We Keep Coding

In .NET, failure to retrieve HTTP resource from W3C web site

Retrieving the resource at http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-1/XMLSchema.xsd takes around 10 seconds using the following mechanisms:
web browser
curl
Java URL.openConnection()
It's possible that the W3C site is applying some "throttling" - deliberately slowing the response to discourage bulk requests.
Trying to retrieve the same resource from a C# application on .NET, I get a timeout after about 60-70 seconds. I've tried a couple of different approaches, both with the same result:
System.Xml.XmlUrlResolver.GetEntity()
new WebClient().OpenRead(uri)
Anyone have any idea what's going on? Would another API, or some configuration options, solve the problem?

The problem is they are (probably) checking for a User-Agent string. If it's not present, they send you to purgatory. .NET's http clients do not set this by default.
So, give this a shot:
private static readonly HttpClient _client = new HttpClient();
public static async Task TestMe()
{
using (var req = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Get,
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-1/XMLSchema.xsd"))
{
req.Headers.Add("user-agent",
"Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 10_3 like Mac OS X)");
using (var resp = await _client.SendAsync(req))
{
resp.EnsureSuccessStatusCode();
var data = await resp.Content.ReadAsStringAsync();
}
}
}
No idea why they do this; Maybe it's a bug in their back-end? (I sure wouldn't want to leave a socket open longer than it needs to be for no good reason). The request still takes 10-15 seconds, but it's better than the 120+ second timeout.

Calls to an API fails after some time when multiple users are logged in and using the application. Is there a way to solve this?

I am making some calls to an api that syncs and saves appointments to/from my application and mail agenda which is most commonly Outlook mails. The calls to the api are made from a web application and it is working fine for some time but then immediately after a few hours, the calls are failed. This continues for some time and starts to work again after some time.
The DefaultConnectionLimit was set to 100 in the beginning and during this scenario, the process stopped working after some time (Say 30 mins to 1 hour). Then DefaultConnectionLimit was set to 20 and in this case, it worked fine for 3-4 hours and stopped working after that. I don't know if this is the actual cause but just mentioning.
The code where the call to the api is made from the web application is mentioned below :
public bool SyncNewAppToExch(string encryptedAppSyncDetails)
{
try
{
string result = string.Empty;
JArray paramList = new JArray();
paramList.Add(encryptedAppSyncDetails);
var emailApiUrl = ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["emailApiUrl"].ToString();
Uri baseAddress = new Uri(emailApiUrl);
var url = "/api/EmailProcess/ManualSaveAppointments";
HttpClient client = new HttpClient();
client.BaseAddress = baseAddress;
client.DefaultRequestHeaders.Accept.Clear();
client.DefaultRequestHeaders.Accept.Add(new MediaTypeWithQualityHeaderValue("application/json"));
Task.Run(() => client.PostAsJsonAsync(url, paramList)).Wait(5000);
var responseMessage = true;
if (responseMessage)
return true;
else
return false;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
return false;
}
}
The exception that follows the api call failure reads :
Exception : System.AggregateException: One or more errors occurred. System.Threading.Tasks.TaskCanceledException: A task was canceled. --- End of inner exception stack trace --- at System.Threading.Tasks.Task1.GetResultCore(Boolean waitCompletionNotification) at System.Threading.Tasks.Task1.get_Result()

If you are making a new HttpClient object each time you want to make a call, you are not using it appropriately. HttpClient may continue to use sockets even if it is no longer being used and this will likely cause socket exhaustion under load. You can see more on this topic here
You should create a single instance and reuse it. If you are using .Net core it would be a better idea to use the HttpClientFactory.
In addition, using Task.Run to call an async method is not wise. You are setting yourself up for a deadlock. It would be much better to mark your method as async and await, if possible. Since you are effectively doing fire and forget, the way you have done this if your App Domain shuts down this work will be lost.
If you need to do this, you should at least consider registering your task as such:
HostingEnvironment.QueueBackgroundWorkItem(ct => SendMailAsync(user.Email));
The short answer is that it is difficult to say what your issue is, it could be one of several problems.

await HttpClient.SendAsync not throwing exception when expected

I have a Windows Phone 8 app containing code as follows:
using (var client = new HttpClient())
{
var httpRequest = new HttpRequestMessage(method, uri);
try
{
var response = client.SendAsync(httpRequest);
var httpResponse = await response;
if (httpResponse.IsSuccessStatusCode)
{
var result = await httpResponse.Content.ReadAsStringAsync();
return result;
}
else
{
HandleError(httpResponse);
return null;
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
throw;
}
}
If the client successfully connects to the server, I will get the expected results, including all the appropriate HTTP status codes and reason phrases.
If the client is unable to contact the server (e.g. incorrect domain/IP/port in the URL), the awaited task completes after some delay, with a 404 status and no reason phrase. The task never throws an exception. The task (the response variable in the code snippet) has the status of "ran to completion". Nothing about the result is indicative of the actual problem - be it networking failure, unreachable server, etc.
How can I capture more meaningful errors in the case where the URL points to a non-existent or unreachable server, socket connection refused, etc.? Shouldn't SendAsync be throwing specific exceptions for such cases?
FWIW, the client code is built into a PCL library using VS 2013 update 3 and running in the Windows Phone emulator, using System.Net.Http 2.2.28 from NuGet

Windows Phone's implementation of the .NET HttpClient is different from Desktop's implementation (wininet vs. custom stack). This is one of the incompatibilities that you need to be aware of, if there is a semantic difference for you.
In my simple test I do get a ReasonPhrase of "Not Found" on the phone emulator. Also you can see that the Headers collection is empty whereas if the server was found and actually returned a real 404 then there would be headers.

Web Api + HttpClient: An asynchronous module or handler completed while an asynchronous operation was still pending

I'm writing an application that proxies some HTTP requests using the ASP.NET Web API and I am struggling to identify the source of an intermittent error.
It seems like a race condition... but I'm not entirely sure.
Before I go into detail here is the general communication flow of the application:
Client makes a HTTP request to Proxy 1.
Proxy 1 relays the contents of the HTTP request to Proxy 2
Proxy 2 relays the contents of the HTTP request to the Target Web Application
Target Web App responds to the HTTP request and the response is streamed (chunked transfer) to Proxy 2
Proxy 2 returns the response to Proxy 1 which in turn responds to the original calling Client.
The Proxy applications are written in ASP.NET Web API RTM using .NET 4.5.
The code to perform the relay looks like so:
//Controller entry point.
public HttpResponseMessage Post()
{
using (var client = new HttpClient())
{
var request = BuildRelayHttpRequest(this.Request);
//HttpCompletionOption.ResponseHeadersRead - so that I can start streaming the response as soon
//As it begins to filter in.
var relayResult = client.SendAsync(request, HttpCompletionOption.ResponseHeadersRead).Result;
var returnMessage = BuildResponse(relayResult);
return returnMessage;
}
}
private static HttpRequestMessage BuildRelayHttpRequest(HttpRequestMessage incomingRequest)
{
var requestUri = BuildRequestUri();
var relayRequest = new HttpRequestMessage(incomingRequest.Method, requestUri);
if (incomingRequest.Method != HttpMethod.Get && incomingRequest.Content != null)
{
relayRequest.Content = incomingRequest.Content;
}
//Copies all safe HTTP headers (mainly content) to the relay request
CopyHeaders(relayRequest, incomingRequest);
return relayRequest;
}
private static HttpRequestMessage BuildResponse(HttpResponseMessage responseMessage)
{
var returnMessage = Request.CreateResponse(responseMessage.StatusCode);
returnMessage.ReasonPhrase = responseMessage.ReasonPhrase;
returnMessage.Content = CopyContentStream(responseMessage);
//Copies all safe HTTP headers (mainly content) to the response
CopyHeaders(returnMessage, responseMessage);
}
private static PushStreamContent CopyContentStream(HttpResponseMessage sourceContent)
{
var content = new PushStreamContent(async (stream, context, transport) =>
await sourceContent.Content.ReadAsStreamAsync()
.ContinueWith(t1 => t1.Result.CopyToAsync(stream)
.ContinueWith(t2 => stream.Dispose())));
return content;
}
The error that occurs intermittently is:
An asynchronous module or handler completed while an asynchronous operation was still pending.
This error usually occurs on the first few requests to the proxy applications after which the error is not seen again.
Visual Studio never catches the Exception when thrown.
But the error can be caught in the Global.asax Application_Error event.
Unfortunately the Exception has no Stack Trace.
The proxy applications are hosted in Azure Web Roles.
Any help identifying the culprit would be appreciated.

Your problem is a subtle one: the async lambda you're passing to PushStreamContent is being interpreted as an async void (because the PushStreamContent constructor only takes Actions as parameters). So there's a race condition between your module/handler completing and the completion of that async void lambda.
PostStreamContent detects the stream closing and treats that as the end of its Task (completing the module/handler), so you just need to be sure there's no async void methods that could still run after the stream is closed. async Task methods are OK, so this should fix it:
private static PushStreamContent CopyContentStream(HttpResponseMessage sourceContent)
{
Func<Stream, Task> copyStreamAsync = async stream =>
{
using (stream)
using (var sourceStream = await sourceContent.Content.ReadAsStreamAsync())
{
await sourceStream.CopyToAsync(stream);
}
};
var content = new PushStreamContent(stream => { var _ = copyStreamAsync(stream); });
return content;
}
If you want your proxies to scale a bit better, I also recommend getting rid of all the Result calls:
//Controller entry point.
public async Task<HttpResponseMessage> PostAsync()
{
using (var client = new HttpClient())
{
var request = BuildRelayHttpRequest(this.Request);
//HttpCompletionOption.ResponseHeadersRead - so that I can start streaming the response as soon
//As it begins to filter in.
var relayResult = await client.SendAsync(request, HttpCompletionOption.ResponseHeadersRead);
var returnMessage = BuildResponse(relayResult);
return returnMessage;
}
}
Your former code would block one thread for each request (until the headers are received); by using async all the way up to your controller level, you won't block a thread during that time.

I would like to add some wisdom for anyone else who landed here with the same error, but all of your code seems fine. Look for any lambda expressions passed into functions across the call-tree from where this occurs.
I was getting this error on a JavaScript JSON call to an MVC 5.x controller action. Everything I was doing up and down the stack was defined async Task and called using await.
However, using Visual Studio's "Set next statement" feature I systematically skipped over lines to determine which one caused it. I kept drilling down into local methods until I got to a call into an external NuGet package. The called method took an Action as a parameter and the lambda expression passed in for this Action was preceded by the async keyword. As Stephen Cleary points out above in his answer, this is treated as an async void, which MVC does not like. Luckily said package had *Async versions of the same methods. Switching to using those, along with some downstream calls to the same package fixed the problem.
I realize this is not a novel solution to the problem, but I passed over this thread a few times in my searches trying to resolve the issue because I thought I didn't have any async void or async <Action> calls, and I wanted to help someone else avoid that.

A slightly simpler model is that you can actually just use the HttpContents directly and pass them around inside the relay. I just uploaded a sample illustrating how you can rely both requests and responses asynchronously and without buffering the content in a relatively simple manner:
http://aspnet.codeplex.com/SourceControl/changeset/view/7ce67a547fd0#Samples/WebApi/RelaySample/ReadMe.txt
It is also beneficial to reuse the same HttpClient instance as this allows you to reuse connections where appropriate.

System.Net.WebClient unreasonably slow

When using the System.Net.WebClient.DownloadData() method I'm getting an unreasonably slow response time.
When fetching an url using the WebClient class in .NET it takes around 10 sec before I get a response, while the same page is fetched by my browser in under 1 sec.
And this is with data that's 0.5kB or smaller in size.
The request involves POST/GET parameters and a user agent header if perhaps that could cause problems.
I haven't (yet) tried if other ways to download data in .NET gives me the same problems, but I'm suspecting I might get similar results. (I've always had a feeling web requests in .NET are unusually slow...)
What could be the cause of this?
Edit:
I tried doing the exact thing using System.Net.HttpWebRequest instead, using the following method, and all requests finish in under 1 sec.
public static string DownloadText(string url)
var request = (HttpWebRequest)WebRequest.Create(url);
var response = (HttpWebResponse)request.GetResponse();
using (var reader = new StreamReader(response.GetResponseStream()))
{
return reader.ReadToEnd();
}
}
While this (old) method using System.Net.WebClient takes 15-30s for each request to finish:
public static string DownloadText(string url)
{
var client = new WebClient();
byte[] data = client.DownloadData(url);
return client.Encoding.GetString(data);
}

I had that problem with WebRequest. Try setting Proxy = null;
WebClient wc = new WebClient();
wc.Proxy = null;
By default WebClient, WebRequest try to determine what proxy to use from IE settings, sometimes it results in like 5 sec delay before the actual request is sent.
This applies to all classes that use WebRequest, including WCF services with HTTP binding.
In general you can use this static code at application startup:
WebRequest.DefaultWebProxy = null;

Download Wireshark here http://www.wireshark.org/
Capture the network packets and filter the "http" packets.
It should give you the answer right away.

There is nothing inherently slow about .NET web requests; that code should be fine. I regularly use WebClient and it works very quickly.
How big is the payload in each direction? Silly question maybe, but is it simply bandwidth limitations?
IMO the most likely thing is that your web-site has spun down, and when you hit the URL the web-site is slow to respond. This is then not the fault of the client. It is also possible that DNS is slow for some reason (in which case you could hard-code the IP into your "hosts" file), or that some proxy server in the middle is slow.
If the web-site isn't yours, it is also possible that they are detecting atypical usage and deliberately injecting a delay to annoy scrapers.
I would grab Fiddler (a free, simple web inspector) and look at the timings.

WebClient may be slow on some workstations when Automatic Proxy Settings in checked in the IE settings (Connections tab - LAN Settings).

Setting WebRequest.DefaultWebProxy = null; or client.Proxy = null didn't do anything for me, using Xamarin on iOS.
I did two things to fix this:
I wrote a downloadString function which does not use WebRequest and System.Net:
public static async Task<string> FnDownloadStringWithoutWebRequest(string url)
{
using (var client = new HttpClient())
{
//Define Headers
client.DefaultRequestHeaders.Accept.Clear();
client.DefaultRequestHeaders.Accept.Add(new MediaTypeWithQualityHeaderValue("application/json"));
var response = await client.GetAsync(url);
if (response.IsSuccessStatusCode)
{
string responseContent = await response.Content.ReadAsStringAsync();
//dynamic json = Newtonsoft.Json.JsonConvert.DeserializeObject(responseContent);
return responseContent;
}
Logger.DefaultLogger.LogError(LogLevel.NORMAL, "GoogleLoginManager.FnDownloadString", "error fetching string, code: " + response.StatusCode);
return "";
}
}
This is however still slow with Managed HttpClient.
So secondly, in Visual Studio Community for Mac, right click on your Project in the Solution -> Options -> set HttpClient implementation to NSUrlSession, instead of Managed.
Screenshot: Set HttpClient implementation to NSUrlSession instead of Managed
Managed is not fully integrated into iOS, doesn't support TLS 1.2, and thus does not support the ATS standards set as default in iOS9+, see here:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/xamarin/ios/app-fundamentals/ats
With both these changes, string downloads are always very fast (<<1s).
Without both of these changes, on every second or third try, downloadString took over a minute.
Just FYI, there's one more thing you could try, though it shouldn't be necessary anymore:
//var authgoogle = new OAuth2Authenticator(...);
//authgoogle.Completed...
if (authgoogle.IsUsingNativeUI)
{
// Step 2.1 Creating Login UI
// In order to access SFSafariViewController API the cast is neccessary
SafariServices.SFSafariViewController c = null;
c = (SafariServices.SFSafariViewController)ui_object;
PresentViewController(c, true, null);
}
else
{
PresentViewController(ui_object, true, null);
}
Though in my experience, you probably don't need the SafariController.

Another alternative (also free) to Wireshark is Microsoft Network Monitor.

What browser are you using to test?
Try using the default IE install. System.Net.WebClient uses the local IE settings, proxy etc. Maybe that has been mangled?

Another cause for extremely slow WebClient downloads is the destination media to which you are downloading. If it is a slow device like a USB key, this can massively impact download speed. To my HDD I could download at 6MB/s, to my USB key, only 700kb/s, even though I can copy files to this USB at 5MB/s from another drive. wget shows the same behavior. This is also reported here:
https://superuser.com/questions/413750/why-is-downloading-over-usb-so-slow
So if this is your scenario, an alternative solution is to download to HDD first and then copy files to the slow medium after download completes.