteLine(result);
}
}

.NET CORE Time asynced method

I have several asynec methods.
One of them triggers a POST method which start a process. I then need to 'sample' the results of another GET method every 10 minutes, and check if the status has changed from "pending" to "success" .
I tryed usingSystem.Threading.Timer with no luck, complaining about my method being asynced .
Error CS0407 'Task Campaigns.repeat(object)' has the wrong return type Campaigns
This is my code:
public async Task waitForCampaignLoadAsync(string Uri)
{
...........
var container = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<CampaignTempleteStatus>(json);
if(container.status == "pending")
{
var autoEvent = new AutoResetEvent(false);
//The next row triggers the error
var stateTimer = new Timer(repeat, autoEvent, 1000, (1000 * 60 * 10));
//How can I keep repeating this, until (bool isFinished = true)??
}
public async Task repeat(Object stateInfo)
{
if(...)
isFinished = true;
}
Another thing is , how do I pass extra info inside repeat function? I need to pass the Uri input for inner ussage ?
When an asynchronous method starts getting complicated it's a sure sign something is wrong. Most of the time async code looks almost the same as synchronous code with the addition of await.
A simple polling loop could be as simple as :
public async Task<string> waitForCampaignLoadAsync(string uri)
{
var client=new HttpClient();
for(int i=0;i<30;i++)
{
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
var json = await client.GetStringAsync(uri);
var container = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<CampaignTempleteStatus>(json);
if (container.status != "pending")
{
return container.status;
}
await Task.Delay(10000);
}
return "Timed out!";
}
Cancellation in managed threads explains how CancellationTokenSource and CancellationToken can be used to cancel threads, tasks and asynchronous functions. Many asynchronous methods already provide overloads that accept a CancellationToken parameter. The polling function could be modified to accept and check a canellation token :
public async Task<string> waitForCampaignLoadAsync(string uri,CancellationToken token=default)
{
var client=new HttpClient();
for(int i=0;i<30;i++)
{
var json = await client.GetStringAsync(uri);
var container = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<CampaignTempleteStatus>(json);
if (container.status != "pending")
{
return container.status;
}
await Task.Delay(10000,token);
}
return "Timed out!";
}
A CancellationTokenSource can be used to call this method with an overall timeout of eg, 5 minutes :
var cts=new CancellationTokenSource(TimeSpan.FromMinutes(5));
try
{
var result=waitForCampaignLoadAsync(uri,cts.Token);
//Process the result ....
}
catch(OperationCancelledExcepction ex)
{
//Handle the timeout here
}
This code can be improved. For example, GetStringAsync() doesn't accept a cancellation token. The operation can be broken in two steps though, one call to GetAsync() with a cancellation token that waits for the server to send a result
and another to HttpContent.ReadAsStringAsync() to read the response, eg :
var response=await client.GetAsync(uri,token)
response.EnsureSuccessStatusCode();
var json=await response.Content.ReadAsStringAsync();
...
The first parameter of Timer is a TimerCallback delegate, which should return void
var stateTimer = new Timer(Repeat, autoEvent, 1000, (1000 * 60 * 10));
private void Repeat(object state)
{
....
}

Setting timeout for an async operation [duplicate]

I want to wait for a Task<T> to complete with some special rules:
If it hasn't completed after X milliseconds, I want to display a message to the user.
And if it hasn't completed after Y milliseconds, I want to automatically request cancellation.
I can use Task.ContinueWith to asynchronously wait for the task to complete (i.e. schedule an action to be executed when the task is complete), but that doesn't allow to specify a timeout.
I can use Task.Wait to synchronously wait for the task to complete with a timeout, but that blocks my thread.
How can I asynchronously wait for the task to complete with a timeout?
How about this:
int timeout = 1000;
var task = SomeOperationAsync();
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout)) == task) {
// task completed within timeout
} else {
// timeout logic
}
And here's a great blog post "Crafting a Task.TimeoutAfter Method" (from MS Parallel Library team) with more info on this sort of thing.
Addition: at the request of a comment on my answer, here is an expanded solution that includes cancellation handling. Note that passing cancellation to the task and the timer means that there are multiple ways cancellation can be experienced in your code, and you should be sure to test for and be confident you properly handle all of them. Don't leave to chance various combinations and hope your computer does the right thing at runtime.
int timeout = 1000;
var task = SomeOperationAsync(cancellationToken);
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout, cancellationToken)) == task)
{
// Task completed within timeout.
// Consider that the task may have faulted or been canceled.
// We re-await the task so that any exceptions/cancellation is rethrown.
await task;
}
else
{
// timeout/cancellation logic
}
Here's a extension method version that incorporates cancellation of the timeout when the original task completes as suggested by Andrew Arnott in a comment to his answer.
public static async Task<TResult> TimeoutAfter<TResult>(this Task<TResult> task, TimeSpan timeout) {
using (var timeoutCancellationTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource()) {
var completedTask = await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout, timeoutCancellationTokenSource.Token));
if (completedTask == task) {
timeoutCancellationTokenSource.Cancel();
return await task; // Very important in order to propagate exceptions
} else {
throw new TimeoutException("The operation has timed out.");
}
}
}
From .Net 6 (Preview 7) or later, there is a new build-in method Task.WaitAsync to achieve this.
// Using TimeSpan
await myTask.WaitAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10));
// Using CancellationToken
await myTask.WaitAsync(cancellationToken);
// Using both TimeSpan and CancellationToken
await myTask.WaitAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10), cancellationToken);
If the task isn't finished before the TimeSpan or CancellationToken then it throws TimeoutException or TaskCanceledException respectively
try
{
await myTask.WaitAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10), cancellationToken);
}
catch (TaskCanceledException)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task didn't get finished before the `CancellationToken`");
}
catch (TimeoutException)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task didn't get finished before the `TimeSpan`");
}
You can use Task.WaitAny to wait the first of multiple tasks.
You could create two additional tasks (that complete after the specified timeouts) and then use WaitAny to wait for whichever completes first. If the task that completed first is your "work" task, then you're done. If the task that completed first is a timeout task, then you can react to the timeout (e.g. request cancellation).
This is a slightly enhanced version of previous answers.
In addition to Lawrence's answer, it cancels the original task when timeout occurs.
In addtion to sjb's answer variants 2 and 3, you can provide CancellationToken for the original task, and when timeout occurs, you get TimeoutException instead of OperationCanceledException.
async Task<TResult> CancelAfterAsync<TResult>(
Func<CancellationToken, Task<TResult>> startTask,
TimeSpan timeout, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
using (var timeoutCancellation = new CancellationTokenSource())
using (var combinedCancellation = CancellationTokenSource
.CreateLinkedTokenSource(cancellationToken, timeoutCancellation.Token))
{
var originalTask = startTask(combinedCancellation.Token);
var delayTask = Task.Delay(timeout, timeoutCancellation.Token);
var completedTask = await Task.WhenAny(originalTask, delayTask);
// Cancel timeout to stop either task:
// - Either the original task completed, so we need to cancel the delay task.
// - Or the timeout expired, so we need to cancel the original task.
// Canceling will not affect a task, that is already completed.
timeoutCancellation.Cancel();
if (completedTask == originalTask)
{
// original task completed
return await originalTask;
}
else
{
// timeout
throw new TimeoutException();
}
}
}
Usage
InnerCallAsync may take a long time to complete. CallAsync wraps it with a timeout.
async Task<int> CallAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
var timeout = TimeSpan.FromMinutes(1);
int result = await CancelAfterAsync(ct => InnerCallAsync(ct), timeout,
cancellationToken);
return result;
}
async Task<int> InnerCallAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
return 42;
}
Using Stephen Cleary's excellent AsyncEx library, you can do:
TimeSpan timeout = TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10);
using (var cts = new CancellationTokenSource(timeout))
{
await myTask.WaitAsync(cts.Token);
}
TaskCanceledException will be thrown in the event of a timeout.
Here is a fully worked example based on the top voted answer, which is:
int timeout = 1000;
var task = SomeOperationAsync();
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout)) == task) {
// task completed within timeout
} else {
// timeout logic
}
The main advantage of the implementation in this answer is that generics have been added, so the function (or task) can return a value. This means that any existing function can be wrapped in a timeout function, e.g.:
Before:
int x = MyFunc();
After:
// Throws a TimeoutException if MyFunc takes more than 1 second
int x = TimeoutAfter(MyFunc, TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
This code requires .NET 4.5.
using System;
using System.Threading;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace TaskTimeout
{
public static class Program
{
/// <summary>
/// Demo of how to wrap any function in a timeout.
/// </summary>
private static void Main(string[] args)
{
// Version without timeout.
int a = MyFunc();
Console.Write("Result: {0}\n", a);
// Version with timeout.
int b = TimeoutAfter(() => { return MyFunc(); },TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
Console.Write("Result: {0}\n", b);
// Version with timeout (short version that uses method groups).
int c = TimeoutAfter(MyFunc, TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
Console.Write("Result: {0}\n", c);
// Version that lets you see what happens when a timeout occurs.
try
{
int d = TimeoutAfter(
() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(123));
return 42;
},
TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
Console.Write("Result: {0}\n", d);
}
catch (TimeoutException e)
{
Console.Write("Exception: {0}\n", e.Message);
}
// Version that works on tasks.
var task = Task.Run(() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
return 42;
});
// To use async/await, add "await" and remove "GetAwaiter().GetResult()".
var result = task.TimeoutAfterAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(2)).
GetAwaiter().GetResult();
Console.Write("Result: {0}\n", result);
Console.Write("[any key to exit]");
Console.ReadKey();
}
public static int MyFunc()
{
return 42;
}
public static TResult TimeoutAfter<TResult>(
this Func<TResult> func, TimeSpan timeout)
{
var task = Task.Run(func);
return TimeoutAfterAsync(task, timeout).GetAwaiter().GetResult();
}
private static async Task<TResult> TimeoutAfterAsync<TResult>(
this Task<TResult> task, TimeSpan timeout)
{
var result = await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout));
if (result == task)
{
// Task completed within timeout.
return task.GetAwaiter().GetResult();
}
else
{
// Task timed out.
throw new TimeoutException();
}
}
}
}
Caveats
Having given this answer, its generally not a good practice to have exceptions thrown in your code during normal operation, unless you absolutely have to:
Each time an exception is thrown, its an extremely heavyweight operation,
Exceptions can slow your code down by a factor of 100 or more if the exceptions are in a tight loop.
Only use this code if you absolutely cannot alter the function you are calling so it times out after a specific TimeSpan.
This answer is really only applicable when dealing with 3rd party library libraries that you simply cannot refactor to include a timeout parameter.
How to write robust code
If you want to write robust code, the general rule is this:
Every single operation that could potentially block indefinitely, must have a timeout.
If you do not observe this rule, your code will eventually hit an operation that fails for some reason, then it will block indefinitely, and your app has just permanently hung.
If there was a reasonable timeout after some time, then your app would hang for some extreme amount of time (e.g. 30 seconds) then it would either display an error and continue on its merry way, or retry.
What about something like this?
const int x = 3000;
const int y = 1000;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
// Your scheduler
TaskScheduler scheduler = TaskScheduler.Default;
Task nonblockingTask = new Task(() =>
{
CancellationTokenSource source = new CancellationTokenSource();
Task t1 = new Task(() =>
{
while (true)
{
// Do something
if (source.IsCancellationRequested)
break;
}
}, source.Token);
t1.Start(scheduler);
// Wait for task 1
bool firstTimeout = t1.Wait(x);
if (!firstTimeout)
{
// If it hasn't finished at first timeout display message
Console.WriteLine("Message to user: the operation hasn't completed yet.");
bool secondTimeout = t1.Wait(y);
if (!secondTimeout)
{
source.Cancel();
Console.WriteLine("Operation stopped!");
}
}
});
nonblockingTask.Start();
Console.WriteLine("Do whatever you want...");
Console.ReadLine();
}
You can use the Task.Wait option without blocking main thread using another Task.
Use a Timer to handle the message and automatic cancellation. When the Task completes, call Dispose on the timers so that they will never fire. Here is an example; change taskDelay to 500, 1500, or 2500 to see the different cases:
using System;
using System.Threading;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
class Program
{
private static Task CreateTaskWithTimeout(
int xDelay, int yDelay, int taskDelay)
{
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var token = cts.Token;
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
// Do some work, but fail if cancellation was requested
token.WaitHandle.WaitOne(taskDelay);
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
Console.WriteLine("Task complete");
});
var messageTimer = new Timer(state =>
{
// Display message at first timeout
Console.WriteLine("X milliseconds elapsed");
}, null, xDelay, -1);
var cancelTimer = new Timer(state =>
{
// Display message and cancel task at second timeout
Console.WriteLine("Y milliseconds elapsed");
cts.Cancel();
}
, null, yDelay, -1);
task.ContinueWith(t =>
{
// Dispose the timers when the task completes
// This will prevent the message from being displayed
// if the task completes before the timeout
messageTimer.Dispose();
cancelTimer.Dispose();
});
return task;
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var task = CreateTaskWithTimeout(1000, 2000, 2500);
// The task has been started and will display a message after
// one timeout and then cancel itself after the second
// You can add continuations to the task
// or wait for the result as needed
try
{
task.Wait();
Console.WriteLine("Done waiting for task");
}
catch (AggregateException ex)
{
Console.WriteLine("Error waiting for task:");
foreach (var e in ex.InnerExceptions)
{
Console.WriteLine(e);
}
}
}
}
}
Also, the Async CTP provides a TaskEx.Delay method that will wrap the timers in tasks for you. This can give you more control to do things like set the TaskScheduler for the continuation when the Timer fires.
private static Task CreateTaskWithTimeout(
int xDelay, int yDelay, int taskDelay)
{
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var token = cts.Token;
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
// Do some work, but fail if cancellation was requested
token.WaitHandle.WaitOne(taskDelay);
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
Console.WriteLine("Task complete");
});
var timerCts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var messageTask = TaskEx.Delay(xDelay, timerCts.Token);
messageTask.ContinueWith(t =>
{
// Display message at first timeout
Console.WriteLine("X milliseconds elapsed");
}, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
var cancelTask = TaskEx.Delay(yDelay, timerCts.Token);
cancelTask.ContinueWith(t =>
{
// Display message and cancel task at second timeout
Console.WriteLine("Y milliseconds elapsed");
cts.Cancel();
}, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
task.ContinueWith(t =>
{
timerCts.Cancel();
});
return task;
}
With .Net 6 (preview 7 as the date of this answer), it is possible to use the new WaitAsync(TimeSpan, CancellationToken) which answers to this particular need.
If you can use .Net6, this version is moreover described to be optimized if we compare to the majority of good solutions proposed in this posts.
(Thanks for all participants because I used your solution for years)
Another way of solving this problem is using Reactive Extensions:
public static Task TimeoutAfter(this Task task, TimeSpan timeout, IScheduler scheduler)
{
return task.ToObservable().Timeout(timeout, scheduler).ToTask();
}
Test up above using below code in your unit test, it works for me
TestScheduler scheduler = new TestScheduler();
Task task = Task.Run(() =>
{
int i = 0;
while (i < 5)
{
Console.WriteLine(i);
i++;
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
})
.TimeoutAfter(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5), scheduler)
.ContinueWith(t => { }, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
scheduler.AdvanceBy(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(6).Ticks);
You may need the following namespace:
using System.Threading.Tasks;
using System.Reactive.Subjects;
using System.Reactive.Linq;
using System.Reactive.Threading.Tasks;
using Microsoft.Reactive.Testing;
using System.Threading;
using System.Reactive.Concurrency;
A generic version of #Kevan's answer above, using Reactive Extensions.
public static Task<T> TimeoutAfter<T>(this Task<T> task, TimeSpan timeout, IScheduler scheduler)
{
return task.ToObservable().Timeout(timeout, scheduler).ToTask();
}
With optional Scheduler:
public static Task<T> TimeoutAfter<T>(this Task<T> task, TimeSpan timeout, Scheduler scheduler = null)
{
return scheduler is null
? task.ToObservable().Timeout(timeout).ToTask()
: task.ToObservable().Timeout(timeout, scheduler).ToTask();
}
BTW: When a Timeout happens, a timeout exception will be thrown
For the fun of it I made a 'OnTimeout' extension to Task. On timeout Task executes the desired inline lambda Action() and returns true, otherwise false.
public static async Task<bool> OnTimeout<T>(this T t, Action<T> action, int waitms) where T : Task
{
if (!(await Task.WhenAny(t, Task.Delay(waitms)) == t))
{
action(t);
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
The OnTimeout extension returns a bool result that can be assigned to a variable like in this example calling an UDP socket Async:
var t = UdpSocket.ReceiveAsync();
var timeout = await t.OnTimeout(task => {
Console.WriteLine("No Response");
}, 5000);
The 'task' variable is accessible in the timeout lambda for more processing.
The use of Action receiving an object may inspire to various other extension designs.
Create a extension to wait for the task or a delay to complete, whichever comes first. Throw an exception if the delay wins.
public static async Task<TResult> WithTimeout<TResult>(this Task<TResult> task, TimeSpan timeout)
{
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout)) != task)
throw new TimeoutException();
return await task;
}
I felt the Task.Delay() task and CancellationTokenSource in the other answers a bit much for my use case in a tight-ish networking loop.
And although Joe Hoag's Crafting a Task.TimeoutAfter Method on MSDN blogs was inspiring, I was a little weary of using TimeoutException for flow control for the same reason as above, because timeouts are expected more frequently than not.
So I went with this, which also handles the optimizations mentioned in the blog:
public static async Task<bool> BeforeTimeout(this Task task, int millisecondsTimeout)
{
if (task.IsCompleted) return true;
if (millisecondsTimeout == 0) return false;
if (millisecondsTimeout == Timeout.Infinite)
{
await Task.WhenAll(task);
return true;
}
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<object>();
using (var timer = new Timer(state => ((TaskCompletionSource<object>)state).TrySetCanceled(), tcs,
millisecondsTimeout, Timeout.Infinite))
{
return await Task.WhenAny(task, tcs.Task) == task;
}
}
An example use case is as such:
var receivingTask = conn.ReceiveAsync(ct);
while (!await receivingTask.BeforeTimeout(keepAliveMilliseconds))
{
// Send keep-alive
}
// Read and do something with data
var data = await receivingTask;
A few variants of Andrew Arnott's answer:
If you want to wait for an existing task and find out whether it completed or timed out, but don't want to cancel it if the timeout occurs:
public static async Task<bool> TimedOutAsync(this Task task, int timeoutMilliseconds)
{
if (timeoutMilliseconds < 0 || (timeoutMilliseconds > 0 && timeoutMilliseconds < 100)) { throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); }
if (timeoutMilliseconds == 0) {
return !task.IsCompleted; // timed out if not completed
}
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
if (await Task.WhenAny( task, Task.Delay(timeoutMilliseconds, cts.Token)) == task) {
cts.Cancel(); // task completed, get rid of timer
await task; // test for exceptions or task cancellation
return false; // did not timeout
} else {
return true; // did timeout
}
}
If you want to start a work task and cancel the work if the timeout occurs:
public static async Task<T> CancelAfterAsync<T>( this Func<CancellationToken,Task<T>> actionAsync, int timeoutMilliseconds)
{
if (timeoutMilliseconds < 0 || (timeoutMilliseconds > 0 && timeoutMilliseconds < 100)) { throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); }
var taskCts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var timerCts = new CancellationTokenSource();
Task<T> task = actionAsync(taskCts.Token);
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeoutMilliseconds, timerCts.Token)) == task) {
timerCts.Cancel(); // task completed, get rid of timer
} else {
taskCts.Cancel(); // timer completed, get rid of task
}
return await task; // test for exceptions or task cancellation
}
If you have a task already created that you want to cancel if a timeout occurs:
public static async Task<T> CancelAfterAsync<T>(this Task<T> task, int timeoutMilliseconds, CancellationTokenSource taskCts)
{
if (timeoutMilliseconds < 0 || (timeoutMilliseconds > 0 && timeoutMilliseconds < 100)) { throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); }
var timerCts = new CancellationTokenSource();
if (await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeoutMilliseconds, timerCts.Token)) == task) {
timerCts.Cancel(); // task completed, get rid of timer
} else {
taskCts.Cancel(); // timer completed, get rid of task
}
return await task; // test for exceptions or task cancellation
}
Another comment, these versions will cancel the timer if the timeout does not occur, so multiple calls will not cause timers to pile up.
sjb
So this is ancient, but there's a much better modern solution. Not sure what version of c#/.NET is required, but this is how I do it:
... Other method code not relevant to the question.
// a token source that will timeout at the specified interval, or if cancelled outside of this scope
using var timeoutTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5));
using var linkedTokenSource = CancellationTokenSource.CreateLinkedTokenSource(token, timeoutTokenSource.Token);
async Task<MessageResource> FetchAsync()
{
try
{
return await MessageResource.FetchAsync(m.Sid);
} catch (TaskCanceledException e)
{
if (timeoutTokenSource.IsCancellationRequested)
throw new TimeoutException("Timeout", e);
throw;
}
}
return await Task.Run(FetchAsync, linkedTokenSource.Token);
the CancellationTokenSource constructor takes a TimeSpan parameter which will cause that token to cancel after that interval has elapsed. You can then wrap your async (or syncronous, for that matter) code in another call to Task.Run, passing the timeout token.
This assumes you're passing in a cancellation token (the token variable). If you don't have a need to cancel the task separately from the timeout, you can just use timeoutTokenSource directly. Otherwise, you create linkedTokenSource, which will cancel if the timeout ocurrs, or if it's otherwise cancelled.
We then just catch OperationCancelledException and check which token threw the exception, and throw a TimeoutException if a timeout caused this to raise. Otherwise, we rethrow.
Also, I'm using local functions here, which were introduced in C# 7, but you could easily use lambda or actual functions to the same affect. Similarly, c# 8 introduced a simpler syntax for using statements, but those are easy enough to rewrite.
If you use a BlockingCollection to schedule the task, the producer can run the potentially long running task and the consumer can use the TryTake method which has timeout and cancellation token built in.
I'm recombinging the ideas of some other answers here and this answer on another thread into a Try-style extension method. This has a benefit if you want an extension method, yet avoiding an exception upon timeout.
public static async Task<bool> TryWithTimeoutAfter<TResult>(this Task<TResult> task,
TimeSpan timeout, Action<TResult> successor)
{
using var timeoutCancellationTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
var completedTask = await Task.WhenAny(task, Task.Delay(timeout, timeoutCancellationTokenSource.Token))
.ConfigureAwait(continueOnCapturedContext: false);
if (completedTask == task)
{
timeoutCancellationTokenSource.Cancel();
// propagate exception rather than AggregateException, if calling task.Result.
var result = await task.ConfigureAwait(continueOnCapturedContext: false);
successor(result);
return true;
}
else return false;
}
async Task Example(Task<string> task)
{
string result = null;
if (await task.TryWithTimeoutAfter(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1), r => result = r))
{
Console.WriteLine(result);
}
}

Async/await in .Net --> Calling a service method that has no async implementation

Basically I need to make a remote request using a vendor's .Net SDK for some information. Their SDK has no async implementations on their methods so I am trying to come up with something on my own. I bascially want to fire off this request to a synchronous method, and wait on it for only a certain amount of time. If the request takes too long, I need to act and report that down to the client in our web app.
I'm wondering if this is the best way to do this, or is there a better way? The code below is a service method that is called from a Controller action.
public async Task<bool> SignersAdded(string packageId)
{
var timeout = 5000;
var task = Task.Run(() =>
{
var package = _eslClient.GetPackage(new PackageId(packageId));
return package != null && package.Documents.Values.Any(x => x.Signatures.Any());
});
var stopwatch = Stopwatch.StartNew();
while (!task.IsCompleted)
{
if (stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds >= timeout)
return false;
}
return false;
}
Task.Wait has an overload that takes an int which defines timeout.
public Task<bool> SignersAdded(string packageId)
{
var timeout = 5000;
var task = Task.Run(() =>
{
var package = _eslClient.GetPackage(new PackageId(packageId));
return package != null && package.Documents.Values.Any(x => x.Signatures.Any());
});
if(!task.Wait(1000 /*timeout*/))
{
// timeout
return false;
}
return task.Result;
}
Your method doesn't await on anything, so it runs synchronously. Also, your while loop will spin the CPU, blocking the calling code until the task is complete.
A better approach might be this:
var task = Task.Run(/* your lambda */)
var finishedTask = await Task.WhenAny(Task.Delay(timeout), task);
return finishedTask == task;
This way we create a separate delay task for that time and we await until the first task is complete. This will run in a truly asynchronous manner - there is no while loop that will burn CPU cycles.
(The above assumes timeout is in milliseconds. If not, then use an overload to Delay taking a TimeSpan argument instead.)
You are correct: start a task that calls GetPackage. After that you can continue doing other things.
After a while when you need the result you can wait for the task to complete. However you don't have to do Task.Wait. It is much easier to use async / await.
To do this, you have to do three things:
Declare your function async
Instead of void return Task and instead of type TResult return Task<TResult>. You already did that.
Instead of waiting for the task to finish use await
Your function would look much simpler:
public **async** Task<bool> SignersAdded(string packageId)
{
var timeout = TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5);
var task = Task.Run(() =>
{
var package = _eslClient.GetPackage(new PackageId(packageId));
return package != null
&& package.Documents.Values
.Any(x => x.Signatures.Any());
});
// if desired you can do other things here
// once you need the answer start waiting for it and return the result:
return await Task;
}
if you have a function that returns TResult the async version of it returns Task<TResult>.
the return value of await Task<TResult> is TResult
However, if you want to be able to wait with a timeout you can do the following:
var tokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1);
// cancel after 1 second
try
{
return await task.Run( () => ..., tokenSource.Token);
}
catch (OperationCanceledException exc)
{
// handle timeout
}
finally
{
// do necessary cleanup
}
The disadvantage of making your function async is that all callers also have to be async and all have to return Task or Task<TResult>. There is one exception:
An event handler can be async but may return void
Example:
private async void OnButton1_clicked(object sender, )
Look at the TaskCompletionSource and the CancellationToken class. Samples here: Timeout an async method implemented with TaskCompletionSource or How to cancel a TaskCompletionSource using a timout

Categories