-1

Currently, i am having difficulties to understand multi-tasking using async and await pattern. In order to get some basics, i have written the following test case;

public partial class MainWindow : Window
{

    public MainWindow()
    {
        InitializeComponent();
    }

    private int global_int = 10;
    public async Task<int> RunAsyncTask()
    {
       // This method runs asynchronously.
       await Task.Run(() => Calculate());
       return global_int;
    }

    private int Calculate()
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Ticket count: " + --global_int);
        return global_int;
    }

    private async void  Start_Button_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
    {
        List<Task<int>> list = new List<Task<int>>(); 

        Console.WriteLine("\nReseting: " );
        global_int = 10;

        for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
        {
            var task = RunAsyncTask();
            list.Add(task); 
        }

       await Task.WhenAll(list.ToArray<Task<int>>()); 
        
       Console.WriteLine("\nFinished: " + global_int);

    }
}

Idea/Target:

10 customers, 10 tickets, every customer buys a ticket and at the end there will be no availiable ticket.

Problem:

When I run the code, i am actually getting not always the same result (Expecting 0 ticket always). Where is the actuall problem?

So, how can I write the code in a way that, result would be always same.

Output1:

Reseting: 
Ticket count: 9
Ticket count: 8
Ticket count: 8
Ticket count: 7
Ticket count: 5
Ticket count: 6
Ticket count: 4
Ticket count: 3
Ticket count: 2
Ticket count: 1

Finished: 1

Output2:

Reseting: 
Ticket count: 9
Ticket count: 8
Ticket count: 7
Ticket count: 6
Ticket count: 5
Ticket count: 4
Ticket count: 3
Ticket count: 2
Ticket count: 1
Ticket count: 0

Finished: 0
Ugur
  • 1,257
  • 2
  • 20
  • 30
  • 3
    Aside from the `--` issue, you will get a better idea from `int r = await RunAsyncTask();` and then use `r` in the GUI immediately. – H H Oct 23 '17 at 12:57

2 Answers2

6
--global_int

This is not a thread-safe operation. Multiple threads are reading and writing to global_int, causing a race condition. There's a handy class called Interlocked to keep simple int operations atomic, change your Calculate method to:

Console.WriteLine("Ticket count: " + Interlocked.Decrement(ref global_int);
Jonesopolis
  • 25,034
  • 12
  • 68
  • 112
  • 2
    I think attention should also be called to the fact that returning `global_int` may return the wrong value. It might be better to show in the sample code retrieving the result of the Decrement call and returning (and possibly logging) that, which is more likely to be useful than just directly logging it. Returning `global_int` is likely to pick up a value altered by another thread whereas returning the result of the `Decrement` should always get the value generated by the current thread (right?). – BlueMonkMN Oct 23 '17 at 13:08
  • @BlueMonkMN, you are actually right. Main purpose was actually test to multi-tasking mechanism and to understand how to deal with globals. I am not sure also, is async/await pattern works like multi-threading pattern. The question is, do we reallly need to implement mutex like coding to work threadsafe? – Ugur Oct 23 '17 at 13:34
  • @Ugur I'm also relatively new to async/await, but I believe it does not *necessarily* entail multi-threading. If you can find a way to initiate an async function on the same thread where one is already running, you shouldn't have to be as concerned about mutex work. `Task.Run`, however, I believe will likely initiate a tasks on multiple threads. If you ran `Calculate` on the current thread, then you wouldn't have to worry about mutexes, but in this simple example, I think that would completely defeat the purpose of `await` too. – BlueMonkMN Oct 23 '17 at 13:53
3

If you want to understand how tasks might be scheduled in a single-threaded fashion while still making use of async patterns, you may be interested in this code.

class Program
{
   static void Main(string[] args)
   {
     InitiateCalculations().Wait();
     Console.WriteLine("Finished: {0}", global_int);
   }

   // LimitedConcurrencyLevelTaskScheduler from
   // https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.threading.tasks.taskscheduler
   // Provides a task scheduler that ensures a maximum concurrency level while 
   // running on top of the thread pool.
   public class LimitedConcurrencyLevelTaskScheduler : TaskScheduler
   {
      public static TaskFactory SingleFactory { get; private set; }

      static LimitedConcurrencyLevelTaskScheduler()
      {
         SingleFactory = new TaskFactory(new LimitedConcurrencyLevelTaskScheduler(1));
      }

      // Indicates whether the current thread is processing work items.
      [ThreadStatic]
      private static bool _currentThreadIsProcessingItems;

      // The list of tasks to be executed 
      private readonly LinkedList<Task> _tasks = new LinkedList<Task>(); // protected by lock(_tasks)

      // The maximum concurrency level allowed by this scheduler. 
      private readonly int _maxDegreeOfParallelism;

      // Indicates whether the scheduler is currently processing work items. 
      private int _delegatesQueuedOrRunning = 0;

      // Creates a new instance with the specified degree of parallelism. 
      public LimitedConcurrencyLevelTaskScheduler(int maxDegreeOfParallelism)
      {
         if (maxDegreeOfParallelism < 1) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("maxDegreeOfParallelism");
         _maxDegreeOfParallelism = maxDegreeOfParallelism;
      }

      // Queues a task to the scheduler. 
      protected sealed override void QueueTask(Task task)
      {
         // Add the task to the list of tasks to be processed.  If there aren't enough 
         // delegates currently queued or running to process tasks, schedule another. 
         lock (_tasks)
         {
            _tasks.AddLast(task);
            if (_delegatesQueuedOrRunning < _maxDegreeOfParallelism)
            {
               ++_delegatesQueuedOrRunning;
               NotifyThreadPoolOfPendingWork();
            }
         }
      }
      // Inform the ThreadPool that there's work to be executed for this scheduler. 
      private void NotifyThreadPoolOfPendingWork()
      {
         ThreadPool.UnsafeQueueUserWorkItem(_ =>
         {
            // Note that the current thread is now processing work items.
            // This is necessary to enable inlining of tasks into this thread.
            _currentThreadIsProcessingItems = true;
            try
            {
               // Process all available items in the queue.
               while (true)
               {
                  Task item;
                  lock (_tasks)
                  {
                     // When there are no more items to be processed,
                     // note that we're done processing, and get out.
                     if (_tasks.Count == 0)
                     {
                        --_delegatesQueuedOrRunning;
                        break;
                     }

                     // Get the next item from the queue
                     item = _tasks.First.Value;
                     _tasks.RemoveFirst();
                  }

                  // Execute the task we pulled out of the queue
                  base.TryExecuteTask(item);
               }
            }
            // We're done processing items on the current thread
            finally { _currentThreadIsProcessingItems = false; }
         }, null);
      }

      // Attempts to execute the specified task on the current thread. 
      protected sealed override bool TryExecuteTaskInline(Task task, bool taskWasPreviouslyQueued)
      {
         // If this thread isn't already processing a task, we don't support inlining
         if (!_currentThreadIsProcessingItems) return false;

         // If the task was previously queued, remove it from the queue
         if (taskWasPreviouslyQueued)
            // Try to run the task. 
            if (TryDequeue(task))
               return base.TryExecuteTask(task);
            else
               return false;
         else
            return base.TryExecuteTask(task);
      }

      // Attempt to remove a previously scheduled task from the scheduler. 
      protected sealed override bool TryDequeue(Task task)
      {
         lock (_tasks) return _tasks.Remove(task);
      }

      // Gets the maximum concurrency level supported by this scheduler. 
      public sealed override int MaximumConcurrencyLevel { get { return _maxDegreeOfParallelism; } }

      // Gets an enumerable of the tasks currently scheduled on this scheduler. 
      protected sealed override IEnumerable<Task> GetScheduledTasks()
      {
         bool lockTaken = false;
         try
         {
            Monitor.TryEnter(_tasks, ref lockTaken);
            if (lockTaken) return _tasks;
            else throw new NotSupportedException();
         }
         finally
         {
            if (lockTaken) Monitor.Exit(_tasks);
         }
      }
   }

   static private int global_int = 10;
   public static Task<int> RunAsyncTask()
   {
      return LimitedConcurrencyLevelTaskScheduler.SingleFactory.StartNew<int>(Calculate);
   }

   private static int Calculate()
   {
      Thread.Sleep(500);
      Console.WriteLine("Ticket count: {0} Thread: {1}", --global_int, Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId);
      return global_int;
   }

   private static async Task InitiateCalculations()
   {
      List<Task<int>> list = new List<Task<int>>();

      Console.WriteLine("\nReseting: ");
      global_int = 10;

      for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
      {
         var task = RunAsyncTask();
         list.Add(task);
      }

      await Task.WhenAll(list.ToArray<Task<int>>());
   }
}
BlueMonkMN
  • 25,079
  • 9
  • 80
  • 146
  • Perfect solution. Thanks! – Ugur Nov 08 '17 at 11:57
  • Instead of using the `LimitedConcurrencyLevelTaskScheduler` and having to include the source code in your project, you could use the built-in [`ConcurrentExclusiveSchedulerPair.ExclusiveScheduler`](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.threading.tasks.concurrentexclusiveschedulerpair.exclusivescheduler). – Theodor Zoulias Jul 07 '20 at 20:34