I'm using the Gcm Network Manager to schedule tasks, in one of those tasks I need to perform an HTTP request. Until now it was written with HttpWebRequest so nothing was async.
Now I would like to reuse code that is written with HttpClient and is async.
The problem that arrises is that I cannot make the OnRunTask() async as it needs to return an int:
e.g.
public override int OnRunTask(TaskParams #params)
{
var result = await performSync();
if(result)
{
return GcmNetworkManager.ResultSuccess;
}
return GcmNetworkManager.ResultReschedule;
}
What could I do to be able to reuse async code here ?
You can use Task.Run inside your OnRunTask method like this :
Task.Run( async () =>
{
// Do your stuff here
await asyncTask();
});
You will no need to have OnRunTask async with this technique
Hope it helps
Edit
If you need the return value to match the framework / library signature, you can also use .Result
E.g.
var result = asyncTask().Result;
...
Related
I'm calling a third-party API which has a method that looks like this:
myServiceClient.Discover(key, OnCompletionCallback);
public bool OnCompletionCallback(string response)
{
// my code
}
My challenge is, I have to call Discover because it does some work under-the-covers that I need. At the same time, I have to wait for Discover to complete before running my custom code. To further complicate matters, I can't just put my code in the OnCompletionCallback handler because I need to call the code above from a Func delegate. In short, I want to do this:
Func<SystemTask> myFunction = async () =>
{
await myServiceClient.Discover(key);
// my code
}
However, I can't do this because the third-party API uses a callback approach instead of an async/await approach.
Is there some way to make the callback approach work in an async / await world?
If I understand you correctly you can do something like this
public Task<bool> MyAsyncFunction()
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>();
myServiceClient.Discover("somekey", s => {
//........
var res = true;
tcs.TrySetResult(res);
return res;
});
return tcs.Task;
}
Now you can await MyAsyncFunction
I have been reasearching once again the async tasks. No mater how i set the Tasks, my application suffers from UI freeze all the time. I have the following code for downloading the string from a webpage:
internal string DownloadString(string URL)
{
var result = LoadCompanyContracts(URL);
return result.Result;
}
internal async Task<string> LoadCompanyContracts(string URL)
{
Task<string> task2 = Task<string>.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
for (int i = 0; i <= 10000000; i++) Console.WriteLine(i);
WebClient wc = new WebClient();
string tmp = wc.DownloadString(new Uri(URL));
return tmp;
});
return task2.Result;
}
When i execute this task and during the for loop the UI of my application is freezing. Even though i believe that this code should not freeze the UI i am not able to find a solution. I have tried many different options and really want to use tasks instead of threads or events with webclient async.
Info: I am using .net 4.5 for my project. The difference in my code is that these functions are inside a class library(don't know if it matters).
Is it possible to run this code without blocking the user interface with async await by calling the DownloadString function from my code? If not what are the alternatives(any good nuget packages)?
The async keyword doesn't make something run asynchronously, it enables you to use await to await an already asynchronous operation. You need to use
DownloadStringTaskAsync to truly download in an asynchronous manner:
internal async Task<string> LoadCompanyContracts(string URL)
{
....
using(var wc = new WebClient())
{
string tmp = await wc.DownloadStringTaskAsync(new Uri(URL));
return tmp;
}
}
await by itself returns execution in the original execution context (ie the UI thread). This may or may not be desirable, which is why library code typically uses ConfigureAwait(false); and lets the final user of the library to decide how to await:
string tmp = await wc.DownloadStringTaskAsync(new Uri(URL))
.ConfigureAwait(false);
Finally, there's no point in awaiting if you are going to call .Result from the top-level function. There is no point in using await at all if you don't want to do use the method's result in your code. LoadCompanyContracts could be just:
internal Task<string> LoadCompanyContracts(string URL)
{
....
using(var wc = new WebClient())
{
return wc.DownloadStringTaskAsync(new Uri(URL))
.ConfigureAwait(false);
}
}
Oops
Typically, you don't need to use await at all if you just return the result of an asynchronous operation. The method could just return wc.DownloadStringTaskAsync(..); BUT that would cause the method to return and dispose the WebClient before download finishes. Avoiding the using block isn't a solution either, as it will let an expensive object like WebClient alive longer than necessary.
That's why HttpClient is preferable to WebClient: a single instance supports multiple concurrent calls, which means you can have just one instance eg as a field and reuse it, eg:
HttpClient _myClient =new HttpClient();
internal Task<string> LoadCompanyContractsAsync(string URL)
{
....
return _myClient.GetStringAsync(new Uri(URL))
.ConfigureAwait(false);
}
}
You could get rid of your DownloadString since it doesn't do anything on top of LoadCompanyContracts. If it does use the result of LoadCompanyContracts, it should be rewritten as:
internal async Task<string> DownloadString(string URL)
{
var result = await LoadCompanyContracts(URL);
//Do something with the result
return result;
}
EDIT
The original answer used DownloadStringAsync which is a legacy method that raises an event when download completes. The correct method is DownloadStringTaskAsync
EDIT 2
Since we are talking about a UI, the code can be made asynchronous all the way to the top event handler by using the async void syntax for the handler, eg async void Button1_Click, eg:
async void LoadCustomers_Click(...)
{
var contracts=await LoaCompanyContracts(_companyUrls);
txtContracts>Text=contracts;
}
In this case we want to return to the original thread, so we don't use ConfigureAwait(false);
I have 2 methods: the first sends HTTP GET request on one address and the second calls it multiple times (so, it sends request to many IPs). Both methods are async, so they don't block code execution while the requests are proccessing remotely. The problem is, due to my poor C# knowledge, I don't know how to send all the requests simultaneously, not one after another (which my code does). That's my code:
public static async Task<string> SendRequest(Uri uri)
{
using (var client = new HttpClient())
{
var resp = await client.GetStringAsync(uri).ConfigureAwait(false);
return resp;
}
}
public static async Task<string[]> SendToAllIps(string req)
{
string[] resp = new string[_allIps.Length];
for (int i = 0; i < _allIps.Length; i++)
{
resp[i] = await SendRequest(new Uri(_allIps[i] + req));
}
return resp;
}
How to make SendToAllIps send requests without awaiting for previous task result? Also SendToAllIps must return an array of responses when all the requests are finished. As far as I understand, this can be done with Task.WaitAll, but how to use it in this particular situation?
You can use Task.WhenAll to await a collection of tasks:
public static async Task<string[]> SendToAllIps(string req)
{
var tasks = _allIps.Select(ip => SendRequest(new Uri(ip + req)));
return await Task.WhenAll(tasks);
}
Answers provided above provide the correct way of doing it but doesn't provide rationale, let me explain what's wrong with your code:
Following line creates an issue:
resp[i] = await SendRequest(new Uri(_allIps[i] + req));
Why ?
As you are awaiting each individual request, it will stop the processing of the remaining requests, that's the behavior of the async-await and it will be almost the synchronous processing of each SendRequest when you wanted then to be concurrent.
Resolution:
SendRequest being an async method returns as Task<string>, you need add that to an IEnumerable<Task<string>> and then you have option:
Task.WaitAll or Task.WhenAll
Yours is Web API (Rest Application), which needs a Synchronization Context, so you need Task.WhenAll, which provides a Task as result to wait upon and integrate all the task results in an array, if you try using Task.WaitAll it will lead to deadlock, as it is not able to search the Synchronization Context, check the following:
WaitAll vs WhenAll
You can use the Task.WaitAll only for the Console application not the Web Application, Console App doesn't need any Synchronization Context or UI Thread
public static async Task<string[]> SendToAllIps(string req)
{
var tasks = new List<Task<string>>();
for (int i = 0; i < _allIps.Length; i++)
{
// Start task and assign the task itself to a collection.
var task = SendRequest(new Uri(_allIps[i] + req));
tasks.Add(task);
}
// await all the tasks.
string[] resp = await Task.WhenAll(tasks);
return resp;
}
The key here is to collect all the tasks in a collection and then await them all using await Task.WhenAll. Even though I think the solution from Lee is more elegant...
I'm learning how to use Tasks in MVC and I get completly lost. I need to download the source from selected webpage, find one element, get its value and return it. That's it.
For this I am using HtmlAgilityPack and HttpClient to fetch the webpage.
The problem that occurs is where nothing is waiting for response from httpClient and thus results that response generation completed when Task was still in progress. (An asynchronous module or handler completed while an asynchronous operation was still pending.)
I read lots of threads in here ,codeproj and some blogs, still don't understand what's the problem. Most common explanation is about resulting type of void in async method, but I cannot find any other way to return awaiting value, than this:
public float ReadPrice(Uri url)
{
switch (url.Host)
{
case "www.host1.xy":
return ParseXYZAsync(url).Result;
default:
return float.Parse("99999,99");
}
}
private Task<float> ParseXYZAsync(Uri url)
{
loadPage(url);
var priceNode = document.DocumentNode.SelectSingleNode(
#"//*[#id='pageWrapper']/div[4]/section[1]/div[4]/div[1]/div[1]/span");
var price = priceNode.InnerText;
...
return priceInFloat;
}
private async Task LoadPage(Uri url)
{
HttpClient http = new HttpClient();
var response = await http.GetByteArrayAsync(url);
String source = Encoding.GetEncoding("utf-8")
.GetString(response, 0, response.Length - 1);
source = WebUtility.HtmlDecode(source);
document.LoadHtml(source);
}
In order to figure out what's wrong you need to understand one key concept with async-await. When an async method hits the first await keyword, control is yielded back to the calling method. This means that when you do this:
loadPage(url);
The method will synchronously run until it hits:
var response = await http.GetByteArrayAsync(url);
Which will yields control back to ParseWebSite, which will continue execution and will probably end before the async operation has actually completed.
What you need to do is make LoadPage return a Task and await for it's completion:
private async Task<float> ParseWebsiteAsync(Uri url)
{
await LoadPageAsync(url);
var priceNode = document.DocumentNode.SelectSingleNode
(#"//*[#id='pageWrapper']/div[4]/section[1]/div[4]/div[1]/div[1]/span");
var price = priceNode.InnerText;
return priceInFloat;
}
private async Task LoadPageAsync(Uri url)
{
HttpClient http = new HttpClient();
var source = await http.GetAsStringAsync(url);
source = WebUtility.HtmlDecode(source);
document.LoadHtml(source);
}
Side Notes:
Do follow .NET naming conventions. Methods should be PascalCase and not camelCase
Do add the "Async" postfix for asynchronous methods. E.g, LoadPage should become LoadPageAsync.
private async void loadPage(Uri url) needs to return a Task:
private async Task loadPage(Uri url)
then you need to await it in the calling method:
private async Task<float> parseWEBSITEXY(Uri url)
{
await loadPage(url);
...
}
In you code load page starts and it returns immediately.
One more thing - it is not recommended to use async void, except for event handlers. Always return Task.
I am trying to invoke a method from another .dll file .
It is sending a message through the VPN then Return the RecievedMessage from another computer.
As you now it takes time to sending and receiving message and VpnObject just send message and I should wait for listener to invoke the RecievedMessage.
This method is like this!
public string RecievedMessage()
{
string Recieved ;
// Some VPN Code and then return the result;
return Recieved;
}
public string SendAndRecieveMessage(string MessageToSend)
{
string RecievedAnswer = string.Empty;
// Now Sending Message through the VPN
VpnObject.SendMessage(MessageToSend);
//Then want to Recieve the answer and return the answer here .
return RecievedAnswer;
}
I'm just thinking how can wait for RecievedMessage to invoke then return the result .
You know it is simple to use a variable and assign it value and check for while but it reduced the performance dramatically .
Is there anyway to continue from SendAndRecieveMessage just when RecievedMessage invoked ? (I think it is something with async and await but don't know how!)
Edit :VpnObject is just a sender and receiver through the vpn . it contains a simple socket send and a listener that invoke a method(RecievedMessage) when new message received .
Whether or not you have an alternative to polling depends on whether the library you are using provides any events or callbacks that will tell you when the request has completed.
Either way, the standard approach to exposing the deferred result of an asynchronous operation is to use a Task. Your method signature would look like this:
public Task<string> SendAndRecieveMessage(string MessageToSend)
Now, how you actually implement the method depends on what API VpnObject exposes. TaskCompletionSource is very useful for this kind of thing.
If VpnObject has an event that fires when the request completes:
public Task<string> SendAndReceiveMessage(string messageToSend)
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<string>();
...
VpnObject.OnMessageReceived += (s, e) => tcs.SetResult(e.Message);
...
return tcs.Task;
}
If VpnObject can accept a callback that it will invoke when the request completes:
public Task<string> SendAndReceiveMessage(string messageToSend)
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<string>();
...
VpnObject.OnMessageReceived(message => tcs.SetResult(message));
...
return tcs.Task;
}
If VpnObject doesn't support any of this, you can fall back to polling:
public async Task<string> SendAndReceiveMessage(string messageToSend)
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<string>();
...
while(!VpnObject.IsMessageReceived)
await Task.Delay(500); // Adjust to a reasonable polling interval
...
return VpnObject.Message;
}
You know it is simple to use a variable and assign it value and check for while but it reduced the performance dramatically .
A spin while loop is definitely not the way to implement this. Even with a sleep, it's clunky, and C# has multiple ways to solve this problem.
It's not entirely clear how your VPN Send and Receive method works, but the idea for solving this is to either use a callback approach, or as you noted, use C# async framework.
Without more details on the VPN Object, I'll just have to have some stub methods. The idea is to create a Task that returns the string, mark it as an async task, then await for it to complete. In your case, the task is receiving the VPN response string.
Something like this.
public Task<string> ReceivedMessage()
{
//get the response from the VPN Object.
string Received = VpnObject.GetResponse();
var ts = new TaskCompletionSource<string>();
ts.SetResult(Received);
// Some VPN Code and then return the result;
return ts.Task;
}
public async Task<string> SendAndReceiveMessageAsync(string MessageToSend)
{
string result = string.Empty;
// Now Sending Message through the VPN
VpnObject.SendMessage(MessageToSend);
result = await ReceivedMessage();
return result;
}