Develop Reference

uwp c# async method waiting data not completely loaded exception

I will try to tell my problem in as simple words as possible.
In my UWP app, I am loading the data async wise on my Mainpage.xaml.cs`
public MainPage()
{
this.InitializeComponent();
LoadVideoLibrary();
}
private async void LoadVideoLibrary()
{
FoldersData = new List<FolderData>();
var folders = (await Windows.Storage.StorageLibrary.GetLibraryAsync
(Windows.Storage.KnownLibraryId.Videos)).Folders;
foreach (var folder in folders)
{
var files = (await folder.GetFilesAsync(Windows.Storage.Search.CommonFileQuery.OrderByDate)).ToList();
FoldersData.Add(new FolderData { files = files, foldername = folder.DisplayName, folderid = folder.FolderRelativeId });
}
}
so this is the code where I am loading up a List of FolderData objects.
There in my other page Library.xaml.cs I am using that data to load up my gridview with binding data.
protected override void OnNavigatedTo(NavigationEventArgs e)
{
try
{
LoadLibraryMenuGrid();
}
catch { }
}
private async void LoadLibraryMenuGrid()
{
MenuGridItems = new ObservableCollection<MenuItemModel>();
var data = MainPage.FoldersData;
foreach (var folder in data)
{
var image = new BitmapImage();
if (folder.files.Count == 0)
{
image.UriSource = new Uri("ms-appx:///Assets/StoreLogo.png");
}
else
{
for (int i = 0; i < folder.files.Count; i++)
{
var thumb = (await folder.files[i].GetThumbnailAsync(Windows.Storage.FileProperties.ThumbnailMode.VideosView));
if (thumb != null) { await image.SetSourceAsync(thumb); break; }
}
}
MenuGridItems.Add(new MenuItemModel
{
numberofvideos = folder.files.Count.ToString(),
folder = folder.foldername,
folderid = folder.folderid,
image = image
});
}
GridHeader = "Library";
}
the problem I am facing is that when i launch my application, wait for a few seconds and then i navigate to my library page, all data loads up properly.
but when i try to navigate to library page instantly after launching the app, it gives an exception that
"collection was modified so it cannot be iterated"
I used the breakpoint and i came to know that if i give it a few seconds the List Folder Data is already loaded properly asyncornously, but when i dnt give it a few seconds, that async method is on half way of loading the data so it causes exception, how can i handle this async situation? thanks

What you need is a way to wait for data to arrive. How you fit that in with the rest of the application (e.g. MVVM or not) is a different story, and not important right now. Don't overcomplicate things. For example, you only need an ObservableCollection if you expect the data to change while the user it looking at it.
Anyway, you need to wait. So how do you wait for that data to arrive?
Use a static class that can be reached from everywhere. In there put a method to get your data. Make sure it returns a task that you cache for future calls. For example:
internal class Data { /* whatever */ }
internal static class DataLoader
{
private static Task<Data> loaderTask;
public static Task<Data> LoadDataAsync(bool refresh = false)
{
if (refresh || loaderTask == null)
{
loaderTask = LoadDataCoreAsync();
}
return loaderTask;
}
private static async Task<Data> LoadDataCoreAsync()
{
// your actual logic goes here
}
}
With this, you can start the download as soon as you start the application.
await DataLoader.LoadDataAsync();
When you need the data in that other screen, just call that method again. It will not download the data again (unless you set refresh is true), but will simply wait for the work that you started earlier to finish, if it is not finished yet.

I get that you don't have enough experience.There are multiple issues and no solution the way you are loading the data.
What you need is a Service that can give you ObservableCollection of FolderData. I think MVVM might be out of bounds at this instance unless you are willing to spend a few hours on it. Though MVVM will make things lot easier in this instance.
The main issue at hand is this
You are using foreach to iterate the folders and the FolderData list. Foreach cannot continue if the underlying collection changes.
Firstly you need to start using a for loop as opposed to foreach. 2ndly add a state which denotes whether loading has finished or not. Finally use observable data source. In my early days I used to create static properties in App.xaml.cs and I used to use them to share / observe other data.

How to return a data before method complete execution?

I have a slow and expensive method that return some data for me:
public Data GetData(){...}
I don't want to wait until this method will execute. Rather than I want to return a cached data immediately.
I have a class CachedData that contains one property Data cachedData.
So I want to create another method public CachedData GetCachedData() that will initiate a new task(call GetData inside of it) and immediately return cached data and after task will finish we will update the cache.
I need to have thread safe GetCachedData() because I will have multiple request that will call this method.
I will have a light ping "is there anything change?" each minute and if it will return true (cachedData != currentData) then I will call GetCachedData().
I'm new in C#. Please, help me to implement this method.
I'm using .net framework 4.5.2

The basic idea is clear:
You have a Data property which is wrapper around an expensive function call.
In order to have some response immediately the property holds a cached value and performs updating in the background.
No need for an event when the updater is done because you poll, for now.
That seems like a straight-forward design. At some point you may want to use events, but that can be added later.
Depending on the circumstances it may be necessary to make access to the property thread-safe. I think that if the Data cache is a simple reference and no other data is updated together with it, a lock is not necessary, but you may want to declare the reference volatile so that the reading thread does not rely on a stale cached (ha!) version. This post seems to have good links which discuss the issues.

If you will not call GetCachedData at the same time, you may not use lock. If data is null (for sure first run) we will wait long method to finish its work.
public class SlowClass
{
private static object _lock;
private static Data _cachedData;
public SlowClass()
{
_lock = new object();
}
public void GetCachedData()
{
var task = new Task(DoStuffLongRun);
task.Start();
if (_cachedData == null)
task.Wait();
}
public Data GetData()
{
if (_cachedData == null)
GetCachedData();
return _cachedData;
}
private void DoStuffLongRun()
{
lock (_lock)
{
Console.WriteLine("Locked Entered");
Thread.Sleep(5000);//Do Long Stuff
_cachedData = new Data();
}
}
}
I have tested on console application.
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var mySlow = new SlowClass();
var mySlow2 = new SlowClass();
mySlow.GetCachedData();
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
Console.WriteLine(i);
mySlow.GetData();
mySlow2.GetData();
}
mySlow.GetCachedData();
Console.Read();
}

Maybe you can use the MemoryCache class,
as explained here in MSDN

using EWS Managed API with ASP.NET MVC

I'm trying to create a web app which does many things but the one that I'm currently focused in is the inbox count. I want to use EWS StreamSubscription so that I can get notification for each event and returns the total count of items in the inbox. How can I use this in terms of MVC? I did find some code from Microsoft tutorial that I was gonna test, but I just couldn't figure how I could use it in MVC world i.e. What's the model going to be, if model is the count then how does it get notified every time an event occurs in Exchange Server, etc.
Here's the code I downloaded from Microsoft, but just couldn't understand how I can convert the count to json and push it to client as soon as a new change event occurs. NOTE: This code is unchanged, so it doesn't return count, yet.
using System;
using System.Linq;
using System.Net;
using System.Threading;
using Microsoft.Exchange.WebServices.Data;
namespace StreamingNotificationsSample
{
internal class Program
{
private static AutoResetEvent _Signal;
private static ExchangeService _ExchangeService;
private static string _SynchronizationState;
private static Thread _BackroundSyncThread;
private static StreamingSubscriptionConnection CreateStreamingSubscription(ExchangeService service,
StreamingSubscription subscription)
{
var connection = new StreamingSubscriptionConnection(service, 30);
connection.AddSubscription(subscription);
connection.OnNotificationEvent += OnNotificationEvent;
connection.OnSubscriptionError += OnSubscriptionError;
connection.OnDisconnect += OnDisconnect;
connection.Open();
return connection;
}
private static void SynchronizeChangesPeriodically()
{
while (true)
{
try
{
// Get all changes from the server and process them according to the business
// rules.
SynchronizeChanges(new FolderId(WellKnownFolderName.Inbox));
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Console.WriteLine("Failed to synchronize items. Error: {0}", ex);
}
// Since the SyncFolderItems operation is a
// rather expensive operation, only do this every 10 minutes
Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromMinutes(10));
}
}
public static void SynchronizeChanges(FolderId folderId)
{
bool moreChangesAvailable;
do
{
Console.WriteLine("Synchronizing changes...");
// Get all changes since the last call. The synchronization cookie is stored in the _SynchronizationState field.
// Only the the ids are requested. Additional properties should be fetched via GetItem calls.
var changes = _ExchangeService.SyncFolderItems(folderId, PropertySet.IdOnly, null, 512,
SyncFolderItemsScope.NormalItems, _SynchronizationState);
// Update the synchronization cookie
_SynchronizationState = changes.SyncState;
// Process all changes
foreach (var itemChange in changes)
{
// This example just prints the ChangeType and ItemId to the console
// LOB application would apply business rules to each item.
Console.Out.WriteLine("ChangeType = {0}", itemChange.ChangeType);
Console.Out.WriteLine("ChangeType = {0}", itemChange.ItemId);
}
// If more changes are available, issue additional SyncFolderItems requests.
moreChangesAvailable = changes.MoreChangesAvailable;
} while (moreChangesAvailable);
}
public static void Main(string[] args)
{
// Create new exchange service binding
// Important point: Specify Exchange 2010 with SP1 as the requested version.
_ExchangeService = new ExchangeService(ExchangeVersion.Exchange2010_SP1)
{
Credentials = new NetworkCredential("user", "password"),
Url = new Uri("URL to the Exchange Web Services")
};
// Process all items in the folder on a background-thread.
// A real-world LOB application would retrieve the last synchronization state first
// and write it to the _SynchronizationState field.
_BackroundSyncThread = new Thread(SynchronizeChangesPeriodically);
_BackroundSyncThread.Start();
// Create a new subscription
var subscription = _ExchangeService.SubscribeToStreamingNotifications(new FolderId[] {WellKnownFolderName.Inbox},
EventType.NewMail);
// Create new streaming notification conection
var connection = CreateStreamingSubscription(_ExchangeService, subscription);
Console.Out.WriteLine("Subscription created.");
_Signal = new AutoResetEvent(false);
// Wait for the application to exit
_Signal.WaitOne();
// Finally, unsubscribe from the Exchange server
subscription.Unsubscribe();
// Close the connection
connection.Close();
}
private static void OnDisconnect(object sender, SubscriptionErrorEventArgs args)
{
// Cast the sender as a StreamingSubscriptionConnection object.
var connection = (StreamingSubscriptionConnection) sender;
// Ask the user if they want to reconnect or close the subscription.
Console.WriteLine("The connection has been aborted; probably because it timed out.");
Console.WriteLine("Do you want to reconnect to the subscription? Y/N");
while (true)
{
var keyInfo = Console.ReadKey(true);
{
switch (keyInfo.Key)
{
case ConsoleKey.Y:
// Reconnect the connection
connection.Open();
Console.WriteLine("Connection has been reopened.");
break;
case ConsoleKey.N:
// Signal the main thread to exit.
Console.WriteLine("Terminating.");
_Signal.Set();
break;
}
}
}
}
private static void OnNotificationEvent(object sender, NotificationEventArgs args)
{
// Extract the item ids for all NewMail Events in the list.
var newMails = from e in args.Events.OfType<ItemEvent>()
where e.EventType == EventType.NewMail
select e.ItemId;
// Note: For the sake of simplicity, error handling is ommited here.
// Just assume everything went fine
var response = _ExchangeService.BindToItems(newMails,
new PropertySet(BasePropertySet.IdOnly, ItemSchema.DateTimeReceived,
ItemSchema.Subject));
var items = response.Select(itemResponse => itemResponse.Item);
foreach (var item in items)
{
Console.Out.WriteLine("A new mail has been created. Received on {0}", item.DateTimeReceived);
Console.Out.WriteLine("Subject: {0}", item.Subject);
}
}
private static void OnSubscriptionError(object sender, SubscriptionErrorEventArgs args)
{
// Handle error conditions.
var e = args.Exception;
Console.Out.WriteLine("The following error occured:");
Console.Out.WriteLine(e.ToString());
Console.Out.WriteLine();
}
}
}
I just want to understand the basic concept as in what can be model, and where can I use other functions.

Your problem is that you are confusing a service (EWS) with your applications model. They are two different things. Your model is entirely in your control, and you can do whatever you want with it. EWS is outside of your control, and is merely a service you call to get data.
In your controller, you call the EWS service and get the count. Then you populate your model with that count, then in your view, you render that model property. It's really that simple.
A web page has no state. It doesn't get notified when things change. You just reload the page and get whatever the current state is (ie, whatever the current count is).
In more advanced applications, like Single Page Apps, with Ajax, you might periodically query the service in the background. Or, you might have a special notification service that uses something like SignalR to notify your SPA of a change, but these concepts are far more advanced than you currently are. You should probably develop your app as a simple stateless app first, then improve it to add ajax functionality or what not once you have a better grasp of things.

That's a very broad question without a clear-cut answer. Your model could certainly have a "Count" property that you could update. The sample code you found would likely be used by your controller.

Resource Access by Parallel Threads

I have 2 threads to are triggered at the same time and run in parallel. These 2 threads are going to be manipulating a string value, but I want to make sure that there are no data inconsistencies. For that I want to use a lock with Monitor.Pulse and Monitor.Wait. I used a method that I found on another question/answer, but whenever I run my program, the first thread gets stuck at the Monitor.Wait level. I think that's because the second thread has already "Pulsed" and "Waited". Here is some code to look at:
string currentInstruction;
public void nextInstruction()
{
Action actions = {
fetch,
decode
}
Parallel.Invoke(actions);
_pc++;
}
public void fetch()
{
lock(irLock)
{
currentInstruction = "blah";
GiveTurnTo(2);
WaitTurn(1);
}
decodeEvent.WaitOne();
}
public void decode()
{
decodeEvent.Set();
lock(irLock)
{
WaitTurn(2);
currentInstruction = "decoding..."
GiveTurnTo(1);
}
}
// Below are the methods I talked about before.
// Wait for turn to use lock object
public static void WaitTurn(int threadNum, object _lock)
{
// While( not this threads turn )
while (threadInControl != threadNum)
{
// "Let go" of lock on SyncRoot and wait utill
// someone finishes their turn with it
Monitor.Wait(_lock);
}
}
// Pass turn over to other thread
public static void GiveTurnTo(int nextThreadNum, object _lock)
{
threadInControl = nextThreadNum;
// Notify waiting threads that it's someone else's turn
Monitor.Pulse(_lock);
}
Any idea how to get 2 parallel threads to communicate (manipulate the same resources) within the same cycle using locks or anything else?

You want to run 2 peaces of code in parallel, but locking them at start using the same variable?
As nvoigt mentioned, it already sounds wrong. What you have to do is to remove lock from there. Use it only when you are about to access something exclusively.
Btw "data inconsistencies" can be avoided by not having to have them. Do not use currentInstruction field directly (is it a field?), but provide a thread safe CurrentInstruction property.
private object _currentInstructionLock = new object();
private string _currentInstruction
public string CurrentInstruction
{
get { return _currentInstruction; }
set
{
lock(_currentInstructionLock)
_currentInstruction = value;
}
}
Other thing is naming, local variables name starting from _ is a bad style. Some peoples (incl. me) using them to distinguish private fields. Property name should start from BigLetter and local variables fromSmall.

Threading and asynchronous operations in C#

I'm an old dog trying to learn a new trick. I'm extremely familiar with a language called PowerBuilder and in that language, when you want to do things asynchronously, you spawn an object in a new thread. I'll reiterate that: the entire object is instantiated in a separate thread and has a different execution context. Any and all methods on that object execute in the context of that separate thread.
Well now, I'm trying to implement some asynchronous executing using C# and the threading model in .NET feels completely different to me. It looks like I'm instantiating objects in one thread but that I can specify (on a call-by-call basis) that certain methods execute in a different thread.
The difference seems subtle, but it's frustrating me. My old-school thinking says, "I have a helper named Bob. Bob goes off and does stuff." The new-school thinking, if I understand it right, is "I am Bob. If I need to, I can sometimes rub my belly and pat my head at the same time."
My real-world coding problem: I'm writing an interface engine that accepts messages via TCP, parses them into usable data, then puts that data into a database. "Parsing" a message takes approximately one second. Depending on the parsed data, the database operation may take less than a second or it might take ten seconds. (All times made up to clarify the problem.)
My old-school thinking tells me that my database class should live in a separate thread and have something like a ConcurrentQueue. It would simply spin on that queue, processing anything that might be in there. The Parser, on the other hand, would need to push messages into that queue. These messages would be (delegates?) things like "Create an order based on the data in this object" or "Update an order based on the data in this object". It might be worth noting that I actually want to process the "messages" in the "queue" in a strict, single-threaded FIFO order.
Basically, my database connection can't always keep up with my parser. I need a way to make sure my parser doesn't slow down while my database processes try to catch up. Advice?
-- edit: with code!
Everyone and everything is telling me to use BlockingCollection. So here's a brief explanation of the end goal and code to go with it:
This will be a Windows service. When started, it will spawn multiple "environments", with each "environment" containing one "dbworker" and one "interface". The "interface" will have one "parser" and one "listener".
class cEnvironment {
private cDBWorker MyDatabase;
private cInterface MyInterface;
public void OnStart () {
MyDatabase = new cDBWorker ();
MyInterface = new cInterface ();
MyInterface.OrderReceived += this.InterfaceOrderReceivedEventHandler;
MyDatabase.OnStart ();
MyInterface.OnStart ();
}
public void OnStop () {
MyInterface.OnStop ();
MyDatabase.OnStop ();
MyInterface.OrderReceived -= this.InterfaceOrderReceivedEventHandler;
}
void InterfaceOrderReceivedEventHandler (object sender, OrderReceivedEventArgs e) {
MyDatabase.OrderQueue.Add (e.Order);
}
}
class cDBWorker {
public BlockingCollection<cOrder> OrderQueue = new BlockingCollection<cOrder> ();
private Task ProcessingTask;
public void OnStart () {
ProcessingTask = Task.Factory.StartNew (() => Process (), TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning);
}
public void OnStop () {
OrderQueue.CompleteAdding ();
ProcessingTask.Wait ();
}
public void Process () {
foreach (cOrder Order in OrderQueue.GetConsumingEnumerable ()) {
switch (Order.OrderType) {
case 1:
SuperFastMethod (Order);
break;
case 2:
ReallySlowMethod (Order);
break;
}
}
}
public void SuperFastMethod (cOrder Order) {
}
public void ReallySlowMethod (cOrder Order) {
}
}
class cInterface {
protected cListener MyListener;
protected cParser MyParser;
public void OnStart () {
MyListener = new cListener ();
MyParser = new cParser ();
MyListener.DataReceived += this.ListenerDataReceivedHandler;
MyListener.OnStart ();
}
public void OnStop () {
MyListener.OnStop ();
MyListener.DataReceived -= this.ListenerDataReceivedHandler;
}
public event OrderReceivedEventHandler OrderReceived;
protected virtual void OnOrderReceived (OrderReceivedEventArgs e) {
if (OrderReceived != null)
OrderReceived (this, e);
}
void ListenerDataReceivedHandler (object sender, DataReceivedEventArgs e) {
foreach (string Message in MyParser.GetMessages (e.RawData)) {
OnOrderReceived (new OrderReceivedEventArgs (MyParser.ParseMessage (Message)));
}
}
It compiles. (SHIP IT!) But does that mean that I'm doing it right?

BlockingCollection makes putting this kind of thing together pretty easy:
// the queue
private BlockingCollection<Message> MessagesQueue = new BlockingCollection<Message>();
// the consumer
private MessageParser()
{
foreach (var msg in MessagesQueue.GetConsumingEnumerable())
{
var parsedMessage = ParseMessage(msg);
// do something with the parsed message
}
}
// In your main program
// start the consumer
var consumer = Task.Factory.StartNew(() => MessageParser(),
TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning);
// the main loop
while (messageAvailable)
{
var msg = GetMessageFromTcp();
// add it to the queue
MessagesQueue.Add(msg);
}
// done receiving messages
// tell the consumer that no more messages will be added
MessagesQueue.CompleteAdding();
// wait for consumer to finish
consumer.Wait();
The consumer does a non-busy wait on the queue, so it's not eating CPU resources when there's nothing available.