Develop Reference

why does MySQL Connector claim there is already an open DataReader when there isn't?

I'm using the .NET Connector to access a MySQL database from my C# program. All my queries are done with MySqlCommand.BeginExecuteReader, with the IAsyncResults held in a list so I can check them periodically and invoke appropriate callbacks whenever they finish, fetching the data via MySqlCommand.EndExecuteReader. I am careful never to hold one of these readers open while attempting to read results from something else.
This mostly works fine. But I find that if I start two queries at the same time, then I get the dreaded MySqlException: There is already an open DataReader associated with this Connection which must be closed first exception in EndExecuteReader. And this is happening the first time I invoke EndExecuteReader. So the error message is full of baloney; there is no other open DataReader at that point, unless the connector has somehow opened one behind the scenes without me calling EndExecuteReader. So what's going on?
Here's my update loop, including copious logging:
for (int i=queries.Count-1; i>=0; i--) {
Debug.Log("Checking query: " + queries[i].command.CommandText);
if (!queries[i].operation.IsCompleted) continue;
var q = queries[i];
queries.RemoveAt(i);
Debug.Log("Finished, opening Reader for " + q.command.CommandText);
using (var reader = q.command.EndExecuteReader(q.operation)) {
try {
q.callback(reader, null);
} catch (System.Exception ex) {
Logging.LogError("Exception while processing: " + q.command.CommandText);
Logging.LogError(ex.ToString());
q.callback(null, ex.ToString());
}
}
Debug.Log("And done with callback for: " + q.command.CommandText);
}
And here's the log:
As you can see, I start both queries in rapid succession. (This is the first thing my program does after opening the DB connection, just to pin down what's happening.) Then the first one I check says it's done, so I call EndExecuteReader on it, and boom -- already it claims there's another open one. This happens immediately, before it even gets to my callback method. How can that be?
Is it not valid to have two open queries at once, even if I only call EndExecuteReader on one at a time?

When you run two queries concurrently, you must have two Connection objects. Why? Each Connection can only handle one query at a time. It looks like your code got into some kind of race condition where some of your concurrent queries worked and then a pair of them collided and failed.
At any rate your system will be more resilient in production if you can keep your startup sequences simple. If I were you I'd run one query after another rather than trying to run them all at once. (Obvs if that causes real performance problems you'll have to run them concurrently. But keep it simple until you need it to be complex.)

ConnectionState Enumeration - Determining Database Status

I am trying to write a background process that checks to see if a database is broken and I am a little bit confused on what exactly would constitute as "broken".
Looking at the official documentation found here on the Microsoft Developers Network for ConnectionState there is a member entitled "broken". At what point would this member result to true, or how exactly would it be used?
This is currently how I am checking if the DB is broken:
public bool DatabaseConnection()
{
bool statusUp = true;
using (var databaseConnection = new SqlConnection(ConfigData.ConnectionStrings.DatabaseConnectionString))
{
try
{
databaseConnection.Open()
}
catch (SqlException ex)
{
const string message = "Could not establish a connection with Database.";
Log.DatabaseStatusDown(message, ex);
statusUp = false;
}
finally { databaseConnection.Close(); }
}
return statusUp
}
I know Using statement leverages the IDisposable class and the connection will be disposed of but I am extra paranoid. Is this efficient? If not, would a more efficient way to determine if my connection is broken would be to do something like this?
public bool DatabaseConnection()
{
using (var databaseConnection = new SqlConnection(ConfigData.ConnectionStrings.DatabaseConnectionString))
{
return databaseConnection.State == ConnectionState.Broken;
}
}
I will be running this process every two minutes, and something tells me the first method I outlined will not be efficient. Would the second method work to determine if my DB is broken? What exactly does Microsoft define as broken for this particular enum?

I wouldn't use ConnectionState.Broken. It is reserved for future use.
The first technique is actually pretty lightweight. All it does is get a connection from the connection pool, which is held locally. Disposing the connection will return the connection to the pool for use by other processes.
I would perhaps consider actually sending a command to the SQL Server, e.g. "SELECT 'ping'" or something lightweight. If you don't get a resultset back it indicates that your SQL Server couldn't service the request for whatever reason.

Not an expert, but I believe broken would indicate that an already connected database connection had an unrecoverable connection issue (Server closed it, etc). It wouldn't be very reliable, and then possibly only detectable after a failed attempt to do something.

It doesn't make sense to check for Broken on a connection you just made. It's only useful for a long-living connection - and it basically tells you to reopen the connection.
It doesn't tell you anything about the state of the database, or the database server. The only thing it tells you is whether the concrete connection is working or not.
If you're always creating new connections, the only thing you care about is whether connection.Open throws an exception or not. And of course, the ExecuteXXX methods etc. - the connection can drop at any point.

How can I circument the "80004005 There is a file sharing violation...." err msg on a SQL Server CE database?

I am getting error
80004005 There is a file sharing violation. A different process might be using the file.
when trying to open a SqlCeConnection.
Is there a way to close a SQL Server CE database programmatically, to try to nip that problem in the bud? Something like (pseudocode):
SqlCeDatabase SQLCeDb = "\My Documents\HHSDB003.sdf";
if (SQLCeDb.IsOpen)
{
SQLCeDb.Close();
}
?
Or a way to set the connection so that it doesn't care if the database is open elsewhere/wise, such as:
SqlCeConnection conn = new SqlCeConnection(#"Data Source=\My Documents\HHSDB003.sdf;File Mode = 'shared read'");
...or:
SqlCeConnection conn = new SqlCeConnection(#"Data Source=\My Documents\HHSDB003.sdf;File Mode = 'read write'");
I can't test these at present, because I'm back to getting
Cannot copy HHS.exe The device has either stopped responding or has been disconnected
when I attempt to copy over a new version of the .exe to the handheld.
If there's something more frustrating to program against (and "against" is the correct word here, I think) than the prehistoric versions of Windows CE / Compact Framework / .NET, I'm not at all sure I want to know what it is.
UPDATE
Adding to my frustrusion (haywire combination of confusion and frustration), I found the following at http://www.pocketpcfaq.com/faqs/activesync/exchange_errors.php:
0x80004005 N/A Synchronization failed due to a device software error. Contact your network administrator.
1. Obtain the latest Pocket PC End User Update from your service provider.
UPDATE 2
Is this possibly problematic (than all but the first setting is blank):
UPDATE 3
With this code:
private void menuItemTestSendingXML_Click(object sender, System.EventArgs e)
{
string connStr = "Data Source=My Documents\\HHSDB003.SDF";
SqlCeConnection conn = null;
try
{
try
{
conn = new SqlCeConnection(connStr);
conn.Open();
MessageBox.Show("it must have opened okay");
}
finally
{
conn.Close();
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
if (null == ex.InnerException)
{
MessageBox.Show("inner Ex is null");
}
MessageBox.Show(String.Format("msg is {0}", ex.Message));
}
}
...I am now seeing "it must have opened okay" (that's a good thing, but...why it's now working, I have no idea, because the code has not changed since I last ran it and it failed. Something beyond the code must have been at play.
The only thing I can think of that happened that MAY have had a bearing on this change is that, thinking there may have been a rogue instance of either the .exe or its ancillary dll in memory on the handheld device, I wrote an quick-and-dirty utility that looped through the running processes, looking for them and, if finding them, killing them, but they were not there, so the utility really did "nothing" (maybe the Hawthorne effect?).
That is the way working with this combination of tools and technologies seems to go, though: everything is working fine one minute and the next, BAM! It no longer is. Then the reverse can also happen: for no apparent reason it seems to "heal itself".
In the interests of "full disclosure," here is the utility code:
// Got this from http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/36841/Compact-Framework-Process-class-that-supports-full
private void btnKillRogue_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
ProcessInfo[] list = ProcessCE.GetProcesses();
foreach (ProcessInfo item in list)
{
MessageBox.Show("Process item: " + item.FullPath);
if (item.FullPath == #"\Windows\iexplore.exe") item.Kill(); //<= this was the example search; it probably could be a problem, so I'll use it, too
if (item.FullPath.EndsWith("HHS.exe"))
{
MessageBox.Show("about to kill hhs.exe");
item.Kill();
}
if (item.FullPath.EndsWith("HUtilCE.dll"))
{
MessageBox.Show("about to kill hutilce.dll");
item.Kill();
}
}
}
Maybe there was an instance of iexplore.exe resident in memory that was problematic (I'm not showing a messagebox if that is what is found)...?

As an attempt to claim unused bounty ... do not, however, feel obligated to pass around free points on my behalf ...
Aside from force killing of possible tasks, had you rebooted the system amidst your search for an answer? If your tool did not return the message, it is certainly possible that a reboot would have done the very thing that you had attempted with the kill utility - or possible iexplore.exe had something to do with it ... the lack of the additional messagebox may leave you never knowing - unless this issue occurs again.
If no rebooting occurred, then perhaps whatever program/dll was held in memory by some other process concluded its task and released it hold.
There are several scenarios that might have occurred, it is certainly hard to determine with absolution; hence the lack of answers. I would be interested, though, if this problem occurred again.

How do you detect if a SqlConnection's "blocking period" is active?

According to Microsoft's article (SQL Server Connection Pooling (ADO.NET)),
When connection pooling is enabled, and if a timeout error or other login error occurs, an exception will be thrown and subsequent connection attempts will fail for the next five seconds, the "blocking period". If the application attempts to connect within the blocking period, the first exception will be thrown again. After the blocking period ends, another connection failure by the application will result in a blocking period that is twice as long as the previous blocking period. Subsequent failures after a blocking period ends will result in a new blocking periods that is twice as long as the previous blocking period, up to a maximum of five minutes.
How would you detect that the blocking period is active? I would assume that there is some property to check before attempting the connection so that you could avoid extending the blocking period.

There shouldn't be a need to check if you're in a blocking period to avoid extending it. As it says in the excerpt above, any attempts to connect during the blocking period will re-throw the first exception, it says nothing about extending the blocking period. However, each new blocking period will be twice as long as the previous.
In my experience, the exceptions that get thrown (due to timeouts, connection leaks, etc.) are either environmental issues or failing to properly close/dispose connections. It's a good idea to log these exceptions so that you can track down the real issue.
If you do keep coming across a timeout exception, you could catch it and try to clear all the pools, but it's likely due to a connection leak. You'll want to make sure you're wrapping your connections with a using statement, which will help to close/dispose of your connections when you're done with them or if an exception occurs.
using(SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection("connection_string"))
{
using(SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand())
{
SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand();
command.Connection = connection;
command.CommandType = CommandType.Text;
command.CommandTimeout = [some timeout value];
command.CommandText = "Update SomeTable Set Value = 1";
connection.Open();
command.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
}

In addition to the ClientConnectionId field,
The SqlException.Message will also be reference-equal. That is, the cached string will be returned for connections that fail within the "blocking period".
However, this is also an implementation detail and may change.

Unfortunately there is no easy way to detect if you are in the ADO.NET "Blocking Period" or not (without resorting to something fragile like reflection).
However, if you are using .Net 4.5 or later, then you can detect if the last exception you observed from Open/OpenAsync is duplicated or not by looking at the ClientConnectionId of the SqlException and comparing that to the id of the last SqlException that you've seen (since the exceptions are duplicated, the ids are duplicated as well).
Assuming that you have a single place where you create\open SqlConnections for a single connection string, you can do the following:
public static class DataAccessLayer
{
// Single connection string that all connections use
private static readonly string _connectionString = "server=(local);integrated security=true;";
// Stores that last observed connection if when opening a connection
// NOTE: Using an object so that the Volatile methods will work
private static object _lastErrorConnectionId = Guid.Empty;
public static SqlConnection GetOpenedConnection()
{
try
{
SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(_connectionString);
connection.Open();
return connection;
}
catch (SqlException ex)
{
// Did the connection open get to the point of creating an internal connection?
if (ex.ClientConnectionId != Guid.Empty)
{
// Verify that the connection id is something new
var lastId = (Guid)Volatile.Read(ref _lastErrorConnectionId);
if (ex.ClientConnectionId != lastId)
{
// New error, save id and fall-through to re-throw
// NOTE: There is a small timing window here where multiple threads could end up switching this between
// a duplicated id and a new id. Since this is unlikely and will only cause a few additional exceptions to be
// thrown\logged, there isn't a large need for a lock here.
Volatile.Write(ref _lastErrorConnectionId, (object)ex.ClientConnectionId);
}
else
{
// Duplicate error
throw new DuplicatedConnectionOpenException(_connectionString, ex);
}
}
// If we are here, then this is a new exception
throw;
}
}
}
public class DuplicatedConnectionOpenException : Exception
{
public string ConnectionString { get; private set; }
internal DuplicatedConnectionOpenException(string connectionString, SqlException innerException)
: base("Hit the connection pool block-out period and a duplicated SqlException was thrown", innerException)
{
ConnectionString = connectionString;
}
}
Now if you call GetOpenedConnection and you see a DuplicatedConnectionOpenException being thrown, you will know that you have hit the "Blocking Period".
NOTE: I'm using Volatile Read/Write here instead of a lock since I'm opting for better performance versus being 100% accurate about being in the "Blocking Period". If you would prefer the accuracy you can use a lock instead.
Additionally, I do have code that works as an extension method on SqlConnection and can handle multiple connection strings, but its performance is much worse since it uses a ConcurrentDictionary to map connection strings to connection ids.

How to handle database exceptions/ issue?

I one of my c# application, i have written sql connection code as following
try
{
myConnection = new SqlConnection(m_resourceDB.GetResourceString(nSiteID, ApplicationID.XClaim,(short)nResID ) );
myConnection.open();
}
I want to handle unkown issue of sqlserver like database down, time out.
For this i though to introduce for loop 3 times with 3 minute sleep between loop and if at all problem is there then i will exit from loop
I don't know my though is right or not? I want some expert advice on this? Any example?

I would say simply: the code that talks to connections etc should not be doing a sleep/retry, unless that code is already asynchronous. If the top-level calling code wants to catch an exception and set up a timer (not a sleep) and retry, then fine - but what you want to avoid is things like:
var data = dal.GetInfo();
suddenly taking 3 minutes. You might get away with it if it is an async/callback, and you have clearly advertised that this method may take minutes to execute. But even that feels like a stretch. And if you are up at the application logic, why not just catch the exception the first time, tell the user, and let the user click the button again at some point in the future?

If you are running a service with no user interface, then by all means, keep on looping until things start working, but at least log the errors to the EventLog while you're at it, so that the server admin can figure out when and why things go wrong.
For a client application, I would no suggest that you make the user wait 9 minutes before telling them things are not working like they should. Try to connect, assess the error condition, and let the user know what is going wrong so that they can take it further.
If you are using the SqlException class you can check the Exception Class and decide based on that what is going wrong, for example:
switch (sqlEx.Class)
{
case 20:
//server not found
case 11:
//database not found
All the classes have the SQL Server message on them, it is a matter of testing the different conditions.

It really depends on how you want your application to behave.
If your database access is dealt with on the same thread as your UI then whilst you are attempting to connect to a database it will become unresponsive.
The default time period for a connection timeout is already pretty long and so running it in a for loop 3 times would triple that and leave you with frustrated users.
In my opinion unless your specifically attempting to hide connection issues from the user, it is by far better to report back that a connection attempt has failed and ask the user if they wish to retry. Then having a count on the number of times that you'll allow a reconnection attempt before informing the user that they can't continue or putting the application into an "out of service" state.

I want to handle unkown issue of sqlserver like database down, time out.
Try to surround connection operation with using statement to capture connection related problems .
using( sqlcon = new SqlConnection(constr))
{}
Use the Try/Catch Statement for capturing the exception:
try
{
con.Open();
try
{
//Execute Queries
// ....
}
catch
{
// command related or other exception
}
finally
{
con.Close();
}
}
catch
{
// connection error
}
To prevent Exception of such type check these:
Troubleshooting Timeout SqlExceptions
you can set the CommandTimeout to some value on a SqlCommand:
objCmd.CommandTimeout = 600

You can catch the SqlException.
SqlException.Class
Gets the severity level of the error returned from the .NET Framework Data Provider for SQL Server.
SqlException.Errors
Gets a collection of one or more SqlError objects that give detailed information about exceptions generated by the .NET Framework Data Provider for SQL Server.
SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand();
cmd.Connection = new SqlConnection("CONNECTION_STRING");
cmd.CommandText = "SELECT * FROM ....";
// cmd.CommandType = System.Data.CommandType.Text;
try
{
cmd.Connection.Open();
try
{
SqlDataReader reader = cmd.ExecuteReader();
// ....
}
finally
{
cmd.Connection.Close();
}
}
catch (SqlException ex)
{
// ex.Class contains the ErrorCode, depends on your dataprovider
foreach (SqlError error in ex.Errors)
{
// error.LineNumber
// error.Message
}
}

The best way would be to putt it in a try catch statement and display the error in a better format, If it fails for 1 time, trying it continue sly 3 times will not change anything untill and unless you dc and send request again, In a separate in separate packed as a new request.
use try this.
try
{
Executing code.
}
catch (Exception err)
{
Display["ErrorMsg"] = err.Message.ToString() + "|" + err.GetBaseException() + "|" + Request.Url.ToString();
}
Good Luck.