Construct Task from WaitHandle.Wait - multithreading

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");
}

Related

The connection was inactive for more than the allowed 60000 milliseconds and is closed by container

I have an azure function that sends a message to the service bus queue. Since a recent deployment, I see an exception occurring frequently: The connection was inactive for more than the allowed 60000 milliseconds and is closed by container.
I looked into this GitHub post: https://github.com/Azure/azure-service-bus-java/issues/280 it says this is a warning. Is there a way to increase this timeout? Or any suggestions on how to resolve this? Here is my code:
namespace Repositories.ServiceBusQueue
{
public class MembershipServiceBusRepository : IMembershipServiceBusRepository
{
private readonly QueueClient _queueClient;
public MembershipServiceBusRepository(string serviceBusNamespacePrefix, string queueName)
{
var msiTokenProvider = TokenProvider.CreateManagedIdentityTokenProvider();
_queueClient = new QueueClient($"https://{serviceBusNamespacePrefix}.servicebus.windows.net", queueName, msiTokenProvider);
}
public async Task SendMembership(GroupMembership groupMembership, string sentFrom = "")
{
if (groupMembership.SyncJobPartitionKey == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("SyncJobPartitionKey must be set."); }
if (groupMembership.SyncJobRowKey == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("SyncJobRowKey must be set."); }
foreach (var message in groupMembership.Split().Select(x => new Message
{
Body = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(JsonConvert.SerializeObject(x)),
SessionId = groupMembership.RunId.ToString(),
ContentType = "application/json",
Label = sentFrom
}))
{
await _queueClient.SendAsync(message);
}
}
}
}
This could be due to deadlock in the thread pool, please check if you are calling an async method from a sync method.

Async function does not return control to the main thread (linq expression)

I thought that I got threads in .NET, but when I have added LINQ expression it made me a little confused.
Like I wrote in the topic of this discussion I dont why the thread doesnt return control to the main action of my controller.
I have written what makes me silly in comments, so let me skip to the true example:
public class ValuesController : ApiController
{
public async Task<List<SomeProduct>> Get()
{
var collection = new List<Mother>() {
new Mother()
{
internalField = new List<Child>()
{
new Child()
{
theLastOne = "VAL"
},
new Child()
{
theLastOne = "VAL"
}
}
}
};
var oss =
from m in collection
from s in m.internalField
select Convert(m, s).Result;
//1-The above code doesnt enter into CONVERT function (I have a breakpoint there)
return oss.ToList();//2- this list enter into COnvertt
}
private async Task<SomeProduct> Convert(Mother ms, Child ss)
{
var ossNEW = new SomeProduct();
await update(ossNEW, ms);
return ossNEW;
}
private async Task update(SomeProduct oss, Mother ms)
{//3 - Naturally it comes here
await Task.Run(()=>
{
//This task is executed (It is example code, pls do not care, that threads do not have any sense
oss.copyOfTheLastOne = ms.internalField.First().theLastOne;
oss.valeFromAnUpdateFunction = "works";
}); //Flow comes here and THIS line does not return control to the main action, why? :)
}
}
public class SomeProduct
{
public string copyOfTheLastOne;
public string valeFromAnUpdateFunction;
}
public class Mother
{
public List<Child> internalField;
}
public class Child
{
public string theLastOne;
}
I have solved this example by adding an "executor", which takes list of the tasks and manage it.
public class ValuesController : ApiController
{
public async Task<List<SomeProduct>> Get()
{
var collection = new List<Mother>() {
new Mother()
{
internalField = new List<Child>()
{
new Child()
{
theLastOne = "VAL"
},
new Child()
{
theLastOne = "VAL"
}
}
}
};
var oss =
from m in collection
from s in m.internalField
select Convert(m, s);
List<Task<SomeProduct>> downloadTasks = oss.ToList();
List<SomeProduct> ossNew = new List<SomeProduct>();
while (downloadTasks.Count > 0)
{
var firstFinishedTask = await Task.WhenAny(downloadTasks);
downloadTasks.Remove(firstFinishedTask);
ossNew.Add(await firstFinishedTask);
}
return ossNew;
}
private async Task<SomeProduct> Convert(Mother ms, Child ss)
{
var ossNEW = new SomeProduct();
await update(ossNEW, ms);
return ossNEW;
}
private async Task update(SomeProduct oss, Mother ms)
{
await Task.Run(()=>
{
oss.copyOfTheLastOne = ms.internalField.First().theLastOne;
oss.valeFromAnUpdateFunction = "works";
});
}
To fully understand the problem, I would like to know why the UPDATE function does not return control to the main action and why RESULT on CONVERT function does not force to run program synchronously?
I would like to know why the UPDATE function does not return control to the main action and why RESULT on CONVERT function does not force to run program synchronously?
You're running into a common deadlock problem that I explain in full on my blog, due to the use of Result. Use await instead of Result and your problem goes away (in your case, since you have a collection, you'll want to await Task.WhenAll):
public async Task<SomeProduct[]> Get()
{
var collection = new List<Mother>() {
new Mother()
{
internalField = new List<Child>()
{
new Child()
{
theLastOne = "VAL"
},
new Child()
{
theLastOne = "VAL"
}
}
}
};
var oss =
from m in collection
from s in m.internalField
select Convert(m, s);
return Task.WhenAll(oss);
}
On a side note, you shouldn't use Task.Run in your implementations, particularly on ASP.NET. On ASP.NET, Task.Run completely removes all the benefits of async and adds overhead.

RFCommConnectionTrigger in Windows Universal Apps To detect Incoming Bluetooth Connection

I am working on a Windows Universal App. I Want to get the Data from a Bluetooth Device to the Windows Phone. I am Using the Concept of RFCommCommunicationTrigger for this Purpose.
Here's the code Snippet I am Using
var rfTrigger = new RfcommConnectionTrigger();
// Specify what the service ID is
rfTrigger.InboundConnection.LocalServiceId = RfcommServiceId.FromUuid(new Guid("<some_base_guid>"));
//Register RFComm trigger
var rfReg = RegisterTaskOnce(
"HWRFCommTrigger",
"BackgroundLibrary.RFBackgroundTask",
rfTrigger, null
);
SetCompletedOnce(rfReg, OnTaskCompleted);
Here the Function of RegisterTaskOnce
static private IBackgroundTaskRegistration RegisterTaskOnce(string taskName, string entryPoint, IBackgroundTrigger trigger, params IBackgroundCondition[] conditions)
{
// Validate
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(taskName)) throw new ArgumentException("taskName");
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(entryPoint)) throw new ArgumentException("entryPoint");
if (trigger == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("trigger");
// Look to see if the name is already registered
var existingReg = (from reg in BackgroundTaskRegistration.AllTasks
where reg.Value.Name == taskName
select reg.Value).FirstOrDefault();
Debug.WriteLine("Background task "+ taskName+" is already running in the Background");
// If already registered, just return the existing registration
if (existingReg != null)
{
return existingReg;
}
// Create the builder
var builder = new BackgroundTaskBuilder();
builder.TaskEntryPoint = entryPoint;
builder.Name = taskName;
builder.SetTrigger(trigger);
// Conditions?
if (conditions != null)
{
foreach (var condition in conditions)
{
builder.AddCondition(condition);
}
}
// Register
return builder.Register();
}
Here's the code for SetCompletedOnce this will add a Handler only once
static private void SetCompletedOnce(IBackgroundTaskRegistration reg, BackgroundTaskCompletedEventHandler handler)
{
// Validate
if (reg == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("reg");
if (handler == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("handler");
// Unsubscribe in case already subscribed
reg.Completed -= handler;
// Subscribe
reg.Completed += handler;
}
I have also Written the BackgroundLibrary.RFBackgroundTask.cs
public sealed class RFBackgroundTask : IBackgroundTask
{
public async void Run(IBackgroundTaskInstance taskInstance)
{
BackgroundTaskDeferral deferral = taskInstance.GetDeferral();
try
{
Debug.WriteLine(taskInstance.TriggerDetails.GetType());
taskInstance.Canceled += new BackgroundTaskCanceledEventHandler(OnCanceled);
Debug.WriteLine("RFComm Task Running");
Debug.WriteLine(taskInstance.TriggerDetails.GetType().ToString());
}
catch (System.Exception e)
{
Debug.WriteLine("RFComm Task Error: {0}", e.Message);
}
deferral.Complete();
}
}
The Run Method is Invoked Every Time The Device tries to Open the Connection.
The type of the Trigger that is obtained (the type I am debugging in the run method of the RFBackgroundTask.cs) is printed as
Windows.Devices.Bluetooth.Background.RfcommConnectionTriggerDetails
But I am Unable use that because I dont have this Class in the BackgroundLibrary project.
The Documentation says that this Provides information about the Bluetooth device that caused this trigger to fire.
It has Variables like Socket,RemoteDevice etc.
I think I am Missing something very simple
Can you please help me out .
Once your background task is launched, simply cast the TriggerDetails object to an RfcommConnectionTriggerDetails object:
public sealed class RFBackgroundTask : IBackgroundTask
{
public async void Run(IBackgroundTaskInstance taskInstance)
{
BackgroundTaskDeferral deferral = taskInstance.GetDeferral();
try
{
taskInstance.Canceled += new BackgroundTaskCanceledEventHandler(OnCanceled);
RfcommConnectionTriggerDetails details = (RfcommConnectionTriggerDetails)taskInstance.TriggerDetails;
StreamSocket = details.Socket; // Rfcomm Socket
// Access other properties...
}
catch (System.Exception e)
{
Debug.WriteLine("RFComm Task Error: {0}", e.Message);
}
deferral.Complete();
}
}

Let the tasks race

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());
}

E_SCN_READINCOMPATIBLE Notification error thrown while scanning bar code on MC9090G

I'm using EMDK 2.5 (VS2008 and VC# and .NetCF3.5) Barcode2 class from the library to write a sample application to scan bar codes. I followed the samples available in EMDK namely CS_Barcode2Sample1 project.Every time I hardware trigger the scan the notification "E_SCN_READINCOMPATIBLE" is thrown and not able to retrieve the scanned data. The documentation doesn't say much about the cause of E_SCN_READINCOMPATIBLE notification and no luck from Google search. I tried several options including making use of Symbol.Barcode and the outcome is same.
I also tried EMDK 2.3 but the result is same.
I've pasted the whole code here....
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
private Barcode2 myBarcode2 = null;
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
InitBarcode();
}
public bool InitBarcode()
{
// If the Barcode2 object is already initialized then fail the initialization.
if (myBarcode2 != null)
{
return false;
}
else // Else initialize the reader.
{
try
{
Symbol.Barcode2.Device[] AvailableDevices = Symbol.Barcode2.Devices.SupportedDevices;
if (AvailableDevices.Length == 0)
{
return false;
}
if (AvailableDevices.Length == 1)
{
//get the first available scanner in the list
Symbol.Barcode2.Device MyDevice = AvailableDevices[0];
// Create the reader, based on selected device.
myBarcode2 = new Barcode2(MyDevice);
// Attach a scan notification handler.
//this.myScanNotifyHandler = new Barcode2.OnScanHandler(myBarcode2_ScanNotify);
myBarcode2.OnScan += myBarcode2_ScanNotify;
// Attach a status notification handler.
//this.myStatusNotifyHandler = new Barcode2.OnStatusHandler(myBarcode2_StatusNotify);
myBarcode2.OnStatus += myBarcode2_StatusNotify;
myBarcode2.Config.TriggerMode = TRIGGERMODES.HARD;
// Submit a scan.
myBarcode2.Scan(5000);
}
}
catch (OperationFailureException ex)
{
MessageBox.Show("Exception Raised 1");
return false;
}
catch (InvalidRequestException ex)
{
MessageBox.Show("Exception Raised 2");
return false;
}
catch (InvalidIndexerException ex)
{
MessageBox.Show("Exception Raised 3");
return false;
}
}
return false;
}
private void myBarcode2_ScanNotify(ScanDataCollection scanDataCollection)
{
// Checks if the BeginInvoke method is required because the OnScan delegate is called by a different thread
if (this.InvokeRequired)
{
// Executes the OnScan delegate asynchronously on the main thread
this.BeginInvoke(new Barcode2.OnScanHandler(myBarcode2_ScanNotify), new object[] { scanDataCollection });
}
else
{
// Get ScanData
ScanData scanData = scanDataCollection.GetFirst;
int i;
switch (scanData.Result)
{
case Symbol.Barcode2.Results.SUCCESS:
String str = scanData.Text;
myBarcode2.Config.TriggerMode = TRIGGERMODES.HARD;
myBarcode2.Scan(5000);
break;
case Symbol.Barcode2.Results.E_SCN_READTIMEOUT:
break;
case Symbol.Barcode2.Results.CANCELED:
break;
case Symbol.Barcode2.Results.E_SCN_DEVICEFAILURE:
i = 93;
break;
default:
if (scanData.Result == Symbol.Barcode2.Results.E_SCN_READINCOMPATIBLE)
{
// If the failure is E_SCN_READINCOMPATIBLE, exit the application.
MessageBox.Show("Fatal Error");
this.Close();
return;
}
break;
}
}
}
private void myBarcode2_StatusNotify(StatusData statusData)
{
// Checks if the Invoke method is required because the OnStatus delegate is called by a different thread
if (this.InvokeRequired)
{
// Executes the OnStatus delegate on the main thread
this.Invoke(new Barcode2.OnStatusHandler(myBarcode2_StatusNotify), new object[] { statusData });
}
else
{
int i;
switch (statusData.State)
{
case States.IDLE:
break;
case States.READY:
break;
default:
break;
}
}
}
}
}
I've went thru this recently also, as I observed, it probably due to the scanner device is occupied by other application, where the scan request has been queued already, you can go to memory management, and kill the suspect app, and try your app again.
Refer to the Symbol FAQ

Resources