We Keep Coding

Cannot get error 500 details in controller

I have a simple Rest Web service that raises an exception randomly (Internal Server Error).
I noticed it when I have stressed this Web api in a console program in a 50.000 iterations loop.
What I get in this client :
{StatusCode: 500, ReasonPhrase: 'Internal Server Error', Version: 1.1,
What I want is to get this Error 500 detail.
But I cannot catch it in my controller, the code doesn't go in the catch.
The controller code :
[HttpPost]
[Route("{IdLog}/message")]
public string CreateLogMsg(long IdLog, [FromBody] TlogLineDTO oLogLine)
{
long lTmp = 0;
try
{
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
string sTmp = _oExploitBll.InsertNewLogLine(oLogLine).ToString();
if (!long.TryParse(sTmp, out lTmp))
{
// Create a new file
Random rnd = new Random();
using (System.IO.StreamWriter sw = System.IO.File.AppendText(#"E:\Temp\20200707\REF_" + rnd.Next().ToString() + ".txt"))
{
sw.WriteLine(sTmp);
}
}
return sTmp;
}
else
{
// Create a new file where to put the error message
Random rnd = new Random();
using (System.IO.StreamWriter sw = System.IO.File.AppendText(#"E:\Temp\20200707\REF_" + rnd.Next().ToString() + ".txt"))
{
sw.WriteLine("Ko");
}
return "Ko";
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
string sMsgErr = ex.Message + "-" + ex.StackTrace;
// Create a new file
Random rnd = new Random();
using (System.IO.StreamWriter sw = System.IO.File.AppendText(#"E:\Temp\20200707\REF_" + rnd.Next().ToString() + ".txt"))
{
sw.WriteLine(sMsgErr);
}
return "0";
}
}
How can I make it go in the catch ?
Does someone have an idea ?
Thanks a lot in advance.
Eric

If, as you say, the error happens because the server is too stressed the requests which get the error never reach the controller. Actually the server cannot even enqueue them. Sso you can't handle them unless you add a side-car server which receives requests from the client, forwards them to your server and then
if response is ok forwards response to client
else handles the error
In real case scenarios you use a load balancer to divide the request load between more servers

In fact, I have corrected the code and added a loop of 2 retries for the http requests and it seems to work : when the http request fails, I retry it once (or the number of retries I want) and generally the http request success in the second retry.
But I still don't know why the http requests fail sometimes.

Azure Function SSH.Net Socket read operation has timed out

I'm attempting to connect from a timed Azure function to a 3rd party SFTP server that I have access to, but do not control. My function runs successfully locally when using the azure functions emulator, however I receive an exception ("Socket read operation has timed out after 30000 milliseconds.") when attempting to run in Azure.
Is there anything from a networking perspective I need to do to allow/set up outbound SFTP connections, or does anyone see anything wrong with my code below?
var ftpHost = Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable("SFTP:Server");
var ftpUser = Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable("SFTP:User");
var ftpPass = Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable("SFTP:Password");
var ftpDirectory = Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable("SFTP:WorkingDirectory");
log.Info($"Connecting to {ftpHost}"); //This outputs the correct values I would expect from my app settings
using (var sftp = new SftpClient(ftpHost, ftpUser, ftpPass))
{
sftp.Connect(); //This throws the exception
log.Info("Connected");
var files = sftp.ListDirectory(ftpDirectory);
log.Info("Directory listing successful");
var exceptions = new List<Exception>();
foreach (var file in files.Where(f => f.IsRegularFile))
{
try
{
log.Info($"{file.FullName} - {file.LastWriteTimeUtc}");
var records = Process(sftp, file);
log.Info($"Parsed {records.Count} records");
sftp.DeleteFile(file.FullName);
log.Info($"Deleted {file.FullName}");
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
exceptions.Add(ex);
}
}
if (exceptions.Any())
{
throw new AggregateException(exceptions);
}
}
Edit
I did leave my failing code out there and the failures appear to be intermittent. Running every 15 minutes, I have a roughly 50% success rate. In the last 20 attempts, 10 have succeeded.

System.Threading.Task not starting in production environment

I have a c# windows service which is doing various tasks. Its working perfectly on my local system but as soon as I start it on my product server, its doesn't perform a particular task on it.
This is how my service is structured:
public static void Execute()
{
try
{
// .... some work ....
foreach (DataRow dr in dt.Rows)
{
string cc = dr["ccode"].ToString();
Task objTask = new Task(delegate { RequestForEachCustomer(cc); });
objTask.Start();
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// Logging in DB + Text File
}
}
public static void RequestForEachCustomer(object cc)
{
try
{
// .... some work ....
foreach (DataRow dr in dt.Rows)
{
WriteLog("RequestForEachCustomer - Before Task");
Task objTask = new Task(delegate { RequestProcessing(dr); });
objTask.Start();
WriteLog("RequestForEachCustomer - After Task");
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// Logging in DB + Text File
}
}
public static void RequestProcessing(object dr)
{
try
{
WriteLog("Inside RequestProcessing");
// .... some work ....
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// Logging in DB + Text File
}
}
Now what happens on the production server is that it logs the last entry in RequestForEachCustomer which is "RequestForEachCustomer - After Task" but it doesn't log the entry from RequestProcessing which mean the task is not starting at all. There are no exceptions in either database or text file.
There are no events logged in window's event viewer either. Also the service keeps working (if I insert another record in database, its processed by the service immediately so the service isn't stuck either. It just doesn't seem to process RequestProcessing task.)
I am baffled by this and it would be great if someone could point out the mistake I am making. Oh, btw did I forgot to mention that this service was working perfectly few days ago on the server and it is still working fine on my local PC.
EDIT :
WriteLog :
public static void WriteErrorLog(string Message)
{
StreamWriter sw = null;
try
{
lock (locker)
{
sw = new StreamWriter(AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory + "\\Logs\\LogFile.txt", true);
sw.WriteLine(DateTime.Now.ToString() + ": " + Message);
sw.Flush();
sw.Close();
}
}
catch (Exception excep)
{
try
{
// .... Inserting ErrorLog in DB ....
}
catch
{
throw excep;
}
throw excep;
}
}
I have also logged an entry on OnStop() something like "Service Stopped" and its logs every time I stop my service so the problem couldn't exist in WriteLog function.

I suggest you refactor your code as in this MSDN example. What bother me in your code is, you never wait for tasks to finish anywhere.
The following example starts 10 tasks, each of which is passed an index as a state object. Tasks with an index from two to five throw exceptions. The call to the WaitAll method wraps all exceptions in an AggregateException object and propagates it to the calling thread.
Source : Task.WaitAll Method (Task[])
This line from example might be of some importance :
Task.WaitAll(tasks.ToArray());

sporadic error while getting all messages in Windows messagequeue

In C# ASP.NET 3.5 web application running on Windows Server 2003, I get the following error once in a while:
"Object reference not set to an instance of an object.: at System.Messaging.Interop.MessagePropertyVariants.Unlock()
at System.Messaging.Message.Unlock()
at System.Messaging.MessageQueue.ReceiveCurrent(TimeSpan timeout, Int32 action, CursorHandle cursor, MessagePropertyFilter filter, MessageQueueTransaction internalTransaction, MessageQueueTransactionType transactionType)
at System.Messaging.MessageEnumerator.get_Current()
at System.Messaging.MessageQueue.GetAllMessages()".
The line of code that throws this error is:
Message[] msgs = Global.getOutputQueue(mode).GetAllMessages();
where Global.getOutputQueue(mode) gives the messagequeue I want to get messages from.
Update:
Global.getPool(mode).WaitOne();
commonClass.log(-1, "Acquired pool: " + mode, "Report ID: " + unique_report_id);
............../* some code /
..............
lock(getLock(mode))
{
bool yet_to_get = true;
int num_retry = 0;
do
{
try
{
msgs = Global.getOutputQueue(mode).GetAllMessages();
yet_to_get = false;
}
catch
{
Global.setOutputQueue(mode);
msgs = Global.getOutputQueue(mode).GetAllMessages();
yet_to_get = false;
}
++num_retry;
}
while (yet_to_get && num_retry < 2);
}
... / some code*/
....
finally
{
commonClass.log(-1, "Released pool: " + mode, "Report ID: " + unique_report_id);
Global.getPool(mode).Release();
}

Your description and this thread suggests a timing issue. I would create the MessageQueue object infrequently (maybe only once) and have Global.getOutputQueue(mode) return a cached version, seems likely to get around this.
EDIT: Further details suggest you have the opposite problem. I suggest encapsulating access to the message queue, catching this exception and recreating the queue if that exception occurs. So, replace the call to Global.getOutputQueue(mode).GetAllMessages() with something like this:
public void getAllOutputQueueMessages()
{
try
{
return queue_.GetAllMessages();
}
catch (Exception)
{
queue_ = OpenQueue();
return queue_.GetAllMessages();
}
}
You'll notice I did not preserve your mode functionality, but you get the idea. Of course, you have to duplicate this pattern for other calls you make to the queue, but only for the ones you make (not the whole queue interface).

This is an old thread, but google brought me here so I shall add my findings.
I agree with user: tallseth that this is a timing issue.
After the message queue is created it is not instantly available.
try
{
return _queue.GetAllMessages().Length;
}
catch (Exception)
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(4000);
return _queue.GetAllMessages().Length;
}
try adding a pause if you catch an exception when accessing a queue which you know has been created.
On a related note
_logQueuePath = logQueuePath.StartsWith(#".\") ? logQueuePath : #".\" + logQueuePath;
_queue = new MessageQueue(_logQueuePath);
MessageQueue.Create(_logQueuePath);
bool exists = MessageQueue.Exists(_logQueuePath);
running the MessageQueue.Exists(string nameofQ); method immediately after creating the queue will return false. So be careful when calling code such as:
public void CreateQueue()
{
if (!MessageQueue.Exists(_logQueuePath))
{
MessageQueue.Create(_logQueuePath);
}
}
As it is likely to throw an exception stating that the queue you are trying to create already exists.
-edit: (Sorry I don't have the relevant link for this new info)
I read that a newly created MessageQueue will return false on MessageQueue.Exists(QueuePath)until it has received at least one message.
Keeping this and the earlier points i mentioned in mind has gotten my code running reliably.

HttpWebRequest Limitations? Or bad implementation

I am trying to build a c# console app that will monitor about 3000 urls (Just need to know that HEAD request returned 200, not necessarily content, etc.)
My attempt here was to build a routine the checks the web URLS, looping and creating threads each executing the routine. What's happening is if i run with <20 threads, it executes ok most of the time, but if i use >20 threads, some of the url's time out. I tried increasing the Timeout to 30 seconds, same occurs. The network I am running this on is more than capable of executing 50 HTTP HEAD requests (10MBIT connection at ISP), and both the CPU and network run very low when executing the routine.
When a timeout occurs, i test the same IP on a browser and it works fine, I tested this repeatedly and there was never a case during testing that a "timed out" url was actually timing out.
The reason i want to run >20 threads is that i want to perform this test every 5 minutes, with some of the URL's taking a full 10sec (or higher if the timeout is set higher), i want to make sure that its able to run through all URLs within 2-3 minutes.
Is there a better way to go about checking if a URL is available, or, should I be looking at the system/network for an issue.
MAIN
while (rdr.Read())
{
Thread t = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart(check_web));
t.Start(rdr[0]);
}
static void check_web(object weburl)
{
bool isok;
isok = ConnectionAvailable(weburl.ToString());
}
public static bool ConnectionAvailable(string strServer)
{
try
{
strServer = "http://" + strServer;
HttpWebRequest reqFP = (HttpWebRequest)HttpWebRequest.Create(strServer);
reqFP.Timeout = 10000;
reqFP.Method = "HEAD";
HttpWebResponse rspFP = (HttpWebResponse)reqFP.GetResponse();
if (HttpStatusCode.OK == rspFP.StatusCode)
{
Console.WriteLine(strServer + " - OK");
rspFP.Close();
return true;
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine(strServer + " Server returned error..");
rspFP.Close();
return false;
}
}
catch (WebException x)
{
if (x.ToString().Contains("timed out"))
{
Console.WriteLine(strServer + " - Timed out");
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine(x.Message.ToString());
}
return false;
}
}

Just remember, you asked.
Very bad implementation.
Do not go creating threads like that. It does very little good to have more threads than processor cores. The extra threads will pretty much just compete with each other, especially since they're all running the same code.
You need to implement using blocks. If you throw an exception (and chances are you will), then you will be leaking resources.
What is the purpose in returning a bool? Do you check it somewhere? In any case, your error and exception processing are a mess.
When you get a non-200 response, you don't display the error code.
You're comparing against the Message property to decide if it's a timeout. Microsoft should put a space between the "time" and "out" just to spite you.
When it's not a timeout, you display only the Message property, not the entire exception, and the Message property is already a string and doesn't need you to call ToString() on it.
Next Batch of Changes
This isn't finished, I don't think, but try this one:
public static void Main()
{
// Don't mind the interpretation. I needed an excuse to define "rdr"
using (var conn = new SqlConnection())
{
conn.Open();
using (var cmd = new SqlCommand("SELECT Url FROM UrlsToCheck", conn))
{
using (var rdr = cmd.ExecuteReader())
{
while (rdr.Read())
{
// Use the thread pool. Please.
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(
delegate(object weburl)
{
// I invented a reason for you to return bool
if (!ConnectionAvailable(weburl.ToString()))
{
// Console would be getting pretty busy with all
// those threads
Debug.WriteLine(
String.Format(
"{0} was not available",
weburl));
}
},
rdr[0]);
}
}
}
}
}
public static bool ConnectionAvailable(string strServer)
{
try
{
strServer = "http://" + strServer;
var reqFp = (HttpWebRequest)WebRequest.Create(strServer);
reqFp.Timeout = 10000;
reqFp.Method = "HEAD";
// BTW, what's an "FP"?
using (var rspFp = (HttpWebResponse) reqFp.GetResponse()) // IDisposable
{
if (HttpStatusCode.OK == rspFp.StatusCode)
{
Debug.WriteLine(string.Format("{0} - OK", strServer));
return true; // Dispose called when using is exited
}
// Include the error because it's nice to know these things
Debug.WriteLine(String.Format(
"{0} Server returned error: {1}",
strServer, rspFp.StatusCode));
return false;
}
}
catch (WebException x)
{
// Don't tempt fate and don't let programs read human-readable messages
if (x.Status == WebExceptionStatus.Timeout)
{
Debug.WriteLine(string.Format("{0} - Timed out", strServer));
}
else
{
// The FULL exception, please
Debug.WriteLine(x.ToString());
}
return false;
}
}
Almost Done - Not Tested Late Night Code
public static void Main()
{
using (var conn = new SqlConnection())
{
conn.Open();
using (var cmd = new SqlCommand("", conn))
{
using (var rdr = cmd.ExecuteReader())
{
if (rdr == null)
{
return;
}
while (rdr.Read())
{
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(
CheckConnectionAvailable, rdr[0]);
}
}
}
}
}
private static void CheckConnectionAvailable(object weburl)
{
try
{
// If this works, it's a lot simpler
var strServer = new Uri("http://" + weburl);
using (var client = new WebClient())
{
client.UploadDataCompleted += ClientOnUploadDataCompleted;
client.UploadDataAsync(
strServer, "HEAD", new byte[] {}, strServer);
}
}
catch (WebException x)
{
Debug.WriteLine(x);
}
}
private static void ClientOnUploadDataCompleted(
object sender, UploadDataCompletedEventArgs args)
{
if (args.Error == null)
{
Debug.WriteLine(string.Format("{0} - OK", args.UserState));
}
else
{
Debug.WriteLine(string.Format("{0} - Error", args.Error));
}
}

Use ThreadPool class. Don't spawn hundreds of threads like this. Threads have such a huge overhead and what happens in your case is that your CPU will spend 99% time on context switching and 1% doing real work.

Don't use threads.
Asynch Call backs and queues. Why create a thread when the resource that they are all wanting is access to the outside world. Limit your threads to about 5, and then implement a class that uses a queue. split the code into two parts, the fetch and the process. One controls the flow of data while the other controls access to the outside world.
Use whatever language you like but you won't got wrong if you think that threads are for processing and number crunching and async call backs are for resource management.