Below I have replicated a real life scenario as a LINQPad script for the sake of simplicity:
var total = 1 * 1000 * 1000;
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var threads = Environment.ProcessorCount;
int capacity = 10;
var edbOptions = new ExecutionDataflowBlockOptions{BoundedCapacity = capacity, CancellationToken = cts.Token, MaxDegreeOfParallelism = threads};
var dbOptions = new DataflowBlockOptions {BoundedCapacity = capacity, CancellationToken = cts.Token};
var gdbOptions = new GroupingDataflowBlockOptions {BoundedCapacity = capacity, CancellationToken = cts.Token};
var dlOptions = new DataflowLinkOptions {PropagateCompletion = true};
var counter1 = 0;
var counter2 = 0;
var delay1 = 10;
var delay2 = 25;
var action1 = new Func<IEnumerable<string>, Task>(async x => {await Task.Delay(delay1); Interlocked.Increment(ref counter1);});
var action2 = new Func<IEnumerable<string>, Task>(async x => {await Task.Delay(delay2); Interlocked.Increment(ref counter2);});
var actionBlock1 = new ActionBlock<IEnumerable<string>>(action1, edbOptions);
var actionBlock2 = new ActionBlock<IEnumerable<string>>(action2, edbOptions);
var batchBlock1 = new BatchBlock<string>(5, gdbOptions);
var batchBlock2 = new BatchBlock<string>(5, gdbOptions);
batchBlock1.LinkTo(actionBlock1, dlOptions);
batchBlock2.LinkTo(actionBlock2, dlOptions);
var bufferBlock1 = new BufferBlock<string>(dbOptions);
var bufferBlock2 = new BufferBlock<string>(dbOptions);
bufferBlock1.LinkTo(batchBlock1, dlOptions);
bufferBlock2.LinkTo(batchBlock2, dlOptions);
var bcBlock = new BroadcastBlock<string>(x => x, dbOptions);
bcBlock.LinkTo(bufferBlock1, dlOptions);
bcBlock.LinkTo(bufferBlock2, dlOptions);
var mainBlock = new TransformBlock<int, string>(x => x.ToString(), edbOptions);
mainBlock.LinkTo(bcBlock, dlOptions);
mainBlock.Dump("Main Block");
bcBlock.Dump("Broadcast Block");
bufferBlock1.Dump("Buffer Block 1");
bufferBlock2.Dump("Buffer Block 2");
actionBlock1.Dump("Action Block 1");
actionBlock2.Dump("Action Block 2");
foreach(var i in Enumerable.Range(1, total))
await mainBlock.SendAsync(i, cts.Token);
mainBlock.Complete();
await Task.WhenAll(actionBlock1.Completion, actionBlock2.Completion);
counter1.Dump("Counter 1");
counter2.Dump("Counter 2");
I have two issues with this code:
BoundedCapacity
of all appropriate blocks to 10 elements, it seems like I can push all 1,000,000 messages almost at once. Is this expected behavior?mainBlock.Complete()
. I expect that both counter1
and counter2
variables to be equal to total
. Is there a way to achieve such behavior?Yes, this is the expected behavior, because of the BroadcastBlock
:
Provides a buffer for storing at most one element at time, overwriting each message with the next as it arrives.
This means that if you link BroadcastBlock
to blocks with BoundedCapacity
, you will lose messages.
To fix that, you could create a custom block that behaves like BroadcastBlock
, but guarantees delivery to all targets. But doing that is not trivial, so you might be satisified with a simpler variant (originally from my old answer):
public static ITargetBlock<T> CreateGuaranteedBroadcastBlock<T>(
IEnumerable<ITargetBlock<T>> targets, DataflowBlockOptions options)
{
var targetsList = targets.ToList();
var block = new ActionBlock<T>(
async item =>
{
foreach (var target in targetsList)
{
await target.SendAsync(item);
}
}, new ExecutionDataflowBlockOptions
{
BoundedCapacity = options.BoundedCapacity,
CancellationToken = options.CancellationToken
});
block.Completion.ContinueWith(task =>
{
foreach (var target in targetsList)
{
if (task.Exception != null)
target.Fault(task.Exception);
else
target.Complete();
}
});
return block;
}
Usage in your case would be:
var bcBlock = CreateGuaranteedBroadcastBlock(
new[] { bufferBlock1, bufferBlock2 }, dbOptions);
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