c#/asp.net - How to catch "System.Web.HttpException: Request timed out"? - c#

In my asp.net/c# project I am using the iTextsharp dll to read the text from many pdf documents, but sometimes I get this error
System.Web.HttpException: Request timed out.
But the code that does it is:
public static bool does_pdf_have_keyword(string keyword, string pdf_src)
{
try
{
PdfReader pdfReader = new PdfReader(pdf_src);
string currentText;
int count = pdfReader.NumberOfPages;
for (int page = 1; page <= count; page++)
{
ITextExtractionStrategy strategy = new SimpleTextExtractionStrategy();
currentText = PdfTextExtractor.GetTextFromPage(pdfReader, page, strategy);
if (currentText.IndexOf(keyword, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase) != -1) return true;
}
pdfReader.Close();
return false;
}
catch
{
return false;
}
}
So why does the page go into an unhandled exception when it's in a try catch and the catch is supposed to catch everything?

I think the reason your try is not catching this exception is that the exception you're getting is not thrown from your code per se, but from the server.
Think about it this way:
Your code is running fine, it's just taking a long time.
The server monitors how long the request is taking, kills the request and throws an exception.
So your code doesn't actually throw that exception.
Now, if you want to find out about it or log it, you can use the Application_Error method in your Global.asax file (assuming you have access to it, I'm not sure how that works with SharePoint).
For example, in one of my web projects, I wanted to log all errors, even ones that weren't caught. So what I do is something like this:
protected void Application_Error(object sender, EventArgs e) {
//Log ALL uncaught exceptions
Exception exc = Server.GetLastError();
if (exc is HttpUnhandledException) {
exc = Context.Error.InnerException;
}
//Log error here
}
I'm not sure there's much you can do with it other than log it. I don't know where in the page life cycle this occurs so I'm not sure if you could do something like get the current HTTP request object and redirect the user.
Hope this helps.

You are catching the exception, but, because it's a ThreadAbortException, the framework is automatically re-throwing it. See here for more information.
The issue is that your PDF keyword searching code is (sometimes) taking longer than the specified HTTP execution timeout. I don't know what the default timeout is for Sharepoint, but you should be able to increase it.

Related

Handle Error with NLog and Try Catch

I log errors in my Actions using NLog to store errors with additional information, for example:
using NLog;
private static Logger _logger = LogManager.GetCurrentClassLogger();
public virtual ActionResult Edit(Client client)
{
try
{
// FORCE ERROR
var x = 0;
x /= x;
return RedirectToAction(MVC.Client.Index());
}
catch (Exception e)
{
_logger.Error("[Error in ClientController.Edit - id: " + client.Id + " - Error: " + e.Message + "]");
}
}
And I have Error handling configured in Web.config:
<customErrors mode="On" />
But I don't get redirected to the Error.cshtml when I execute the Action (the page remains in the same place), why?
Can I use Elmah to do the same thing? (logging additional information like client Id)
First of all, most people solve this error by not catching the exception. This way, the exception propagates to ASP.NET, which displays a "500 Internal Error" webpage, and all the pertinent information is logged.
If your server is configured for production, the error page will just say "an error occurred, details were logged."
If the server is configured for development, then you will get the famous yellow page with the exception type, the message, and the stack trace.
Swallowing the exception and manually redirecting to an error page is a bad practice because it hides errors. There are tools that examine your logs and give you nice statistics, for example about percentages of successful/failed requests, and these won't work any more.
So, not swallowing the exception is what people do, and at the very least, it solves your problem.
Now, I find this very clunky, because I do not like manually looking for the source files mentioned in the yellow page and manually going to the mentioned line numbers. I practically have no use for the yellow page, it might just as well just say "an error occurred, cry me a river, nah-nah-nah." I don't read the yellow page.
Instead, I do like to log exceptions on my own, and I have my logger begin each line with full-path-to-source-filename(line):, so that every line on the debug log in visual studio is clickable, and clicking on a line automatically opens up the right source file, and scrolls to the exact line that issued the log message. If you want this luxury, then go ahead and catch the exception, but right after logging the exception you have to rethrow it, so that things can follow their normal course.
Amendment
Here is some information that was added in comments:
So, you can do the following:
try
{
...
}
catch (Exception e)
{
log( "information" );
throw; //special syntax which preserves original stack trace
}
Or
try
{
...
}
catch (Exception e)
{
throw new Exception( "information", e ); //also preserves original stack trace
}
Do not do this: catch( Exception e ) { log( "information" ); throw e; } because it loses the original stack trace information of e.
In your code, error occur at the division portion(x/=x) so no execution of redirect line(index page) and jump to catch portion executing the logger. You have to define the redirect to Error.cshtml in catch portion also.
Note: when you use try catch block error will not occur at ASP.NET level resulting no redirect to Error.cshtml page
using NLog;
private static Logger _logger = LogManager.GetCurrentClassLogger();
public virtual ActionResult Edit(Client client)
{
try
{
// FORCE ERROR
var x = 0;
x /= x; /// error occur here
return RedirectToAction(MVC.Client.Index()); /// no execution of this line
}
catch (Exception e)
{
_logger.Error("[Error in ClientController.Edit - id: " + client.Id + " - Error: " + e.Message + "]");
/// add redirect link here
return RedirectToAction(MVC.Client.Error()); /// this is needed since the catch block execute mean no error at ASP.net level resulting no redirect to default error page
}
}
This will streamline your exception handling and allow you to manage the process more succinctly. Create an attribute like this:
public class HandleExceptionAttribute : System.Web.Mvc.HandleErrorAttribute
{
// Pass in necessary data, etc
private string _data;
public string Data
{
get { return _data; }
set { _data = value; }
}
public override void OnException(System.Web.Mvc.ExceptionContext filterContext)
{
// Logging code here
// Do something with the passed-in properties (Data in this code)
// Use the filterContext to retrieve all sorts of info about the request
// Direct the user
base.OnException(filterContext);
}
}
Now you can use it on a controller or method level with an attribute like this:
[HandleException(Data="SomeValue", View="Error")]
Or, register it globally (global.asax) like this:
GlobalFilters.Filters.Add(new HandleExceptionAttribute());

Continue processing in spite of unavailable WCF Service

I have the following code courtesy of an answer posted by Jean-Michel Bezeau
bool isAlive = false;
string fixedAddress = "http://localhost:8732/Design_Time_Addresses/WCFService/mex";
System.ServiceModel.Description.ServiceEndpointCollection availableBindings = System.ServiceModel.Description.MetadataResolver.Resolve(typeof(WCFService.IAlive), new EndpointAddress(fixedAddress));
ChannelFactory<WCFService.IAlive> factoryService = new ChannelFactory<WCFService.IAlive>(availableBindings[0]);
WCFService.IAlive accesService = factoryService.CreateChannel();
isAlive = accesService.IsAlive();
I would like my program to continue even if the WCF Service can't be reached so that I can notify someone via email and add it to a log. I thought of doing it like this:
bool isAlive = false;
try
{
string fixedAddress = "http://localhost:8732/Design_Time_Addresses/WCFService/mex";
System.ServiceModel.Description.ServiceEndpointCollection availableBindings = System.ServiceModel.Description.MetadataResolver.Resolve(typeof(WCFService.IAlive), new EndpointAddress(fixedAddress));
ChannelFactory<WCFService.IAlive> factoryService = new ChannelFactory<WCFService.IAlive>(availableBindings[0]);
WCFService.IAlive accesService = factoryService.CreateChannel();
isAlive = accesService.IsAlive();
}
catch {}
finally
{
if (isAlive)
{
//add success message to log
}
else
{
//add warning message to log
//send email notification
}
}
However, I don't like catching all exceptions like that (I know it's bad practice). What's the best way to go about this?
Are there particular exceptions I should be catching? Or, is this a good time to implement a using statement (if so can I have some help with how)?
The exception could be lots of things - it might be just a timeout, or a 404 error, a 500 error, a connection reset error... so there's probably a bunch of exceptions that can be thrown. In this particular case I wouldn't have a problem with a global catch.
You might want to consider retries as well, if it fails the first time try again, in case it was just a timeout.
Alternatively if you already have global error handling on your app, you might not want to swallow the exception, so you could just use the finally block without the catch:
try
{
....
}
finally
{
....
}
But you'd only want to do this if it was a genuine error that the app couldn't handle or resolve by itself.

Verbose exception with service operation

I'm using C# to build a service operation. When something goes wrong, I want to throw an exception that could be catch client side.
However, when an exception is thrown the client is only able to get a generic error like "400: bad request" and the exception message is not accessible.
In my service operation, I have enabled verbose errors with this:
[ServiceBehavior(IncludeExceptionDetailInFaults = true)]
and
config.useVerboseErrors = true;
I also unpack the TargetInvocationException and instead return a DataServiceException with this function:
protected override void HandleException(HandleExceptionArgs args)
{
// Handle exceptions raised in service operations.
if (args.Exception.GetType() == typeof(TargetInvocationException)
&& args.Exception.InnerException != null)
{
if (args.Exception.InnerException.GetType() == typeof(DataServiceException))
{
// Unpack the DataServiceException.
args.UseVerboseErrors = true;
args.Exception = args.Exception.InnerException as DataServiceException;
}
else
{
// Return a new DataServiceException as "400: bad request."
args.UseVerboseErrors = true;
args.Exception = new DataServiceException(400, args.Exception.InnerException.Message);
}
}
}
When I use the browser, I can see the verbose exception message, but when I try programmatically, the inner exception is null and I only see the generic error message "400: bad request".
Strangely, if I return a code 200 instead of 400, I can see the exception message in the answer body. But obviously I don't want to do this.
So, is there a way to get the exception message client side, when you throw an exception from a service operation?
Have you had a look at end to end tracing? Furthermore, this MSDN page isn't as daunting as it may first seem, and i think the "Provide Additional Information When an Exception Occurs" section would be useful to you. Have a lovely read.

SoapHeaderException was unhandled when calling web service

An exception occurs on line
ModifyProfileResp resp = BFGlobal.modifyProfile(req);
INTERNAL_ERROR, SoapHeaderException was unhandled
Error: System.Exception._COMPlusExceptionCode -532462766,
This code basically updates the users information on a web service through a call I made.
public ModifyProfileResp ModifyProfile(string n_homeTelephone)
{
try
{
// Get Login Resp
LoginResp loginResp = LoginToBetfair("username", "password");
// Make a BFGS instance
BFGlobal = new BFGlobalService();
// Set up the request in [req]
ModifyProfileReq req = new ModifyProfileReq();
req.header = new APIRequestHeader();
req.header.sessionToken = loginResp.header.sessionToken;
req.homeTelephone = n_homeTelephone;
// Set up the response in [resp]
// Here is where Im getting thrown an exception..
ModifyProfileResp resp = BFGlobal.modifyProfile(req); // <-- Here Im getting thrown an exception
// return [resp] - which is the response from the call
// Just trying to print out errror codes
string mec = resp.minorErrorCode.ToString();
string ec = resp.errorCode.ToString();
return resp;
}
catch (Exception)
{
throw;
}
Pretty straightforward, make the request header, call the response, pass in the req and I should get some data back, but I keep getting thrown a exception on this line.
Any ideas on how to go about this?
First,
don't do this:
catch (Exception)
{
throw;
}
It's pointless. If you don't have the catch the exception will automatically get thrown up a level, which is what you're doing with throw. Further, if you can't do something with the exception (like retry the request) you're probably better off letting the exception bubble up.
Second, try something like this:
catch (SoapHeaderException ex)
{
Debug.WriteLine(ex.Message);
}
This will catch the specific exception that you're dealing with. Further, set a breakpoint here on the Debug statement. You can then browse the details of the exception. You'll be able to see the stacktrace, inner exceptions and any other data that the thrower of the SoapHeaderException might want you to see.
This information can often be useful when you're debugging, for example, it could say "You forgot to initialize the flux capacitor."
You're seeing an exception from the remote web service.
SoapHeaderException Class
The exception that is thrown when an XML Web service method is called over SOAP and an exception occurs during processing of the SOAP header.
Likely you're not setting up your headers as the remote service requires. Try to acquire help from the remote side.
Try viewing the .InnerException for more details.

Problem passing ELMAH log id to Custom Error page in ASP.NET

I am using ELMAH to log unhandled exceptions in an ASP.NET Webforms application. Logging is working fine.
I want to pass the ELMAH error log id to a custom error page that will give the user the ability to email an administrator about the error. I have followed the advice from this answer. Here is my global.asax code:
void ErrorLog_Logged(object sender, ErrorLoggedEventArgs args)
{
Session[StateKeys.ElmahLogId] = args.Entry.Id;
// this doesn't work either:
// HttpContext.Current.Items[StateKeys.ElmahLogId] = args.Entry.Id;
}
But, on the Custom error page, the session variable reference and HttpContext.Current.Items are giving me a NullReference exception. How can I pass the ID to my custom error page?
This works for me:
void ErrorLog_Logged(object sender, ErrorLoggedEventArgs args)
{
if (args.Entry.Error.Exception is HandledElmahException)
return;
var config = WebConfigurationManager.OpenWebConfiguration("~");
var customErrorsSection = (CustomErrorsSection)config.GetSection("system.web/customErrors");
if (customErrorsSection != null)
{
switch (customErrorsSection.Mode)
{
case CustomErrorsMode.Off:
break;
case CustomErrorsMode.On:
FriendlyErrorTransfer(args.Entry.Id, customErrorsSection.DefaultRedirect);
break;
case CustomErrorsMode.RemoteOnly:
if (!HttpContext.Current.Request.IsLocal)
FriendlyErrorTransfer(args.Entry.Id, customErrorsSection.DefaultRedirect);
break;
default:
break;
}
}
}
void FriendlyErrorTransfer(string emlahId, string url)
{
Server.Transfer(String.Format("{0}?id={1}", url, Server.UrlEncode(emlahId)));
}
Unable to comment on Ronnie's solution. I had that in place for a while but it breaks the standard error flow process and causes ErrorLog_Logged to always transfer, even when calling
Elmah.ErrorSignal.FromCurrentContext().Raise(ex);
This is a problem if you still want to log an error from within a catch statement, for instance you have a workaround for an error but want to log the error to perform a proper fix, which can be pretty helpful on difficult to replicate issues.
I was able to correct this by using the following change:
//if (customErrorsSection != null)
if (customErrorsSection != null && this.Context.Error != null)
This respects the typical error handling properly, as the context.Error will be null in cases where you explicitely raise the exception in Elmah, but is not null when falling through default error handling (not via a catch or if caught and re-thrown). This causes Ronnie's solution to respond similar to the .Net error handling logic.

Categories