I have a public async void Foo()
method that I want to call from synchronous method. So far all I have seen from MSDN documentation is calling async methods via async methods, but my whole program is not built with async methods.
Is this even possible?
Here's one example of calling these methods from an asynchronous method:
Walkthrough: Accessing the Web by Using Async and Await (C# and Visual Basic)
Now I'm looking into calling these async methods from sync methods.
Solution C In that case, you could start the async method on the thread pool: var task = Task. Run(async () => await MyAsyncMethod()); var result = task. WaitAndUnwrapException();
The simplest way to execute a method asynchronously is to start executing the method by calling the delegate's BeginInvoke method, do some work on the main thread, and then call the delegate's EndInvoke method. EndInvoke might block the calling thread because it does not return until the asynchronous call completes.
There's no rule that says that "asynchronous cannot call asynchronous". There are specific rules in place, such as "future cannot call future". A Queueable can call another Queueable, a Batchable can call another Batchable in the finish method, and Scheduleable methods can call Batchable and Queueable methods.
Adding a solution that finally solved my problem, hopefully saves somebody's time.
Firstly read a couple articles of Stephen Cleary:
From the "two best practices" in "Don't Block on Async Code", the first one didn't work for me and the second one wasn't applicable (basically if I can use await
, I do!).
So here is my workaround: wrap the call inside a Task.Run<>(async () => await FunctionAsync());
and hopefully no deadlock anymore.
Here is my code:
public class LogReader { ILogger _logger; public LogReader(ILogger logger) { _logger = logger; } public LogEntity GetLog() { Task<LogEntity> task = Task.Run<LogEntity>(async () => await GetLogAsync()); return task.Result; } public async Task<LogEntity> GetLogAsync() { var result = await _logger.GetAsync(); // more code here... return result as LogEntity; } }
Asynchronous programming does "grow" through the code base. It has been compared to a zombie virus. The best solution is to allow it to grow, but sometimes that's not possible.
I have written a few types in my Nito.AsyncEx library for dealing with a partially-asynchronous code base. There's no solution that works in every situation, though.
Solution A
If you have a simple asynchronous method that doesn't need to synchronize back to its context, then you can use Task.WaitAndUnwrapException
:
var task = MyAsyncMethod(); var result = task.WaitAndUnwrapException();
You do not want to use Task.Wait
or Task.Result
because they wrap exceptions in AggregateException
.
This solution is only appropriate if MyAsyncMethod
does not synchronize back to its context. In other words, every await
in MyAsyncMethod
should end with ConfigureAwait(false)
. This means it can't update any UI elements or access the ASP.NET request context.
Solution B
If MyAsyncMethod
does need to synchronize back to its context, then you may be able to use AsyncContext.RunTask
to provide a nested context:
var result = AsyncContext.RunTask(MyAsyncMethod).Result;
*Update 4/14/2014: In more recent versions of the library the API is as follows:
var result = AsyncContext.Run(MyAsyncMethod);
(It's OK to use Task.Result
in this example because RunTask
will propagate Task
exceptions).
The reason you may need AsyncContext.RunTask
instead of Task.WaitAndUnwrapException
is because of a rather subtle deadlock possibility that happens on WinForms/WPF/SL/ASP.NET:
Task
.Task
.async
method uses await
without ConfigureAwait
.Task
cannot complete in this situation because it only completes when the async
method is finished; the async
method cannot complete because it is attempting to schedule its continuation to the SynchronizationContext
, and WinForms/WPF/SL/ASP.NET will not allow the continuation to run because the synchronous method is already running in that context.This is one reason why it's a good idea to use ConfigureAwait(false)
within every async
method as much as possible.
Solution C
AsyncContext.RunTask
won't work in every scenario. For example, if the async
method awaits something that requires a UI event to complete, then you'll deadlock even with the nested context. In that case, you could start the async
method on the thread pool:
var task = Task.Run(async () => await MyAsyncMethod()); var result = task.WaitAndUnwrapException();
However, this solution requires a MyAsyncMethod
that will work in the thread pool context. So it can't update UI elements or access the ASP.NET request context. And in that case, you may as well add ConfigureAwait(false)
to its await
statements, and use solution A.
Update, 2019-05-01: The current "least-worst practices" are in an MSDN article here.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With