Skip to main content

Use lock in a block that contains a call to an async method (await keyword)

Citeam urmatorul post http://qedcode.com/content/awaitable-critical-section, in care se explica o modalitate de a face lock in cazul in care in block-ul de lock contine un apel la o metoda async.
Pe scurt, pentru a evita ca doua sau mai multe thread-uri sa scrie simultan in acelasi fisier, se incerca sa se faca lock. Dar .NET 4.5 nu ne lasa sa avem urmatorul cod (si foarte bine face):
lock( this )
{
    var f = await storageFile.OpenAsync();
    ...
    await file.WriteAsync("some content");
}   
Eroarea pe care o primim arata in felul urmator:
The 'await' operator cannot be used in the body of a lock statement.
In link-ul pe care l-am dat mai sus, s-a incercat implementarea unei solutii custom care face lock la o anumita portiune de cod. O alta varianta ar putea sa fie sa incerca sa folosim Task.Run. Cea ce am obtine ar fi ceva asemanator cu urmatorul cod
lock( this )
{
    var f = await storageFile.OpenAsync();
    ...
    Task.Run(async () => {await f.WriteAsync("some content") }).Wait();
} 
Codul s-ar compila fara nici o problema dar la rulare am vedea ca aplicatia nu mai raspunde cand ajunge pe linia de cod care contine Task.Run. Din aceasta cauza se poate ajunge sa implementam ceva asemanator cu link-ul dat la inceputul postului.
Cea ce nu imi place la nici o solutie este ca combinatia dintre lock si async nu suna foarte bine. De ce ai vrea sa faci un lock si sa te asiguri ca doar un singur apel asyncron se executa. De foarte multe ori problema poate sa fie de design. Nu degeaba .NET nu iti permite aceasta funcționalitate.
Un await in interiorul unui lock poate sa genereze foarte usor un deadlock. Problema este destul de asemanatoare cu deadlock-ul care se obtinea cand apelam Monitor.Exit in interiorul unui ExisDisposable.Dispose.
Cand se face resume la cod in general ajungem pe acelasi thread, dar acest lucru nu e obligatoriu, din aceasta cauza putem sa ajungem pe un alt thread, care ar face unlock la un lock facut pe un alt thread.
Be aware, cand folositi await, nimeni nu va garanteaza ca la resume o sa ajungeti pe acelasi thread. Trebuie sa mai tinem cont de inca un lucru, o metoda la care facem await nu stim cat o dureze, iar un lock ar trebui sa fie facut pentru o perioada cat mai mica de timp. Pentru acest lucru putem sa facem lock pe codul pe care il executam inainte si dupa apelul la metoda await.
Codul pe care l-am obtine ar avea urmatoare forma:
var f = await storageFile.OpenAsync();
lock(this)
{   
    ...
}
await f.WriteAsync("some content");
lock(this)
{
    ...
}
Da stiu, se doreste ca metoda WriteAsync sa fie executa intr-un lock. Dar acest lucru nu e sanatos. Daca vrem doar noi sa avem drept de scriere, atunci trebuie sa deschide fisierul in asa fel incat doar dintr-un singur loc sa se poata scrie. Pentru a putea face acest lucru este nevoie sa specificam ca parametru la metoda OpenAsync FileAccessMode.
var f = await storageFile.OpenAsync(File.AccessMode.ReadWriteNoCopyOnWrite);
sau (in functie de caz)
var f = await storageFile.OpenAsync(File.AccessMode.ReadWrite);
In concluzie, cand ajungeti la un caz cand aveti nevoie de a face lock pe un block de cod care contine apeluri de metode asincrone, ar fi bine sa faceti un review la cod si sa vedeti daca chiar aveti nevoie de asa ceva si daca nu este o greseala in design-ul aplicatiei.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Windows Docker Containers can make WIN32 API calls, use COM and ASP.NET WebForms

After the last post , I received two interesting questions related to Docker and Windows. People were interested if we do Win32 API calls from a Docker container and if there is support for COM. WIN32 Support To test calls to WIN32 API, let’s try to populate SYSTEM_INFO class. [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public struct SYSTEM_INFO { public uint dwOemId; public uint dwPageSize; public uint lpMinimumApplicationAddress; public uint lpMaximumApplicationAddress; public uint dwActiveProcessorMask; public uint dwNumberOfProcessors; public uint dwProcessorType; public uint dwAllocationGranularity; public uint dwProcessorLevel; public uint dwProcessorRevision; } ... [DllImport("kernel32")] static extern void GetSystemInfo(ref SYSTEM_INFO pSI); ... SYSTEM_INFO pSI = new SYSTEM_INFO(

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see

Navigating Cloud Strategy after Azure Central US Region Outage

 Looking back, July 19, 2024, was challenging for customers using Microsoft Azure or Windows machines. Two major outages affected customers using CrowdStrike Falcon or Microsoft Azure computation resources in the Central US. These two outages affected many people and put many businesses on pause for a few hours or even days. The overlap of these two issues was a nightmare for travellers. In addition to blue screens in the airport terminals, they could not get additional information from the airport website, airline personnel, or the support line because they were affected by the outage in the Central US region or the CrowdStrike outage.   But what happened in reality? A faulty CrowdStrike update affected Windows computers globally, from airports and healthcare to small businesses, affecting over 8.5m computers. Even if the Falson Sensor software defect was identified and a fix deployed shortly after, the recovery took longer. In parallel with CrowdStrike, Microsoft provided a too