We Keep Coding

Queuing asynchronous task in C#

I have few methods that report some data to Data base. We want to invoke all calls to Data service asynchronously. These calls to data service are all over and so we want to make sure that these DS calls are executed one after another in order at any given time. Initially, i was using async await on each of these methods and each of the calls were executed asynchronously but we found out if they are out of sequence then there are room for errors.
So, i thought we should queue all these asynchronous tasks and send them in a separate thread but i want to know what options we have? I came across 'SemaphoreSlim' . Will this be appropriate in my use case?
Or what other options will suit my use case? Please, guide me.
So, what i have in my code currently
public static SemaphoreSlim mutex = new SemaphoreSlim(1);
//first DS call
public async Task SendModuleDataToDSAsync(Module parameters)
{
var tasks1 = new List<Task>();
var tasks2 = new List<Task>();
//await mutex.WaitAsync(); **//is this correct way to use SemaphoreSlim ?**
foreach (var setting in Module.param)
{
Task job1 = SaveModule(setting);
tasks1.Add(job1);
Task job2= SaveModule(GetAdvancedData(setting));
tasks2.Add(job2);
}
await Task.WhenAll(tasks1);
await Task.WhenAll(tasks2);
//mutex.Release(); // **is this correct?**
}
private async Task SaveModule(Module setting)
{
await Task.Run(() =>
{
// Invokes Calls to DS
...
});
}
//somewhere down the main thread, invoking second call to DS
//Second DS Call
private async Task SendInstrumentSettingsToDS(<param1>, <param2>)
{
//await mutex.WaitAsync();// **is this correct?**
await Task.Run(() =>
{
//TrackInstrumentInfoToDS
//mutex.Release();// **is this correct?**
});
if(param2)
{
await Task.Run(() =>
{
//TrackParam2InstrumentInfoToDS
});
}
}

Initially, i was using async await on each of these methods and each of the calls were executed asynchronously but we found out if they are out of sequence then there are room for errors.
So, i thought we should queue all these asynchronous tasks and send them in a separate thread but i want to know what options we have? I came across 'SemaphoreSlim' .
SemaphoreSlim does restrict asynchronous code to running one at a time, and is a valid form of mutual exclusion. However, since "out of sequence" calls can cause errors, then SemaphoreSlim is not an appropriate solution since it does not guarantee FIFO.
In a more general sense, no synchronization primitive guarantees FIFO because that can cause problems due to side effects like lock convoys. On the other hand, it is natural for data structures to be strictly FIFO.
So, you'll need to use your own FIFO queue, rather than having an implicit execution queue. Channels is a nice, performant, async-compatible queue, but since you're on an older version of C#/.NET, BlockingCollection<T> would work:
public sealed class ExecutionQueue
{
private readonly BlockingCollection<Func<Task>> _queue = new BlockingCollection<Func<Task>>();
public ExecutionQueue() => Completion = Task.Run(() => ProcessQueueAsync());
public Task Completion { get; }
public void Complete() => _queue.CompleteAdding();
private async Task ProcessQueueAsync()
{
foreach (var value in _queue.GetConsumingEnumerable())
await value();
}
}
The only tricky part with this setup is how to queue work. From the perspective of the code queueing the work, they want to know when the lambda is executed, not when the lambda is queued. From the perspective of the queue method (which I'm calling Run), the method needs to complete its returned task only after the lambda is executed. So, you can write the queue method something like this:
public Task Run(Func<Task> lambda)
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<object>();
_queue.Add(async () =>
{
// Execute the lambda and propagate the results to the Task returned from Run
try
{
await lambda();
tcs.TrySetResult(null);
}
catch (OperationCanceledException ex)
{
tcs.TrySetCanceled(ex.CancellationToken);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
tcs.TrySetException(ex);
}
});
return tcs.Task;
}
This queueing method isn't as perfect as it could be. If a task completes with more than one exception (this is normal for parallel code), only the first one is retained (this is normal for async code). There's also an edge case around OperationCanceledException handling. But this code is good enough for most cases.
Now you can use it like this:
public static ExecutionQueue _queue = new ExecutionQueue();
public async Task SendModuleDataToDSAsync(Module parameters)
{
var tasks1 = new List<Task>();
var tasks2 = new List<Task>();
foreach (var setting in Module.param)
{
Task job1 = _queue.Run(() => SaveModule(setting));
tasks1.Add(job1);
Task job2 = _queue.Run(() => SaveModule(GetAdvancedData(setting)));
tasks2.Add(job2);
}
await Task.WhenAll(tasks1);
await Task.WhenAll(tasks2);
}

Here's a compact solution that has the least amount of moving parts but still guarantees FIFO ordering (unlike some of the suggested SemaphoreSlim solutions). There are two overloads for Enqueue so you can enqueue tasks with and without return values.
using System;
using System.Threading;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
public class TaskQueue
{
private Task _previousTask = Task.CompletedTask;
public Task Enqueue(Func<Task> asyncAction)
{
return Enqueue(async () => {
await asyncAction().ConfigureAwait(false);
return true;
});
}
public async Task<T> Enqueue<T>(Func<Task<T>> asyncFunction)
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource(TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously);
// get predecessor and wait until it's done. Also atomically swap in our own completion task.
await Interlocked.Exchange(ref _previousTask, tcs.Task).ConfigureAwait(false);
try
{
return await asyncFunction().ConfigureAwait(false);
}
finally
{
tcs.SetResult();
}
}
}

Please keep in mind that your first solution queueing all tasks to lists doesn't ensure that the tasks are executed one after another. They're all running in parallel because they're not awaited until the next tasks is startet.
So yes you've to use a SemapohoreSlim to use async locking and await. A simple implementation might be:
private readonly SemaphoreSlim _syncRoot = new SemaphoreSlim(1);
public async Task SendModuleDataToDSAsync(Module parameters)
{
await this._syncRoot.WaitAsync();
try
{
foreach (var setting in Module.param)
{
await SaveModule(setting);
await SaveModule(GetAdvancedData(setting));
}
}
finally
{
this._syncRoot.Release();
}
}
If you can use Nito.AsyncEx the code can be simplified to:
public async Task SendModuleDataToDSAsync(Module parameters)
{
using var lockHandle = await this._syncRoot.LockAsync();
foreach (var setting in Module.param)
{
await SaveModule(setting);
await SaveModule(GetAdvancedData(setting));
}
}

One option is to queue operations that will create tasks instead of queuing already running tasks as the code in the question does.
PseudoCode without locking:
Queue<Func<Task>> tasksQueue = new Queue<Func<Task>>();
async Task RunAllTasks()
{
while (tasksQueue.Count > 0)
{
var taskCreator = tasksQueue.Dequeu(); // get creator
var task = taskCreator(); // staring one task at a time here
await task; // wait till task completes
}
}
// note that declaring createSaveModuleTask does not
// start SaveModule task - it will only happen after this func is invoked
// inside RunAllTasks
Func<Task> createSaveModuleTask = () => SaveModule(setting);
tasksQueue.Add(createSaveModuleTask);
tasksQueue.Add(() => SaveModule(GetAdvancedData(setting)));
// no DB operations started at this point
// this will start tasks from the queue one by one.
await RunAllTasks();
Using ConcurrentQueue would be likely be right thing in actual code. You also would need to know total number of expected operations to stop when all are started and awaited one after another.

Building on your comment under Alexeis answer, your approch with the SemaphoreSlim is correct.
Assumeing that the methods SendInstrumentSettingsToDS and SendModuleDataToDSAsync are members of the same class. You simplay need a instance variable for a SemaphoreSlim and then at the start of each methode that needs synchornization call await lock.WaitAsync() and call lock.Release() in the finally block.
public async Task SendModuleDataToDSAsync(Module parameters)
{
await lock.WaitAsync();
try
{
...
}
finally
{
lock.Release();
}
}
private async Task SendInstrumentSettingsToDS(<param1>, <param2>)
{
await lock.WaitAsync();
try
{
...
}
finally
{
lock.Release();
}
}
and it is importend that the call to lock.Release() is in the finally-block, so that if an exception is thrown somewhere in the code of the try-block the semaphore is released.

async wait leading to deadlock

I have an async codeblock running on the pageload.
The codes run smoothy until you reach capturevalue method where we create a new task.On executing that code block the await just freezes and then the control doesnt come back seems like the code just went to deadlock
protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
try
{
var textvalue = GetTextValueFromTask();
txtbox.Text = textvalue.Result;
string ss = "";
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Console.WriteLine(ex.ToString());
}
}
private async Task<string> GetTextValueFromTask()
{
string strReturn = await CaptureValue();
return strReturn;
}
private async Task<string> CaptureValue()
{
Thread.Sleep(5000);
Task<string> T = Task.Factory.StartNew<string>(() => "hi");
return await T;
}
Then I made a small change in Capturevalue method.
private async Task<string> CaptureValue()
{
Thread.Sleep(5000);
Task<string> T = Task.Factory.StartNew<string>(() => "hi");
string ss = T.Result;
return await T;
}
Once I made that change it started working normal.What difference did it make on just fetching the result initially. Please help me Iam a newbee to async

The difference is that second time it doesn't happen any "await" because you waited the task yourself, so await doesn't do anything.
I think you missed the await keyword the first time, here:
var textvalue = await GetTextValueFromTask();
Without it your method GetTextValueFromTask runs synchronously, then it comes into CaptureValue method where await occurs. But the default behaviour of the await is that it tries to capture synchronization context where it was called and to continue the rest of the method in that context, in your example it is WPF synchronization context, which does not allow more than one thread to execute at once. But the continuation cannot proceed, because context is already used by await mechanism.
So, one more time. There is one thread (UI thread), that executes your code up to the last await, which is return await T;, then it yields back to the caller - GetTextValueFromTask, and again to the Page_Load when it gets blocked, because initially you called GetTextValueFromTask synchronously (without await). After that, your operation T completes, and your code tries to continue executing using the initial synchronization context, the WPF one. But it can't, because it is already waiting in the Page_Load.
The link in the comments describes the situation in more detail.
Also consider not using Thread.Sleep in async/await scenarios, because it kills all the "asynchronous" nature of the code. Further reading: link.
Another general piece of advice, which is not directly applicable to your source code, is not to use Task.Factory.StartNew, but rather use Task.Run. Explanation here.

Please use Task.Run() instead of Task.Factory.StartNew()
var T = Task.Run(() => "hi");
It's up to Task.Run to decide how to handle this task.
Also please use .ConfigureAwait(false) in your await calls that do not requires the continuation being done in the awaiter thread context.

How to convert WaitAll() to async and await

Is it possible to rewrite the code below using the async await syntax?
private void PullTablePages()
{
var taskList = new List<Task>();
var faultedList = new List<Task>();
foreach (var featureItem in featuresWithDataName)
{
var task = Task.Run(() => PullTablePage();
taskList.Add(task);
if(taskList.Count == Constants.THREADS)
{
var index = Task.WaitAny(taskList.ToArray());
taskList.Remove(taskList[index]);
}
}
if (taskList.Any())
{
Task.WaitAll(taskList.ToArray());
}
//todo: do something with faulted list
}
When I rewrote it as below, the code doesn't block and the console application finishes before most of the threads complete.
It seems like the await syntax doesn't block as I expected.
private async void PullTablePagesAsync()
{
var taskList = new List<Task>();
var faultedList = new List<Task>();
foreach (var featureItem in featuresWithDataName)
{
var task = Task.Run(() => PullTablePage();
taskList.Add(task);
if(taskList.Count == Constants.THREADS)
{
var anyFinished = await Task.WhenAny(taskList.ToArray());
await anyFinished;
for (var index = taskList.Count - 1; index >= 0; index--)
{
if (taskList[index].IsCompleted)
{
taskList.Remove(taskList[index]);
}
}
}
}
if (taskList.Any())
{
await Task.WhenAll(taskList);
}
//todo: what to do with faulted list?
}
Is it possible to do so?
WaitAll doesn't seem to wait for all tasks to complete. How do I get it to do so? The return type says that it returns a task, but can't seem to figure out the syntax.## Heading ##
New to multithreading, please excuse ignorance.

Is it possible to rewrite the code below using the async await syntax?
Yes and no. Yes, because you already did it. No, because while being equivalent from the function implementation standpoint, it's not equivalent from the function caller perspective (as you already experienced with your console application). Contrary to many other C# keywords, await is not a syntax sugar. There is a reason why the compiler forces you to mark your function with async in order to enable await construct, and the reason is that now your function is no more blocking and that puts additional responsibility to the callers - either put themselves to be non blocking (async) or use a blocking calls to your function. Every async method in fact is and should return Task or Task<TResult> and then the compiler will warn the callers that ignore that fact. The only exception is async void which is supposed to be used only for event handlers, which by nature should not care what the object being notified is doing.
Shortly, async/await is not for rewriting synchronous (blocking code), but for easy turning it to asynchronous (non blocking). If your function is supposed to be synchronous, then just keep it the way it is (and your original implementation is perfectly doing that). But if you need asynchronous version, then you should change the signature to
private async Task PullTablePagesAsync()
with the await rewritten body (which you already did correctly). And for backward compatibility provide the old synchronous version using the new implementation like this
private void PullTablePages() { PullTablePagesAsync().Wait(); }

It seems like the await syntax doesn't block as I expected.
You're expecting the wrong thing.
The await syntax should never block - it's just that the execution flow should not continue until the task is finished.
Usually you are using async/await in methods that return a task. In your case you're using it in a method with a return type void.
It takes times to get your head around async void methods, that's why their use is usually discouraged. Async void methods run synchronously (block) to the calling method until the first (not completed) task is awaited. What happens after depends on the execution context (usually you're running on the pool). What's important: The calling method (the one that calls PullTablePAgesAsync) does not know of continuations and can't know when all code in PullTablePagesAsync is done.
Maybe take a look on the async/await best practices on MSDN

How to return type of Task<mytype> without running async

In my data access layer I'm attempting to create methods with return types of Task.
I cannot get the return type from the entity framework to return Task<List<MYtype>>
public static Task<List<ILeaf>> GetLeafs(int doorID)
{
using (var db = new StorefrontSystemEntities())
{
return db.proc_GetDoorLeafs(doorID).ToList<ILeaf>();
};
}
Is the only way to make this run correctly is to format the code like so:
public async static Task<List<ILeaf>> GetLeafs(int doorID)
{
return await Task.Run(() =>
{
using (var db = new StorefrontSystemEntities())
{
return db.proc_GetDoorLeafs(doorID).ToList<ILeaf>();
};
});
}
The reason I was asking is because I would like to give the option to run async, or am I not understanding this correctly?
If I can just return a Task then on the calling end I could give the option to await if I wanted to run async, but if i wanted to run synchronously I would just call the method as normal.
If I'm returning a Task do I always have to include the async keyword in the method signature?
Am I thinking about this the wrong way? If I've got a return type of Task then the method has the option of being called async or synchronously?
But, if I have async and Task in the method signature then the method runs async no matter what?
Thanks!

So to answer the literal question asked, you can just do this:
public static Task<List<ILeaf>> GetLeafs(int doorID)
{
return Task.Run(() =>
{
using (var db = new StorefrontSystemEntities())
{
return db.proc_GetDoorLeafs(doorID).ToList<ILeaf>();
};
});
}
That said, note that this isn't a particularly useful method. The idea of leveraging asynchronous programming is that you don't want to have a thread pool thread sitting there doing nothing but waiting on this IO operation. Ideally you'd leverage IO that is inherently asynchronous in nature; a method that itself naturally returns a task.
You aren't really providing value to consumers of your code by wrapping the blocking IO in a call to Task.Run. If they need that operation to be run in a background thread they can do so on their own, and then they'll know more precisely that it's not a naively asynchronous operation.
See Should I expose asynchronous wrappers for synchronous methods? for more information on the subject.

public static async Task<List<ILeaf>> GetLeafs(int doorID)
{
using (var db = new StorefrontSystemEntities())
{
var result = db.proc_GetDoorLeafs(doorID).ToList<ILeaf>();
return await Task.FromResult(result);
}
}

How to track if an async/awaitable task is running

I'm trying to transition from the Event-based Asynchronous Pattern where I tracked running methods using unique id's and the asynoperationmanager. As this has now been dropped from Windows 8 Apps I'm trying to get a similar effect with Async/Await but can't quite figure out how.
What I'm trying to achieve is something like
private async Task updateSomething()
{
if(***the method is already running***)
{
runagain = true;
}
else
{
await someMethod();
if (runagain)
{
run the method again
}
}
}
The part I'm struggling with is finding out if the method is running. I've tried creating a Task and looking at the status of both that and the .status of the async method but they don't appear to be the correct place to look.
Thanks
UPDATE: This is the current code I use in .net 4 to achieve the same result. _updateMetaDataAsync is a class based on the Event-Based Asynchronous Pattern.
private void updateMetaData()
{
if (_updateMetaDataAsync.IsTaskRunning(_updateMetaDataGuid_CheckAllFiles))
{
_updateMetaDataGuid_CheckAllFiles_Again = true;
}
else
{
_updateMetaDataGuid_CheckAllFiles_Again = false;
_updateMetaDataAsync.UpdateMetaDataAsync(_updateMetaDataGuid_CheckAllFiles);
}
}
private void updateMetaDataCompleted(object sender, UpdateMetaDataCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if (_updateMetaDataGuid_CheckAllFiles_Again)
{
updateMetaData();
}
}

async/await itself is intended to be used to create sequential operations executed asynchronously from the UI thread. You can get it to do parallel operations, but generally the operations "join" back to the UI thread with some sort of result. (there's also the possibility of doing "fire-and-forget" types of asynchronous operations with await but it's not recommended). i.e. there's nothing inherent to async/await to support progress reporting.
You can get progress out of code using async/await; but you need to use new progress interfaces like IProgress<T>. For more info on progress reporting with async/await, see http://blogs.msdn.com/b/dotnet/archive/2012/06/06/async-in-4-5-enabling-progress-and-cancellation-in-async-apis.aspx. Migrating to this should just be a matter of calling an IProgress delegate instead of a Progress event.

If you're using a Task you've created, you can check the Task's Status property (or just see Task.IsCompleted if completion is the only state you are interested in).
That being said, await will not "return" until the operation either completes, raises an exception, or cancels. You can basically safely assume that, if you're still waiting on the "await", your task hasn't completed.

SemaphoreSlim queueToAccessQueue = new SemaphoreSlim(1);
object queueLock = new object();
long queuedRequests = 0;
Task _loadingTask;
public void RetrieveItems() {
lock (queueLock) {
queuedRequests++;
if (queuedRequests == 1) { // 1 is the minimum size of the queue before another instance is queued
_loadingTask = _loadingTask?.ContinueWith(async () => {
RunTheMethodAgain();
await queueToAccessQueue.WaitAsync();
queuedRequests = 0; // indicates that the queue has been cleared;
queueToAccessQueue.Release()
}) ?? Task.Run(async () => {
RunTheMethodAgain();
await queueToAccessQueue.WaitAsync();
queuedRequests = 0; // indicates that the queue has been cleared;
queueToAccessQueue.Release();
});
}
}
}
public void RunTheMethodAgain() {
** run the method again **
}
The added bonus is that you can see how many items are sitting in the queue!