We Keep Coding

C# System.Timers.Timer - Please, how do I make it stop?

I've got a Timer that's doing a 60 second countdown. When the ticks hit 60 seconds, it stops and disposes - no problem (I think). This is run in the context of a WebApi service. I need to be able to cancel the countdown from a UI, so I've exposed a method to handle this. Since the controller is transient (thanks Luaan) and, as Daniel points out, the app pool is not predictable, I need a way to send a "cancellable" countdown to clients. Ideas anyone?
[HttpGet]
public IHttpActionResult CancelCountdown()
{
// DOES NOTHING BECAUSE THERE'S A NEW INSTANCE OF THE CONTROLLER
timer.Stop();
timer.Dispose();
return Ok();
}
private void StartCountdown()
{
// MAY BE A BAD SOLUTION BECAUSE THE APP POOL MAY RECYCLE
timer.Interval = _timeIntervalInMilliseconds;
timer.Elapsed += BroadcastToClients;
timer.Start();
}
private void BroadcastToClients(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
_elapsed += 1;
if (_elapsed == _duration)//_duration is 60
{
timer.Stop();
timer.Dispose();
return;
}
_messageHub.Clients.All.shutdown(_elapsed);
}

It's kind of hard to provide an adequate solution without knowing what you're trying to accomplish with this, but i'll give it a shot.
As Luaan pointed out, controllers are designed to be essentially stateless, so you shouldn't put instance variable on them except for it's external dependencies, since each request creates a new instance of the controller class.
You could store the timer on a static dictionary, indexed by a GUID, and return the GUID on your controller and use it as the cancellation token.
Something like:
private static Dictionary<string,Timer> timers = new Dictionary<Guid,Timer>();
public Guid StartCountdown()
{
// MAY BE A BAD SOLUTION BECAUSE THE APP POOL MAY RECYCLE
timer.Interval = _timeIntervalInMilliseconds;
timer.Elapsed += BroadcastToClients;
var guid = Guid.NewGuid().ToString();
timers.Add(guid,timer);
timer.Start();
return guid;
}
public IHttpActionResult CancelCountdown(Guid cancelationToken)
{
//If the timer no longer exist or the user supplied a wrong token
if(!timers.HasKey(cancelationToken)) return;
var timer = timers[cancelationToken];
timer.Stop();
timer.Dispose();
timers.Remove(cancelationToken);
}
However this won't solve the problem with the AppPool recycling. For a more robust solution, instead of using a timer, you could store the start date and time of each countdown in a more permanent storage (say an SQL database, a NoSQL databse, a redis server or whatever), and have a running thread or global timer, or something like Hangfire, initialized on startup, that constantly checks your countdown storage. If enough time has passed to send a broadcast message you send it, and mark the countdown as finished. If a user wants to cancel the countdown, the controller will simply read the appropiate record, mark it as cancelled, and your running thread can ignore it.
If you go with this approach, you'll need to take into account some considerations:
If the timer interval is set too short you could have a perfomance bottleneck for having to access a permament storage too often. If the interval is too long, the countdown won't be too precise.
To alleviate this problem you could store the countdowns start time in permanent storage, in case the app pool resets and you need to restore them. And also have them stored in memory on a static variable for quicker access.
Please note that if you're working with a server farm instead of a single server, static variables won't be shared across instances.

How Implementing a windows service on a server that is hosted with ISP

I am working on an assignment in asp.net to send notification email to users at specific intervals.
But the problem is that since the server is not privately owned i cannot implement a windows service on it.
Any ideas?

There's no reliable way to achieve that. If you cannot install a Windows Service on the host you could write a endpoint (.aspx or .ashx) that will send the email and then purchase on some other site a service which will ping this endpoint at regular intervals by sending it HTTP request. Obviously you should configure this endpoint to be accessible only from the IP address of the provider you purchase the service from, otherwise anyone could send an HTTP request to the endpoint and trigger the process which is probably undesirable.
Further reading: The Dangers of Implementing Recurring Background Tasks In ASP.NET.

There are several ways to get code executing on an interval that don't require a windows service.
One option is to use the Cache class - use one of the Insert overloads that takes a CacheItemRemovedCallback - this will be called when the cache item is removed. You can re-add the cache item with this callback again and again...
Though, the first thing you need to do is contact the hosting company and find out if they already have some sort of solution for you.

You could set up a scheduled task on the server to invoke a program with the desired action.

You can always use a System.Timer and create a call at specific intervals. What you need to be careful is that this must be run one time, eg on application start, but if you have more than one pools, then it may run more times, and you also need to access some database to read the data of your actions.
using System.Timers;
var oTimer = new Timer();
oTimer.Interval = 30000; // 30 second
oTimer.Elapsed += new ElapsedEventHandler(MyThreadFun);
oTimer.Start();
private static void MyThreadFun(object sender, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
// inside here you read your query from the database
// get the next email that must be send,
// you send them, and mark them as send, log the errors and done.
}
why I select system timer:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc164015.aspx
more words
I use this in a more complex class and its work fine. What are the points that I have also made.
Signaling the application stop, to wait for the timer to end.
Use mutex and database for synchronize the works.

Easiest solution is to exploit global.asax application events
On application startup event, create a thread (or task) into a static singleton variable in the global class.
The thread/task/workitem will have an endless loop while(true) {...} with your "service like" code inside.
You'll also want to put a Thread.Sleep(60000) in the loop so it doesn't eat unnecessary CPU cycles.
static void FakeService(object obj) {
while(true) {
try {
// - get a list of users to send emails to
// - check the current time and compare it to the interval to send a new email
// - send emails
// - update the last_email_sent time for the users
} catch (Exception ex) {
// - log any exceptions
// - choose to keep the loop (fake service) running or end it (return)
}
Thread.Sleep(60000); //run the code in this loop every ~60 seconds
}
}
EDIT Because your task is more or less a simple timer job any of the ACID type concerns from an app pool reset or other error don't really apply, because it can just start up again and keep trucking along with any data corruption. But you could also use the thread to simply execute a request to an aspx or ashx that would hold your logic.
new WebClient().DownloadString("http://localhost/EmailJob.aspx");

ASP.NET: Firing batch jobs

My application could have up to roughly 100 requests for a batch job within a few milliseconds but in actuality, these job requests are being masked as one job request.
To fix this issue so that only one job request is just not feasible at the moment.
A workaround that I have thought is to program my application to fulfill only 1 batch job every x milliseconds, in this case I was thinking of 200 milliseconds, and ignore any other batch job that may come in within those 200 milliseconds or when my batch job have completed. After those 200 milliseconds are up or when the batch job is completed, my application will wait and accept 1 job request from that time on and it will not process any requests that may have been ignored before. Once my application accepts another job requests, it will repeat the cycle above.
What's the best way of doing this using .Net 4.0? Are there any boiler plate code that I can simply follow as a guide?
Update
Sorry for being unclear. I have added more details about my scenario. Also I just realized that my proposed workaround above will not work. Sorry guys, lol. Here's some background information.
I have an application that builds an index using files in a specified directory. When a file is added, deleted or modified in this directory, my application listens for these events using a FileSystemWatcher and re-indexes these files. The problem is that around 100 files can be added, deleted or modified by an external process and they occur very quickly, ie: within a few milliseconds. My end goal is to re-index these files after the last file change have occurred by the external process. The best solution is to modify the external process to signal my application when it has finished modifying the files I'm listening to but that's not feasible at the moment. Thus, I have to create a workaround.
A workaround that may solve my problem is to wait for the first file change. When the first file change have occurred, wait 200 milliseconds for any other subsequent file changes. Why 200 milliseconds? Because I'm hoping and confident that the external process can perform its file changes within 200 milliseconds. Once my application have waited for 200 milliseconds, I would like it to start a task that will re-index the files and go through another cycle of listening to a file change.
What's the best way of doing this?
Again, sorry for the confusion.

This question is a bit too high level to guess at.
My guess is your application is run as a service, you have your requests come into your application and arrive in a queue to be processed. And every 200 ms, you wake the queue and pop and item off for processing.
I'm confused about the "masked as one job request". Since you mentioned you will "ignore any other batch job", my guess is you haven't arranged your code to accept the incoming requests in a queue.
Regardless, you will generally always have one application process running (your service) and if you choose you could spawn a new thread for each item you process in the queue. You can monitor how much cpu/memory utilization this required and adjust the firing time (200ms) accordingly.

I may not be accurately understanding the problem, but my recommendation is to use the singleton pattern to work around this issue.
With the singleton approach, you can implement a lock on an object (the access method could potentially be something along the lines of BatchProcessor::GetBatchResults) that would then lock all requests to the batch job results object. Once the batch has finished, the lock will be released, and the underlying object, will have the results of the batch job available.
Please keep in mind that this is a "work around". There may be a better solution that involves looking into and changing the underlying business logic that causes multiple requests to come in for a job that's processing on demand.
Update:
Here is a link for information regarding Singleton (includes code examples): http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff650316.aspx

It is my understanding that the poster has some sort of an application that sits and waits for incoming requests to perform a batch job. The problem that he is receiving multiple requests within a short period of time that should actually have come in as just a single request. And, unfortunately, he is not able to solve this problem.
So, his solution is to assume that all requests received within a 200 ms timespan are the same, and to only process these once. My concern with this would be whether this assumption is correct or not? This entirely depends on the sending systems and the environment in which this is being used. The general idea to be able to do this would be to update a lastReceived date/time when a request is processed. Then when a new request comes in, compare the current date/time to the lastReceived date/time and only process it if the difference is greater than 200 ms.
Other possible solutions:
You said you could not modify the sending application so only one job request was sent, but could you add additional information to it, for instance a unique identifier?
Could you store the parameters from the last job request and compare it with the next job request and only process them if they are different?
Based on your Update
Here is an example how you could wait 200ms using a Timer:
static Timer timer;
static int waitTime = 200; //in ms
static void Main(string[] args)
{
FileSystemWatcher fsw = new FileSystemWatcher();
fsw.Path = #"C:\temp\";
fsw.Created += new FileSystemEventHandler(fsw_Created);
fsw.EnableRaisingEvents = true;
Console.ReadLine();
}
static void fsw_Created(object sender, FileSystemEventArgs e)
{
DateTime currTime = DateTime.Now;
if (timer == null)
{
Console.WriteLine("Started # " + currTime);
timer = new Timer();
timer.Interval = waitTime;
timer.Elapsed += new ElapsedEventHandler(timer_Elapsed);
timer.Start();
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("Ignored # " + currTime);
}
}
static void timer_Elapsed(object sender, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
//Start task here
Console.WriteLine("Elapsed # " + DateTime.Now);
timer = null;
}

Using System.Timers.Timer in asp.net

I use the following code in a asp.net website.
On application init i call InitializeTimer() once.
The goal of the code was to run DoWork() once every hour (1 time per hour) .
I also wanted the code to execute on different time every loop so i added the random part.
The result i got was werid , i can not find a explaination why is happens.
The code executed the function after 2hrs , then again after 2hrs , then after 3hrs , then after 2hrs , and 2hrs again.****
Can anybody explain the reason?
using System.Timers;
....
private static random = new Random();
....
public static void InitializeTimer()
{
tTimer = new Timer();
tTimer.AutoReset = true;
tTimer.Interval = TimeSpan.FromHours(1.0).TotalMilliseconds;
tTimer.Elapsed += new ElapsedEventHandler(ClassName1.tMailer_Elapsed);
tTimer.Start();
}
private static void tTimer_Elapsed(object sender, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
tTimer.Interval += random.Next(-5, 5);
DoWork();
}
Update:
Please don't post "use windows service" , or "scheduled task".
My question is for the following code I'm not looking for better alternatives.
Also , during this test (10hrs) , website was with high traffic , iis pool did not restart!
Based on the following MSDN: (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.timers.timer.interval.aspx)
If the interval is set after the Timer
has started, the count is reset. For
example, if you set the interval to 5
seconds and then set the Enabled
property to true, the count starts at
the time Enabled is set. If you reset
the interval to 10 seconds when count
is 3 seconds, the Elapsed event is
raised for the first time 13 seconds
after Enabled was set to true.
Is it possible that re-setting the interval in the elapsed function is the cause of the problem?
Meaning that when tTimer_Elapsed function is called the count is 1hr(min a few millisecond)
and my code "tTimer.Interval += random.Next(-5, 5);" is adding another full hour to the Interval?

ASP.NET applications will get shut down when not in use. If someone hits your site, and then no more hits, it can get shut down. Your timer won't fire.
For this type of maintenance work you want to use a windows scheduled task or windows service.

Check this out... Jeff Atwood actually discussed something similar. I guess it worked, but according to Jeff the site outgrew this method so they went to a dedicated task.

Since .net 4.5.2, there is a class called HostingEnvironment, it can do what you're asking, here is how to use:
https://blog.mariusschulz.com/2014/05/07/scheduling-background-jobs-from-an-asp-net-application-in-net-4-5-2
The HostingEnvironment.QueueBackgroundWorkItem method lets you
schedule small background work items. ASP.NET tracks these items and
prevents IIS from abruptly terminating the worker process until all
background work items have completed.

I second Sams suggestion of using windows scheduled task to hit a page every hour. I tried and tried to get mine to work and it sort of worked. I went to a scheduled task and it has never failed.

.NET Windows Service with timer stops responding

I have a windows service written in c#. It has a timer inside, which fires some functions on a regular basis. So the skeleton of my service:
public partial class ArchiveService : ServiceBase
{
Timer tickTack;
int interval = 10;
...
protected override void OnStart(string[] args)
{
tickTack = new Timer(1000 * interval);
tickTack.Elapsed += new ElapsedEventHandler(tickTack_Elapsed);
tickTack.Start();
}
protected override void OnStop()
{
tickTack.Stop();
}
private void tickTack_Elapsed(object sender, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
...
}
}
It works for some time (like 10-15 days) then it stops. I mean the service shows as running, but it does not do anything. I make some logging and the problem can be the timer, because after the interval it does not call the tickTack_Elapsed function.
I was thinking about rewrite it without a timer, using an endless loop, which stops the processing for the amount of time I set up. This is also not an elegant solution and I think it can have some side effects regarding memory.
The Timer is used from the System.Timers namespace, the environment is Windows 2003. I used this approach in two different services on different servers, but both is producing this behavior (this is why I thought that it is somehow connected to my code or the framework itself).
Does somebody experienced this behavior? What can be wrong?
Edit:
I edited both services. One got a nice try-catch everywhere and more logging. The second got a timer-recreation on a regular basis. None of them stopped since them, so if this situation remains for another week, I will close this question. Thank you for everyone so far.
Edit:
I close this question because nothing happened. I mean I made some changes, but those changes are not really relevant in this matter and both services are running without any problem since then. Please mark it as "Closed for not relevant anymore".

unhandled exceptions in timers are swallowed, and they silently kill the timer
wrap the body of your timer code in a try-catch block

I have seen this before with both timer, and looped services. Usually the case is that an exception is caught that stops the timer or looping thread, but does not restart it as part of the exception recovery.
To your other points...
I dont think that there is anything "elegant" about the timer. For me its more straight forward to see a looping operation in code than timer methods. But Elegance is subjective.
Memory issue? Not if you write it properly. Maybe a processor burden if your Thread.Sleep() isn't set right.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/842793
This is a known bug that has resurfaced in the Framework more than once.
The best known work-around: don't use timers. I've rendered this bug ineffective by doing a silly "while (true)" loop.
Your mileage may vary, so verify with your combination of OS/Framework bits.

Like many respondents have pointed out exceptions are swallowed by timer. In my windows services I use System.Threading.Timer. It has Change(...) method which allows you to start/stop that timer. Possible place for exception could be reentrancy problem - in case when tickTack_Elapsed executes longer than timer period. Usually I write timer loop like this:
void TimeLoop(object arg)
{
stopTimer();
//Do some stuff
startTimer();
}
You could also lock(...) your main loop to protect against reentrancy.

Interesting issue. If it is truly just time related (i.e. not an exception), then I wonder if you can simply periodically recycle the timer - i.e.
private void tickTack_Elapsed(object sender, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
CheckForRecycle();
// ... actual code
}
private void CheckForRecycle()
{
lock(someLock) {
if(++tickCount > MAX_TICKS) {
tickCount = 0;
tickTack.Stop();
// re-create timer
tickTack = new Timer(...);
tickTack.Elapsed += ...
tickTack.Start();
}
}
}
You could probably merge chunks of this with the OnStart / OnStop etc to reduce duplication.

Have you checked the error logs? Maybe you run out of timers somehow. Maybe you can create just one timer when you initialize the ArchiveService and skip the OnStart stuff.

I have made exactly the same as you in a few projects but have not had the problem.
Do you have code in the tickTac_Elapsed that can be causing this? Like a loop that never ends or some error that stops the timer, using threads and waiting for ending of those and so on?