We Keep Coding

How to chain async tasks with a CancellationToken?

I'd like to chain some tasks but conditionally continue with the execution if the CancellationToken I have wasn't fired.
What I'm aiming to achieve is something equivalent to
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var cancellationToken = cts.Token;
var t = Task.Run(async () => {
if (cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested) return;
await t1();
if (cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested) return;
await t2();
if (cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested) return;
await t3();
if (cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested) return;
await t4();
});
var timeout = Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(4));
var completedTask = await Task.WhenAny(t, timeout);
if (completedTask != t)
{
cts.Cancel();
await t;
}
That's what I have by now and it is working, though it is also verbose.

var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var t = Task.Run(async () => {
await t1();
await t2();
await t3();
await t4();
}, cts.Token);
cts.CancelAfter(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(4));
try
{
await t;
}
catch (OperationCanceledException)
{
// The cancellation token was triggered, add logic for that
....
}

Your original code is correct-ish -- it assumes that you always want the individual tasks to run to completion and that if cancelled you want the overall task to complete with success. Neither of these things are idiomatic.
A more normal way to do it would be something like:
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var cancellationToken = cts.Token;
var t = Task.Run(async () => {
cancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
await t1(cancellationToken);
cancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
await t2(cancellationToken);
cancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
await t3(cancellationToken);
cancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
await t4(cancellationToken);
}, cancellationToken);
Then, somewhere else:
cts.Cancel();
You can omit the calls to ThrowIfCancellationRequested here assuming that the individual tasks check it fairly soon after entry, but the core idea is that you should be passing the token down to the innermost loop of whatever is doing the work, and they should throw on cancellation by calling that, which ends up setting the task to a cancelled state rather than a success state.
(So really you only need to actually call ThrowIfCancellationRequested if you hit a function that doesn't accept a CancellationToken parameter -- which is why all async methods should do so, as otherwise its task will be non-cancellable.)

It seems like your goal is to just stop execution if the whole operation has taken longer than 4 seconds.
If you were passing the CancellationToken to your t1/t2/etc. methods, I'd say you couldn't do any better than what you have. But as you have it, you could just use a Stopwatch instead of a CancellationToken:
var timeout = TimeSpan.FromSeconds(4);
var stopwatch = new Stopwatch();
stopwatch.Start();
await t1();
if (stopwatch.Elapsed > timeout) return;
await t2();
if (stopwatch.Elapsed > timeout) return;
await t3();
if (stopwatch.Elapsed > timeout) return;
await t4();
stopwatch.Stop();
I assume this is in a method somewhere, where you can use return, but you can modify if needed (return a value, throw an exception, etc.).

Your code is functionally OK, but when reading it at a glance it's not clear what it's doing. So I suggest that you encapsulate this logic inside a utility method with descriptive name and parameters:
public static async Task RunSequentially(IEnumerable<Func<Task>> taskFactories,
int timeout = Timeout.Infinite, bool onTimeoutAwaitIncompleteTask = false)
{
using (var cts = new CancellationTokenSource(timeout))
{
if (onTimeoutAwaitIncompleteTask)
{
await Task.Run(async () =>
{
foreach (var taskFactory in taskFactories)
{
if (cts.IsCancellationRequested) throw new TimeoutException();
await taskFactory();
}
});
}
else // On timeout return immediately
{
var allSequentially = Task.Run(async () =>
{
foreach (var taskFactory in taskFactories)
{
cts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
var task = taskFactory(); // Synchronous part of task
cts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
await task; // Asynchronous part of task
}
}, cts.Token);
var timeoutTask = new Task(() => {}, cts.Token);
var completedTask = await Task.WhenAny(allSequentially, timeoutTask);
if (completedTask.IsCanceled) throw new TimeoutException();
await completedTask; // Propagate any exception
}
}
}
This code defers from yours in that it throws a TimeoutException on time-out. I think that it's better to force the caller to handle explicitly this exception, instead of hiding the fact that the operation timed-out. The caller can ignore the exception by leaving empty the catch block:
try
{
await RunSequentially(new[] { t1, t2, t3, t4 },
timeout: 4000,
onTimeoutAwaitIncompleteTask: true);
}
catch (TimeoutException)
{
// Do nothing
}

You should consider using Microsoft's Reactive Framework (aka Rx) - NuGet System.Reactive and add using System.Reactive.Linq; - then you can do this:
IObservable<Unit> tasks =
from x1 in Observable.FromAsync(() => t1())
from x2 in Observable.FromAsync(() => t2())
from x3 in Observable.FromAsync(() => t3())
from x4 in Observable.FromAsync(() => t4())
select Unit.Default;
IObservable<Unit> timer =
Observable
.Timer(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(4.0))
.Select(x => Unit.Default)
IDisposable subscription =
Observable
.Amb(tasks, timer)
.Subscribe();
If the timer observable fires before the tasks are complete then the entire pipeline is canceled. No unnecessary tasks are run.
If you want to cancel manually then just call subscription.Dispose().
The code is simple and beautiful too.

Since no one here gave a better answer I'll do it myself.
The code I provided in the question is, in my opinion, most cohesive and also general enough to be recycled in other cases.

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);
}
}

Task null using Task.Run and Parallel.For

I have two services that ultimately both update the same object, so we have a test to ensure that the writes to that object complete (Under the hood we have retry policies on each).
9 times out of 10, one or more of the theories will fail, with the task.ShouldNotBeNull(); always being the assertion to fail. What am i getting wrong with the async code in this sample? Why would the task be null?
[Theory]
[InlineData(1)]
[InlineData(5)]
[InlineData(10)]
[InlineData(20)]
public async Task ConcurrencyIssueTest(int iterations)
{
var orderResult = await _driver.PlaceOrder();
var tasksA = new List<Task<ApiResponse<string>>>();
var tasksB = new List<Task<ApiResponse<string>>>();
await Task.Run(() => Parallel.For(1, iterations,
x =>
{
tasksA.Add(_Api.TaskA(orderResult.OrderId));
tasksB.Add(_Api.TaskB(orderResult.OrderId));
}));
//Check all tasks return successful
foreach (var task in tasksA)
{
task.ShouldNotBeNull();
var result = task.GetAwaiter().GetResult();
result.ShouldNotBeNull();
result.StatusCode.ShouldBe(HttpStatusCode.OK);
}
foreach (var task in tasksB)
{
task.ShouldNotBeNull();
var result = task.GetAwaiter().GetResult();
result.ShouldNotBeNull();
result.StatusCode.ShouldBe(HttpStatusCode.OK);
}
}
}

There's no need for Tasks and Parrallel looping here. I'm presuming that your _api calls are IO bound? You want something more like this:
var tasksA = new List<Task<ApiResponse<string>>>();
var tasksB = new List<Task<ApiResponse<string>>>();
//fire off all the async tasks
foreach(var it in iterations){
tasksA.Add(_Api.TaskA(orderResult.OrderId));
tasksB.Add(_Api.TaskB(orderResult.OrderId));
}
//await the results
await Task.WhenAll(tasksA).ConfigureAwait(false);
foreach (var task in tasksA)
{
//no need to get GetAwaiter(), you've awaited above.
task.Result;
}
//to get the most out of the async only await them just before you need them
await Task.WhenAll(tasksB).ConfigureAwait(false);
foreach (var task2 in tasksB)
{
task2.Result;
}
this will fire all your api calls async then block while the results return. You Parallel for and tasks are just using additional thread pool threads to zero benefit.
If _api is CPU bound you could get benefit from Task.Run but I'm guessing these are web api or something. So the Task.Run is doing nothing but using an additional thread.

As others have suggested, remove the Parallel, and await on all tasks to finish before asserting them.
I would also recommend to remove .Result from each task, and await them instead.
public async Task ConcurrencyIssueTest(int iterations)
{
var orderResult = await _driver.PlaceOrder();
var taskA = _Api.TaskA(orderResult.OrderId);
var taskB = _Api.TaskB(orderResult.OrderId);
await Task.WhenAll(taskA, taskB);
var taskAResult = await taskA;
taskAResult.ShouldNotBeNull();
taskAResult.StatusCode.ShouldBe(HttpStatusCode.OK);
var taskBResult = await taskB;
taskBResult.ShouldNotBeNull();
taskBResult.StatusCode.ShouldBe(HttpStatusCode.OK);
}

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);
}
}

How to cancel other threads as soon as one completed thread satisfies condition

I have an ASP.NET MVC application which needs to check if something exists at 3 remote API servers. The application passes an ID to each API and it returns either true or false. The code looks like this.
public class PingController
{
public async Task<bool> IsFound(int id)
{
var servers = new ['a.com', b.com', 'c.com'];
var result = await foundAtServers(id, servers);
return result;
}
private async Task<bool> foundAtServers(int id, string[] servers)
{
var tasks = from server in servers
select checkServer(id, server);
return await.Task.WhenAll(tasks.ToArray());
}
private async Task<bool> checkServer(id, server)
{
var request = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Get, server+"/api/exists"+id);
var client = new HttpClient();
var task = await client.SendAsync(request);
var response = await task.Content.ReadAsStringAsync();
return bool.Parse(response);
}
}
This code currently checks all 3 APIs asynchronously but will wait until ALL of the HttpClient calls have completed before the MVC Action can return.
As soon as one API returns true I want to immediately return true on the Action, rather than wait for the other tasks to complete.
The C# Task class has .WaitAll and .WaitAny, but these won't work either. As I need to cancel the other HttpClient request, I presume I need to use a CancellationToken but I don't know how to use it with this structure.
Cheers.

If you want to immediately return, you can use Task.WhenAny instead of Task.WhenAll. This won't cancel the on-going tasks, but it will enable you to return as soon as possible:
private async Task<bool> FoundAtServersAsync(int id, string[] servers)
{
var tasks = (from server in servers
select checkServer(id, server)).ToList();
while (tasks.Count > 0)
{
var finishedTask = await Task.WhenAny(tasks);
if (finishedTask.Result)
{
return finishedTask.Result;
}
tasks.Remove(finishedTask);
}
return false;
}
This will discard the other tasks. This means that if any exception is thrown inside one of them, it will be swallowed.
Edit:
If you care about actually canceling the other tasks, consider passing your CancellationToken to the overload of SendAsync which takes one, and calling CancellationTokenSource.Cancel once a value is received. Note this will mean you'll also need to handle the OperationCanceledException they will throw.
If they don't matter, i'd simply discard them as above.

This problem is made easier by using the following method to take a sequence of tasks and order them based on when they are completed.
public static IEnumerable<Task<T>> Order<T>(this IEnumerable<Task<T>> tasks)
{
var taskList = tasks.ToList();
var taskSources = new BlockingCollection<TaskCompletionSource<T>>();
var taskSourceList = new List<TaskCompletionSource<T>>(taskList.Count);
foreach (var task in taskList)
{
var newSource = new TaskCompletionSource<T>();
taskSources.Add(newSource);
taskSourceList.Add(newSource);
task.ContinueWith(t =>
{
var source = taskSources.Take();
if (t.IsCanceled)
source.TrySetCanceled();
else if (t.IsFaulted)
source.TrySetException(t.Exception.InnerExceptions);
else if (t.IsCompleted)
source.TrySetResult(t.Result);
}, CancellationToken.None,
TaskContinuationOptions.PreferFairness,
TaskScheduler.Default);
}
return taskSourceList.Select(tcs => tcs.Task);
}
With this you can write:
public static async Task<bool> WhenAny(this IEnumerable<Task<bool>> tasks)
{
foreach (var task in tasks.Order())
if (await task)
return true;
return false;
}

You could wait for the first task to complete - if it's successful, return true immediately. Otherwise, wait for the next one to complete, and so on and so forth.
private async Task<bool> foundAtServers(int id, string[] servers)
{
var tasks = servers.Select(server => checkServer(id, server))
.ToList();
while(tasks.Any())
{
var task = await Task.WhenAny(tasks);
if(task.Result)
return true;
tasks.Remove(task);
}
return false;
}