Suppose I have a BlockingCollection OutputQueue, which has many items. Current my code is:
public void Consumer()
{
foreach (var workItem in OutputQueue.GetConsumingEnumerable())
{
PlayMessage(workItem);
Console.WriteLine("Works on {0}", workItem.TaskID);
OutLog.Write("Works on {0}", workItem.TaskID);
Thread.Sleep(500);
}
}
Now I want PlayMessage(workItem) running in the multiple tasks way because some workItem need more time, the others need less time. There are huge difference.
As for the method PlayMessage(workItem), it has a few service calls, play text to speech and some logging.
bool successRouting = serviceCollection.SvcCall_GetRoutingData(string[] params, out ex);
bool successDialingService = serviceCollection.SvcCall_GetDialingServiceData(string[] params, out excep);
PlayTTS(workItem.TaskType); // playing text to speech
So how to change my code?
What I thought was:
public async Task Consumer()
{
foreach (var workItem in OutputQueue.GetConsumingEnumerable())
{
await PlayMessage(workItem);
Console.WriteLine("Works on {0}", workItem.TaskID);
OutLog.Write("Works on {0}", workItem.TaskID);
Thread.Sleep(500);
}
}
Since you want parallelism with your PlayMessage, i would suggest looking into TPL Dataflow, as it combines both parallel work with async, so you could await your work properly.
TPL Dataflow is constructed of Blocks, and each block has its own characteristics.
Some popular ones are:
ActionBlock<TInput>
TransformBlock<T, TResult>
I would construct something like the following:
var workItemBlock = new ActionBlock<WorkItem>(
workItem =>
{
PlayMessage(workItem);
Console.WriteLine("Works on {0}", workItem.TaskID);
OutLog.Write("Works on {0}", workItem.TaskID);
}, new ExecutionDataflowBlockOptions
{
MaxDegreeOfParallelism = // Set max parallelism as you wish..
});
foreach (var workItem in OutputQueue.GetConsumingEnumerable())
{
workItemBlock.Post(workItem);
}
workItemBlock.Complete();
Here's another solution, not based on TPL Dataflow. It uses uses SemaphoreSlim to throttle the number of parallel playbacks (warning, untested):
public async Task Consumer()
{
var semaphore = new SemaphoreSlim(NUMBER_OF_PORTS);
var pendingTasks = new HashSet<Task>();
var syncLock = new Object();
Action<Task> queueTaskAsync = async(task) =>
{
// be careful with exceptions inside "async void" methods
// keep failed/cancelled tasks in the list
// they will be observed outside
lock (syncLock)
pendingTasks.Add(task);
await semaphore.WaitAsync().ConfigureAwait(false);
try
{
await task;
}
catch
{
if (!task.IsCancelled && !task.IsFaulted)
throw;
// the error will be observed later,
// keep the task in the list
return;
}
finally
{
semaphore.Release();
}
// remove successfully completed task from the list
lock (syncLock)
pendingTasks.Remove(task);
};
foreach (var workItem in OutputQueue.GetConsumingEnumerable())
{
var item = workItem;
Func<Task> workAsync = async () =>
{
await PlayMessage(item);
Console.WriteLine("Works on {0}", item.TaskID);
OutLog.Write("Works on {0}", item.TaskID);
Thread.Sleep(500);
});
var task = workAsync();
queueTaskAsync(task);
}
await Task.WhenAll(pendingTasks.ToArray());
}
Related
public static async Task DoMessage()
{
const int numberOfMessages = 10;
queueClient = new QueueClient(ConnectionString, QueueName);
await SendMessageAsync(numberOfMessages);
await queueClient.CloseAsync();
}
private static async Task SendMessageAsync(int numOfMessages)
{
try
{
for (var i = 0; i < numOfMessages; i++)
{
var messageBody = $"Message {i}";
var message = new Message(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(messageBody));
message.SessionId = i.ToString();
await queueClient.SendAsync(message);
}
}
catch (Exception e)
{
}
}
This is my sample code to send message to the service bus queue with session id.
My question is if I call DoMessage function 2 times: Let's name it as MessageSet1 and MessageSet2, respectively. Will the MessageSet2 be received and processed by the received azure function who dealing with the receiving ends of the message.
I want to handle in order like MessageSet1 then the MessageSet2 and never handle with MessageSet2 unless MessageSet1 finished.
There are a couple of issues with what you're doing.
First, Azure Functions do not currently support sessions. There's an issue for that you can track.
Second, the sessions you're creating are off. A session should be applied on a set of messages using the same SessionId. Meaning your for loop should be assigning the same SessionId to all the messages in the set. Something like this:
private static async Task SendMessageAsync(int numOfMessages, string sessionID)
{
try
{
var tasks = new List<Task>();
for (var i = 0; i < numOfMessages; i++)
{
var messageBody = $"Message {i}";
var message = new Message(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(messageBody));
message.SessionId = sessionId;
tasks.Add(queueClient.SendAsync(message));
}
await Task.WhenAll(tasks).ConfigureAwait(false);
}
catch (Exception e)
{
// handle exception
}
}
For ordered messages using Sessions, see documentation here.
I am developing a quartz.net job which runs every 1 hour. It executes the following method. I am calling a webapi inside a for loop. I want to make sure i return from the GetChangedScripts() method only after all thread is complete? How to do this or have i done it right?
Job
public void Execute(IJobExecutionContext context)
{
try
{
var scripts = _scriptService.GetScripts().GetAwaiter().GetResult();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
_logProvider.Error("Error while executing Script Changed Notification job : " + ex);
}
}
Service method:
public async Task<IEnumerable<ChangedScriptsByChannel>> GetScripts()
{
var result = new List<ChangedScriptsByChannel>();
var currentTime = _systemClock.CurrentTime;
var channelsToProcess = _lastRunReader.GetChannelsToProcess().ToList();
if (!channelsToProcess.Any()) return result;
foreach (var channel in channelsToProcess)
{
var changedScripts = await _scriptRepository.GetChangedScriptAsync(queryString);
if (changedScriptsList.Any())
{
result.Add(new ChangedScriptsByChannel()
{
ChannelCode = channel.ChannelCode,
ChangedScripts = changedScriptsList
});
}
}
return result;
}
As of 8 days ago there was a formal announcement from the Quartz.NET team stating that the latest version, 3.0 Alpha 1 has full support for async and await. I would suggest upgrading to that if at all possible. This would help your approach in that you'd not have to do the .GetAwaiter().GetResult() -- which is typically a code smell.
How can I use await in a for loop?
Did you mean a foreach loop, if so you're already doing that. If not the change isn't anything earth-shattering.
for (int i = 0; i < channelsToProcess.Count; ++ i)
{
var changedScripts =
await _scriptRepository.GetChangedScriptAsync(queryString);
if (changedScriptsList.Any())
{
var channel = channelsToProcess[i];
result.Add(new ChangedScriptsByChannel()
{
ChannelCode = channel.ChannelCode,
ChangedScripts = changedScriptsList
});
}
}
Doing these in either a for or foreach loop though is doing so in a serialized fashion. Another approach would be to use Linq and .Select to map out the desired tasks -- and then utilize Task.WhenAll.
My code is supposed to simultanously start sorting 3 different lists using different methods and return the first one to finish. However it always performs the first task on the list instead. How can I fix that?
Below is part of my code which seemed relevant to show.
static List<Task<List<int>>> listoftasks = new List<Task<List<int>>>() { QuickSortAsync(list1), BubbleSortAsync(list2), SelectionSortAsync(list3) };
public async static void caller()
{
List<int> result = await Task.WhenAny(listoftasks).Result;
foreach (var item in result)
Console.Write(item + ", ");
}
static Task<List<int>> QuickSortAsync(List<int> l)
{
return Task.Run<List<int>>(() =>
{
l.Sort();
return l;
});
}
Since your list of tasks is static, you're starting all three tasks very early. Then, when you call WhenAny, it's likely that they've already all completed.
I suggest you start the tasks when you call WhenAny:
public static async Task CallerAsync()
{
List<int> result = await await Task.WhenAny(QuickSortAsync(list1),
BubbleSortAsync(list2), SelectionSortAsync(list3));
foreach (var item in result)
Console.Write(item + ", ");
}
I chose to return Task<T> and Task from my objects methods to provide easy consumation by the gui. Some of the methods simply wait for mutex of other kind of waithandles . Is there a way to construct Task from WaitHandle.Wait() so that I don't have to block one treadpool thread for that.
There is a way to do this: you can subscribe to WaitHandle using ThreadPool.RegisterWaitForSingleObject method and wrap it via TaskCompletionSource class:
public static class WaitHandleEx
{
public static Task ToTask(this WaitHandle waitHandle)
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<object>();
// Registering callback to wait till WaitHandle changes its state
ThreadPool.RegisterWaitForSingleObject(
waitObject: waitHandle,
callBack:(o, timeout) => { tcs.SetResult(null); },
state: null,
timeout: TimeSpan.MaxValue,
executeOnlyOnce: true);
return tcs.Task;
}
}
Usage:
WaitHandle wh = new AutoResetEvent(true);
var task = wh.ToTask();
task.Wait();
As noted by #gordy in the comments of the accepted answer of Sergey Teplyakov, MSDN proposes an implementation with unsubscription of the registered WaitHandle.
I slightly modified it here to support the result of the callback: if the registration has timed out, the task return false. If the signal has been received, the task return true:
public static class ExtensionMethods
{
public static Task<bool> WaitOneAsync(this WaitHandle waitHandle, int timeoutMs)
{
if (waitHandle == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(waitHandle));
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>();
RegisteredWaitHandle registeredWaitHandle = ThreadPool.RegisterWaitForSingleObject(
waitHandle,
callBack: (state, timedOut) => { tcs.TrySetResult(!timedOut); },
state: null,
millisecondsTimeOutInterval: timeoutMs,
executeOnlyOnce: true);
return tcs.Task.ContinueWith((antecedent) =>
{
registeredWaitHandle.Unregister(waitObject: null);
try
{
return antecedent.Result;
}
catch
{
return false;
}
});
}
}
Usage is same as the original answer:
WaitHandle signal = new AutoResetEvent(initialState: false);
bool signaled = await signal.WaitOneAsync(1000);
if (signaled)
{
Console.WriteLine("Signal received");
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("Waiting signal timed out");
}
I wanted to call my custom method in the Thread.
public void LoopOverAllLists(String _webAndSiteXml)
{
try
{
XmlNode _nodelist = SharePoint.ListsGetListCollection();
foreach (System.Xml.XmlNode _item in _nodelist.ChildNodes)
{
string title = _item.Attributes["Title"].Value;
//check for hidden list
if (_item.Attributes["Hidden"].Value.ToLower() == "false")
{
switch (_item.Attributes["ServerTemplate"].Value)
{
//Check whether list is document library
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_DOCUMENT_LIBRARY:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_XML_FORMS:
case SharePoint.Publishing_ID_Pages:
{
//Get all documents info
try
{
GetAllDocumentsInfo(_item, _webAndSiteXml);
}
catch
{
}
break;
}
//Check whether list is having attachment
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_GENERIC:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_ANNOUNCEMENTS:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_CONTACTS:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_TASKS:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_EVENTS:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_CUSTOM_GRID:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_MEETING_SERIES:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_MEETING_AGENDA:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_MEETING_ATTENDEES:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_MEETING_DECISIONS:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_MEETING_OBJECTIVES:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_MEETING_TTB:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_MEETING_WS_PAGES:
case SharePoint.LIST_ID_PORTAL_SITE_LIST:
{
//Get all list items info having attachment
try
{
GetAllListItemsInfoOnlyAttachments(_item, _webAndSiteXml);
}
catch
{
}
break;
}
default:
GetAllListItemsInfoOnlyAttachments(_item, _webAndSiteXml);
break;
}
// Get All the List Forms
try
{
GetAllListForms(title, _webAndSiteXml);
}
catch
{
}
}
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
throw ex;
}
}
in above method three methods which is " GetAllDocumentsInfo , GetAllListItemsInfoOnlyAttachments and GetAllListForms " I wanted to call these function using thread in C#.
Thanks
Here is how I would approach the problem. Notice that I encapsulated the contents of the foreach loop into a separate method and then queued the execution of that method into the ThreadPool so that each iteration of the loop occurs in parallel. I also use a well established pattern to wait for all pending work items to complete. This code is compatible with .NET 3.5.
public void LoopOverAllLists(String _webAndSiteXml)
{
int pending = 1; // Used to track the number of pending work items.
var finished = new ManualResetEvent(false); // Used to wait for all work items to complete.
XmlNode nodes = SharePoint.ListsGetListCollection();
foreach (XmlNode item in nodes)
{
XmlNode capture = item; // This is required to capture the loop variable correctly.
Interlocked.Increment(ref pending); // There is another work item in progress.
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(
(state) =>
{
try
{
ProcessNode(capture);
}
finally
{
// Signal the event if this is the last work item to complete.
if (Interlocked.Decrement(ref pending) == 0) finished.Set();
}
}, null);
}
// Signal the event if the for loop was last work item to complete.
if (Interlocked.Decrement(ref pending) == 0) finished.Set();
// Wait for all work items to complete.
finished.WaitOne();
}
private void ProcessNode(XmlNode item)
{
// Put the contents of your loop here.
}
instead of calling
GetAllDocumentsInfo(_item, _webAndSiteXml);
use
Task.Factory.StartNew(() => GetAllDocumentsInfo(_item, _webAndSiteXml));
repeat this pattern for the other method calls as well