I have a simple Web API method that looks like this:
public async Task<HttpResponseMessage> RunTask(TaskType taskType)
{
var taskId = await TaskManager.CreateTask(taskType);
TaskManager.Run(taskId);
return new HttpResponseMessage
{
StatusCode = HttpStatusCode.OK,
Content =
new StringContent($"Task {taskType.GetDescription()} was started.")
};
}
TaskManager.Run is decalared like this:
public async Task Run(int id)
I was expecting it to return "Task was started" message immediately after TaskManager.Run(taskId) But the request continues to run synchronously.
But if to replace the call TaskManager.Run(taskId) with:
Task.Run(() => Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(100)));
Then it runs asynchronously.
So I believe this is something to do with the resources shared by TaskManager and main thread. Can a shared resource lock the execution?
I'm using Castle Windsor. One WindsorContainer container is declared in Web API project.
TaskManager utilizes BaseTaskRunner class inside of it. One more WindsorContainer is declared in BaseTaskRunner.
Web API's container uses LifeStyle.PerWebRequest for all components. BaseTaskRunner's container uses LifeStyle.Singleton (not sure if it's correct LifeStyle). Could the call be locked for example by DdContext or other classes declared in both of the containers?
UPD:
I don't want to wait the TaskManager.Run to complete. But what happens is that return statement still waits for the TaskManager.Run to complete (even without await statement on TaskManager.Run).
In other words it does not matter how I call the TaskManager.Run:
TaskManager.Run(taskId);
or
await TaskManager.Run(taskId);
It waits for TaskManager.Run to complete in both cases.
Here is the code of TaskManager:
public class TaskManager : ITaskManager
{
public IRepository<BackgroundTask> TaskRepository { get; set; }
public async Task<int> CreateTask(TaskType type, byte[] data = null, object config = null)
{
var task = new BackgroundTask
{
Type = type,
Status = BackgroundTaskStatus.New,
Config = config?.SerializeToXml(),
Created = DateTime.Now,
Data = data
};
TaskRepository.Add(task);
TaskRepository.SaveChanges();
return task.Id;
}
public async Task Run(int id, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
var task = TaskRepository.GetById(id);
Run(task, removeOnComplete);
}
public async Task Run(TaskType type, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
var tasksToRun = TaskRepository.Get(t => t.Type == type);
tasksToRun.ForEachAsync(t => Run(t, removeOnComplete));
}
public async Task Run(BackgroundTask task, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
switch (task.Type)
{
case TaskType.SpreadsheetImport:
new SpreadsheetImportTaskRunner().Run(task);
break;
}
}
}
And some other classes:
public class SpreadsheetImportTaskRunner : BaseTaskRunner
{
public IForecastSpreadsheetManager SpreadsheetManager { get; set; }
protected override void Execute()
{
SpreadsheetManager.ImportActuals(Task.Data);
}
protected override void Initialize()
{
base.Initialize();
SpreadsheetManager = _container.Resolve<IForecastSpreadsheetManager>();
}
}
BaseTaskRunner:
public class BaseTaskRunner
{
public IRepository<BackgroundTask> TaskRepository { get; set; }
protected IWindsorContainer _container = new WindsorContainer();
protected BackgroundTask Task { get; set; }
public async Task Run(BackgroundTask task)
{
Initialize();
Task = task;
try
{
Execute();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
SetError(ex.ToString());
}
}
protected virtual void Execute()
{
}
protected virtual void Initialize()
{
_container.Install(new TaskRunnerComponentsInstaller());
TaskRepository = _container.Resolve<IRepository<BackgroundTask>>();
}
}
I still believe this is something to do with the WindsorContainer and common classes which are resolved in several different threads.
The issue is that you're not using await on the Task being returned from the invocation of the TaskManager.Run function. Consider the below:
public async Task<HttpResponseMessage> RunTask(TaskType taskType)
{
var taskId = await TaskManager.CreateTask(taskType);
await TaskManager.Run(taskId);
return new HttpResponseMessage
{
StatusCode = HttpStatusCode.OK,
Content =
new StringContent($"Task {taskType.GetDescription()} was started.")
};
}
Now it will work asynchronously as you'd expect. The await sets a continuation marker in the async state-machine, instructing it to return to this portion of the method upon completion of the asynchronous operation defined in the TaskManager.Run.
UPDATE
You are missing lots of await statements, and there are times where you need to not mark methods as async. It appears as though there are some mis-understandings as it pertains to these keywords. Here is what your TaskManager class should look like.
public class TaskManager : ITaskManager
{
public IRepository<BackgroundTask> TaskRepository { get; set; }
public async Task<int> CreateTask(TaskType type,
byte[] data = null,
object config = null)
{
var task = new BackgroundTask
{
Type = type,
Status = BackgroundTaskStatus.New,
Config = config?.SerializeToXml(),
Created = DateTime.Now,
Data = data
};
TaskRepository.Add(task);
TaskRepository.SaveChanges();
return task.Id;
}
public ask Run(int id, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
var task = TaskRepository.GetById(id);
return Run(task, removeOnComplete);
}
public Task Run(TaskType type, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
var tasksToRun = TaskRepository.Get(t => t.Type == type);
return tasksToRun.ForEachAsync(t => Run(t, removeOnComplete));
}
public Task Run(BackgroundTask task, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
switch (task.Type)
{
case TaskType.SpreadsheetImport:
return new SpreadsheetImportTaskRunner().Run(task);
break;
}
}
}
}
Ideally, if the method is marked as a return type of Task and the method doesn't need to unwind any tasks within its execution it can simply return the Task functionality for its implementation. For example, notice how dramatically my TaskManager class differs from yours -- I'm only marking methods as async that need to actually await. These two keywords should be married, if a method uses async there should be an await. But only use await if the method needs to unwind and use the asynchronous operation.
Related
I have a method to make an order,
public async Task<bool> Order(Request request)
{
// Each step does different things.
await Step1(request);
await Step2(request);
await Step3(request);
await Step4(request);
...
await StepN(request);
}
public async Task<bool> Step1(Request request)
{
var amount1 = await changeSomething1(request);
await Pay1(amount1);
}
public async Task<bool> Step2(Request request)
{
var amount2 = await changeSomething2(request);
await Pay2(amount2);
}
public async Task<bool> StepX(Request request)
{
var amountX = await changeSomethingX(request);
await PayX(amountX);
}
Now I need to preview the Order without any PayX(amount) is called. I don't want to add a boolen parameter to skip it, like the following code, which looks pretty ugly.
public async Task<bool> Order(Request request, bool preview = false)
{
await Step1(request, preview);
await Step2(request, preview);
await Step3(request, preview);
await Step4(request, preview);
....
await StepN(request, preview);
}
public async Task<bool> StepX(Request request, bool preview = false)
{
var amountX = await changeSomethingX(request);
if(!preview) await PayX(amountX);
}
What pattern can be applied here? Thanks a lot.
It seems to me that you need some middleware-like pattern (Just like middlewares in Asp.Net for example). That's my proposal:
First create An OrderMiddleware class that encapsulates your 2 methods, Step and Pay. In this case we pass step and pay as delegates to the constructor to achieve maximum flexibility
public delegate Task<int> StepDelegate(Request request);
public delegate Task PayDelegate(int amount);
public class OrderMiddleware
{
// Private fields
private readonly StepDelegate _step;
private readonly PayDelegate _pay;
// Initialization
public OrderMiddleware(StepDelegate step, PayDelegate pay)
{
_step = step;
_pay = pay;
}
// Public
public async Task Order(Request request, bool preview)
{
var amount = await _step.Invoke(request);
if (!preview)
await _pay.Invoke(amount);
}
}
Then you need a class to handle a list of OrderMiddlewares that represent your complete pipeline.
public class OrderPipeline
{
// Private fields
private readonly List<OrderMiddleware> _orderMiddlewares;
// Initialization
public OrderPipeline()
{
_orderMiddlewares = new()
{
new(Step1, Pay1),
new(Step2, Pay2)
};
}
// Order Handling
public async Task Order(Request request, bool preview = false)
{
foreach(var middleware in _orderMiddlewares)
await middleware.Order(request, preview);
}
// Middlewares
public async Task Step1(Request request)
{
var amount1 = await changeSomething1(request);
await Pay1(amount1);
}
public async Task Step2(Request request)
{
var amount2 = await changeSomething2(request);
await Pay2(amount2);
}
}
In this way you order method can work with a list of middlwares.
Just few notes:
If you need to pass other parameters to every middleware, in addiction to the preview bool, consider to create a OrderConfiguration class that encapsulates all these data, and pass it instead. In that way the signature remains clean and you do not need to do any refactoring
Maybe you want to separate you middleware registration logic from your OrderPipeline class in order to not violate the open-closed principle:
public class OrderPipeline
{
// Private fields
private readonly List<OrderMiddleware> _orderMiddlewares = new();
// Order Handling
public async Task Order(Request request, bool preview = false)
{
foreach(var middleware in _orderMiddlewares)
await middleware.Order(request, preview);
}
public void AddMiddleware(OrderMiddleware orderMiddleware)
{
_orderMiddlewares.Add(orderMiddleware);
}
}
{
public class MyClass
{
// all the call to GetData() of apiHelper should pass through this method
public async Task<T> InitiateAPICallAsync<T>(Task<T> apiCall) where T : BaseResponse
{
var response = await apiCall;
// some common code work using response data
return response;
}
public async void MyFunc()
{
var helper = new APIHelper("1", "2");
//
var response1 = await InitiateAPICallAsync(helper.GetData<Response1>()); // correct way
var rewponse2 = await helper.GetData<Response1>(); // incorrect way, need to show warning
}
}
public class APIHelper
{
public APIHelper(string a, string b)
{
// some code
}
public async Task<T> GetData<T>()
{
await Task.Delay(1000); // network call
// other code
return default;
}
}
public class Response1 : BaseResponse { }
public class Response2 : BaseResponse { }
public class BaseResponse { }
}
in my application MyClass, there is a method named InitiateAPICallAsync(). All call to the GetData() method of APIHelper must be pass through this method. I need to showing warning, if GetAsync() method called directly without passing through InitiateAPICallAsync.
Note: It is a sample code snippet, where in my real time project the APIHelper represents a Connectivity library. and MyClass represents another library named service.
How to show warning for a method if it is called directly in c#
Using CallerMemberName attribute is core thread of the following solution, thanks for Fumeaux's comment, I tried place CallerMemberName attribute above GetData method directly to get the caller, but the result is MyFunc but not InitiateAPICallAsync. So I tried use delegate as the InitiateAPICallAsync parameter that could make sure GetData will called by InitiateAPICallAsync. The following code has been simplified.
public delegate Task<int> PrintCaller([CallerMemberName] string Caller = null);
public class MyClass
{
public async Task<string> InitiateAPICallAsync(PrintCaller apiCall)
{
var response = await apiCall();
return "Test";
}
public async void MyFunc()
{
var helper = new APIHelper();
var str1 = await InitiateAPICallAsync(new PrintCaller(helper.GetData));
var str2 = await helper.GetData();
}
}
public class APIHelper
{
public async Task<int> GetData([CallerMemberName] string Caller = null)
{
if (Caller == "InitiateAPICallAsync")
{
// do some thing
}
else
{
//Show Warning
var dialog = new MessageDialog("Waring!!! Please don't call it directly");
await dialog.ShowAsync();
}
return 0;
}
}
I try to wait for the class to be finished with instantiate.
My architecture is the following. Cook is inheriade from CookChief.
And if I instantiate cook, CookChief is creating himself, but CookChief is calling 1 other class named Cookhelper the cookhelper is waiting for a input and for this input method i want to wait in Cook.
The thing is iam creating this in MVVM Galasoft and my entry point is the CookViewmodel, with a relaycommand.
In the code below you can see my architecture. To say it short I want to wait until this bool processed = await Task.Run(() => ValidateForDeviceId()); is finished.
My first step was to outsource the constructer of each class. And create a init method.
This is my code:
public CookViewModel()
{
startCookButtonCommand = new RelayCommand(Cook);
}
private async Task Cook()
{
cook.Init();
}
public class Cook : CookChief
{
public Cook()
{
}
public async Task Init()
{
await this.CookChiefInit();
//here I want to wait until CookChiefInit is finished
Cooking();
}
public void Cooking()
{
MessageBox.Show("Input received");
}
}
Now the Cookchief:
public Cookchief()
{
}
protected async Task CookchiefInit()
{
this.Cookhelper = new Cookhelper();
Cookhelper.CookHelperInit();
}
And in the CookHelper we do this:
public CookHelper()
{
}
public void CookHelperInit()
{
this.driverWindow = new DriverWindow();
startProc();
}
private async void startProc()
{
ShowOrCloseDriverWindow(true);
//this is the task what we wait for before we can repeat
bool processed = await Task.Run(() => ValidateForDeviceId());
if(processed)
{
ShowOrCloseDriverWindow(false);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("DriverError");
}
}
private bool ValidateForDeviceId()
{
for (; ; )
{
this.deviceId = Input.deviceId;
if (deviceId > 0)
{
break;
}
}
return true;
}
Per the discussion in the comments, the problem here was that the initialization routine mixed synchronous and asynchronous methods and calls. Additionally, some async methods were called without the await keyword. The solution was to make all calls asynchronous and await them.
cook.Init() needs an await:
private async Task Cook()
{
await cook.Init();
}
In CookchiefInit(), the CookHelperInit() call needs to be awaited:
protected async Task CookchiefInit()
{
this.Cookhelper = new Cookhelper();
Cookhelper.CookHelperInit();
}
In order to await CookHelperInit(), it needs to be made asynchronous. The startProc() call is to an async method, so it must also be awaited:
public async Task CookHelperInit()
{
this.driverWindow = new DriverWindow();
await startProc();
}
I have an application which currently runs Tasks on a time interval, however I would like more control over that, to be able to stop a running task and restart it by clicking a UI.
There are 6 tasks at the moment, but I would want to keep things generic, to be able to easily more when required. I was hoping to be able to create a wrapper to control them, which I can pass a method into as a parameter.
As such I created an object, which I create as many of as there are tasks, I can get status updates from it as well as manage it
I want to:
- Start a method/Task
- Stop a method/Task
- Restart a method/Task
- Get feedback from it's log/updates/progress/errors that I record to updates List
Is this a good way to do this, is there a better way to achieve what I'm after?
public class ManagedTask
{
public ManagedTask()
{
CreateNewToken();
}
public int Id { get; set; }
public string DescriptiveName { get; set; }
public Action<CancellationToken> TheVoidToRun { private get; set; }
private CancellationTokenSource CTokenSource { get; set; }
private CancellationToken CToken { get; set; }
private Task TheRunningThing { get; set; }
public void StartIt()
{
if (TheRunningThing == null || TheTaskStatus() == TaskStatus.Canceled || TheTaskStatus() == TaskStatus.RanToCompletion)
{
CreateNewToken();
}
// Start up the Task
AddUpdate($"Starting Task at {DateTime.Now}");
TheRunningThing = Task.Run(() => TheVoidToRun?.Invoke(CToken), CToken);
AddUpdate($"Started Task at {DateTime.Now}");
}
public void EndIt()
{
AddUpdate($"Cancelling Task at {DateTime.Now}");
CTokenSource.Cancel();
// Do - If in progress try to stop (Cancellation Token)
// Do - Stop future repeats
}
private void CreateNewToken()
{
CTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
CTokenSource.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
CToken = CTokenSource.Token;
}
public TaskStatus TheTaskStatus() => TheRunningThing.Status;
internal List<string> Updates { get; set; }
private void AddUpdate(string updates)
{
// Do stuff
}
}
So I have various methods which I'd like to pass into this such like:
public class AvailableTasks
{
public async void DoStuffThatIsCancelable(CancellationToken token)
{
DoTheLongStuffOnRepeat(token);
}
public async void DoAnotherThingThatIsCancelable(CancellationToken token)
{
DoTheLongStuffOnRepeat(token);
}
private async void DoTheLongStuffOnRepeat(CancellationToken token)
{
// Do stuff
for (int i = 0; i < 20; i++)
{
while (!token.IsCancellationRequested)
{
try
{
await Task.Delay(500, token);
}
catch (TaskCanceledException ex)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task was cancelled");
continue;
}
Console.WriteLine($"Task Loop at {(i + 1) * 500}");
}
}
}
}
Here is how I was thinking of calling it.
private static readonly List<ManagedTask> _managedTasks = new List<ManagedTask>();
public static void SetupManagedTasks()
{
var at = new AvailableTasks();
var mt1 = new ManagedTask
{
Id = 1,
DescriptiveName = "The cancelable task",
TheVoidToRun = at.DoStuffThatIsCancelable,
};
_managedTasks.Add(mt1);
var mt2 = new ManagedTask
{
Id = 2,
DescriptiveName = "Another cancelable task",
TheVoidToRun = at.DoAnotherThingThatIsCancelable,
};
_managedTasks.Add(mt2);
mt1.StartIt();
mt2.StartIt();
Console.WriteLine($"{mt1.DescriptiveName} status: {mt1.TheTaskStatus()}");
Console.WriteLine($"{mt2.DescriptiveName} status: {mt2.TheTaskStatus()}");
}
public static void CancelTask(int id)
{
var mt = _managedTasks.FirstOrDefault(t => t.Id == id);
if (mt != null)
{
mt.EndIt();
Console.WriteLine($"{mt.DescriptiveName} status: {mt.TheTaskStatus()}");
}
}
public static void GetTaskStatus(int id)
{
var mt = _managedTasks.FirstOrDefault(t => t.Id == id);
if (mt != null)
{
Console.WriteLine($"{mt.DescriptiveName} status: {mt.TheTaskStatus()}");
}
}
However even with all the above, I suffer from the Status only ever showing RanToCompletion.
How can I structure the above to achieve what I want?
Thanks,
David
I suffer from the Status only ever showing RanToCompletion.
This is because your methods are using async void. They should be async Task. As I describe in my async best practices article, you should avoid async void.
Other notes...
Start a method/Task
Restart a method/Task
You can start (or restart) a task on the thread pool by using Task.Run. However, if you have naturally asynchronous tasks, then you can represent them as Func<Task> and just invoke the Func<Task> to start them.
Stop a method/Task
The only appropriate way to do this is with a CancellationToken, which it looks like you're using correctly.
Get feedback from it's log/updates/progress/errors that I record to updates List
I recommend using IProgress<T> for any kind of progress updates.
I have a form, like below, that accepts a Task<T>, waits for completion and then returns after await by closing the form:
public partial class SomeForm<T> : Form
{
public T ReturnValue { get; private set; }
private Task<T> Task { get; set; }
public SomeForm(string waitingText, Task<T> task)
{
InitializeComponent();
...
PerformTask();
}
private async void PerformTask()
{
ReturnValue = await Task;
this.Close();
}
}
However, whilst this method runs happily, it gets to ReturnValue = await Task; and then does not go any further. The method will run normally without being sent to the method and does not delay. I have a feeling it's to do with how I'm using async and await, but I'm new to TPL etc.
Please help me identify what's wrong with the above script, and in identifying why it never returns.
Edit: TaskA was a typo. Here's the Task's method; ImportedFunctions. BS_Robots_LoadDrive(..) is a DllImport of a C++ function, which works just fine synchronously, even on another thread (like in the final snippet), but not with an async paramter.
public uint LoadDisc()
{
uint response = ImportedFunctions.BS_Robots_LoadDrive(DriveLetters[0],
(int)BSRobotConstants.BIN_ID_DEFAULT,
(int)BSRobotConstants.POSITION_TYPE_INPUTBIN,
0);
switch (response)
{
case BSRobotConstants.OK:
case BSRobotConstants.OK_WITH_MESSAGE:
case BSRobotConstants.FROMTRAY_NO_DISC:
case BSRobotConstants.INVALID_DRIVE:
case BSRobotConstants.INVALID_POSITION:
case BSRobotConstants.TOTRAY_NO_DISC:
case BSRobotConstants.TOTRAY_NOT_OPEN:
case BSRobotConstants.FATAL_ERROR:
break;
case BSRobotConstants.BUSY:
break;
case BSRobotConstants.TOTRAY_HAS_DISC:
RejectDisc();
response = LoadDisc();
break;
}
return response;
}
This works:
private async void PerformTask()
{
Task.Start();
Task.Wait();
ReturnValue = Task.Result;
DialogResult = DialogResult.OK;
}
But the first code snippet doesn't.
The task does not continue past ReturnValue = await TaskA; because it is not returning. Verify the Task is running and not getting stuck.
To property utility async-await for object construction use an async factory method.
See: How to initialize an object using async-await pattern
public class Form1<T> : Form
{
public Form1(string waitingText, Task<T> task)
{
Task = Execute(task);
Controls.Add(new Label { Text = waitingText });
}
public T ReturnValue { get { return Task.Result; } }
public Task<T> Task { get; private set; }
private async Task<T> Execute(Task<T> task)
{
var result = await task;
Close();
return result;
}
}
Usage:
var form = new Form1<int>("Hello", Task.Delay(1000).ContinueWith(_ => 1));
form.Show();
var returnValue = await form.Task;
Console.WriteLine(returnValue);