In the diagram below from this page it shows that when an incomplete task is returned by the call to OnInitializedAsync it will await the task and then render the component.
However it seems that what actual happens when an incomplete task is returned is renders the component immediately, and then renders it again once the incomplete task completes.
An example later in the page seems to confirm this. If the component was not rendered immediately after the call to OnInitializedAsync, and instead only rendered for the first time after the Task returned had been completed you would never see the "Loading..." message.
OnParametersSetAsync behavior appears the same. It renders once immediately when an incomplete task is returned, and then again once that task has completed.
Am I misunderstanding the render lifecycle, or is this an error in the documentation?
Thanks
#page "/fetchdata"
#using BlazorSample.Data
#inject WeatherForecastService ForecastService
<h1>Weather forecast</h1>
<p>This component demonstrates fetching data from a service.</p>
#if (forecasts == null)
{
<p><em>Loading...</em></p>
}
else
{
<table class="table">
<!-- forecast data in table element content -->
</table>
}
#code {
private WeatherForecast[]? forecasts;
protected override async Task OnInitializedAsync()
{
forecasts = await ForecastService.GetForecastAsync(DateTime.Now);
}
}
To fully answer your question we need to delve into the ComponentBase code.
Your code is running in the async world where code blocks can yield and give control back to the caller - your "incomplete task is returned".
SetParametersAsync is called by the Renderer when the component first renders and then when any parameters have changed.
public virtual Task SetParametersAsync(ParameterView parameters)
{
parameters.SetParameterProperties(this);
if (!_initialized)
{
_initialized = true;
return RunInitAndSetParametersAsync();
}
else
return CallOnParametersSetAsync();
}
RunInitAndSetParametersAsync is responsible for initialization. I've left the MS coders' comments in which explains the StateHasChanged calls.
private async Task RunInitAndSetParametersAsync()
{
OnInitialized();
var task = OnInitializedAsync();
if (task.Status != TaskStatus.RanToCompletion && task.Status != TaskStatus.Canceled)
{
// Call state has changed here so that we render after the sync part of OnInitAsync has run
// and wait for it to finish before we continue. If no async work has been done yet, we want
// to defer calling StateHasChanged up until the first bit of async code happens or until
// the end. Additionally, we want to avoid calling StateHasChanged if no
// async work is to be performed.
StateHasChanged();
try
{
await task;
}
catch // avoiding exception filters for AOT runtime support
{
if (!task.IsCanceled)
throw;
}
// Don't call StateHasChanged here. CallOnParametersSetAsync should handle that for us.
}
await CallOnParametersSetAsync();
}
CallOnParametersSetAsync is called on every Parameter change.
private Task CallOnParametersSetAsync()
{
OnParametersSet();
var task = OnParametersSetAsync();
// If no async work is to be performed, i.e. the task has already ran to completion
// or was canceled by the time we got to inspect it, avoid going async and re-invoking
// StateHasChanged at the culmination of the async work.
var shouldAwaitTask = task.Status != TaskStatus.RanToCompletion &&
task.Status != TaskStatus.Canceled;
// We always call StateHasChanged here as we want to trigger a rerender after OnParametersSet and
// the synchronous part of OnParametersSetAsync has run.
StateHasChanged();
return shouldAwaitTask ?
CallStateHasChangedOnAsyncCompletion(task) :
Task.CompletedTask;
}
In the diagram substitute "Render" for StateHasChanged in the code above.
The diagram uses the work "Render", which is a bit misleading. It implies that the UI re-renders, when what actually happens is a render fragment (a block of code that builds the UI markup for the component) is queued on the Renderer's render queue. It should say "Request Render" or something similar.
If the component code that triggers a render event, or calls StateHasChanged, is all synchronous code, then the Renderer only gets thread time when the code completes. Code blocks need to "Yield" for the Renderer to get thread time during the process.
It's also important to understand that not all Task based methods yield. Many are just synchronous code in a Task wrapper.
So, if code in OnInitializedAsync or OnParametersSetAsync yields there's a render event on the first yield and then on completion.
A common practice to "yield" in a block of synchronous code is to add this line of code where you want the Renderer to render.
await Task.Delay(1);
You can see ComponentBase here - https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/blob/main/src/Components/Components/src/ComponentBase.cs
Short summary
Blazor adds two 'free' StateHasChanged calls, before and after each lifecycle event and UI event.
StateHasChanged only requests an html update, it does not perform one.
An update request can only be fulfilled after the event
or when the main Thread is released by an await
not every await will release the Thread.
So, when you want to make sure the screen gets updated, use
StateHasChanged();
await Task.Delay(1);
Old answer
when an incomplete task is returned it renders the component immediately, and then renders it again once the incomplete task completes.
Yes, that is a possible sequence.
The flowchart shows the steps for showing a component. What is not so clear from the picture is that the actual rendering is not part of this flow, it happens async on the synchronizationcontext. It can happen when your code awaits something.
So we have this basis non-async sequence:
Oninitialzed[Async]
OnParametersSet[Async]
Render
OnAfterRender[Async]
But when there is something async in this code-path then there can be one extra Render during the await. More Renders are possible when you call StateHasChanged during this flow.
Related
I am new to Blazor. I'm working on a Server App (not WASM).
On a page load, I am loading 2 things to a page. Item1 is loaded at the same time as Item2 via API calls. I'd like individual items to show up as soon as they are available. I was thinking something like
protected override async Task OnInitializedAsync()
{
var t1 = _service.GetItem1().ContinueWith(t => {
Item1Loaded = true;
Item2State = t.Result;
await InvokeAsync(StateHasChanged);
});
var t2 = _service.GetItem2().ContinueWith(t => {
Item2Loaded = true;
Item2State = t.Result;
await InvokeAsync(StateHasChanged);
});
}
I have a couple questions about this though:
Do I need to worry about canceling these lines if the user navigates away from the component? (would changing a state variable after the component is removed cause a problem) or does Blazor handle that at the framework level somehow?
Do I need to ensure this gets back to a certain thread with a Synchronization Context? It seems like InvokeAsync just does this for me but want to be sure.
Its hard to find lots of modern examples of ContinueWith. async/await is dominant, but I don't think it allows continuations to execute in the order they complete. Is this a reasonable use of it?
Since you are using Server side you can do this more cleanly (ContinueWith is more or less obsolete since async / await):
protected override async Task OnInitializedAsync()
{
var t1 = Task.Run(async () =>
{ Item1State = await _service.GetItem1();
Item1Loaded = true; // you can probably derive this from Item1State
await InvokeAsync(StateHasChanged);
});
var t2 = Task.Run(async () =>
{ Item2State = await _service.GetItem2();
Item2Loaded = true;
await InvokeAsync(StateHasChanged);
});
await Task.WhenAll(t1, t2);
}
No need to call StateHasChanged() here.
Without the ItemLoaded guards you could do this without Task.Run().
Do I need to worry about canceling these lines if the user navigates away
Most modern DB stuff can be passed a cancellation token. So, use that if you wish to cancel the operation. If It's your own code and the operations are long running, consider using cancellation tokens.
Do I need to ensure this gets back to a certain thread with a Synchronization Context?
Calling await InvokeAsync(StateHasChanged); ensures the UI code is run on the UI thread.
Question 3
Stick with simple await. Yes, it executes in order. And call await InvokeAsync(StateHasChanged) between operations to update the UI if you have more than two await operations.
Note : This will only work if you await real async code, not sync code wrapped in a Task! If there are no yields, the Renderer gets no thread time so the UI doesn't get updated till it gets some.
After reading pretty much every question on Stack Overflow and Microsoft's documentation about NetworkStream, I dont understand what is wrong with my code.
The problem I see is that my method GetDataAsync() hangs very often. I call this method from Init Method like so:
public MyView(string id)
{
InitializeComponent();
MyViewModel myViewModel = session.Resolve<MyViewModel>(); //Autofac
myiewModel.Init(id);
BindingContext = myViewModel;
}
Above, my View does its initialization, then resolves MyViewModel from Autofac DiC and then calls MyViewModel Init() method to do some additional setup on the VM.
The Init method then calls my Async method GetDataAsync which return a IList like so:
public void Init()
{
// call this Async method to populate a ListView
foreach (var model in GetDataAsync("111").Result)
{
// The List<MyModel> returned by the GetDataAsync is then
// used to load ListView's ObservableCollection<MyModel>
// This ObservableCollection is data-bound to a ListView in
// this View. So, the ListView shows its data once the View
// displays.
}
}
, and here is my GetDataAsync() method including my comments:
public override async Task<IList<MyModel>> GetDataAsync(string id)
{
var timeout = TimeSpan.FromSeconds(20);
try
{
byte[] messageBytes = GetMessageBytes(Id);
using (var cts = new CancellationTokenSource(timeout))
using (TcpClient client = new TcpClient(Ip, Port))
using (NetworkStream stream = client.GetStream())
{
await stream.WriteAsync(messageBytes, 0, messageBytes.Length, cts.Token);
await stream.FlushAsync(cts.Token);
byte[] buffer = new byte[1024];
StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder();
int bytesRead = 0;
await Task.Delay(500);
while (stream.DataAvailable) // need to Delay to wait for data to be available
{
bytesRead = await stream.ReadAsync(buffer, 0, buffer.Length, cts.Token);
builder.AppendFormat("{0}", Encoding.ASCII.GetString(buffer, 0, bytesRead));
}
string msg = buffer.ToString();
}
return ParseMessageIntoList(msg); // parses message into IList<MyModel>
}
catch (OperationCanceledException oce)
{
return await Task.FromResult<IList<RoomGuestModel>>(new List<RoomGuestModel>());
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
return await Task.FromResult<IList<RoomGuestModel>>(new List<RoomGuestModel>());
}
}
I would expect that a ReadAsync or WriteAsync either complete successfully, throw some exception, or get cancelled after 10 seconds in which case I would catch OperationCanceledException.
However, it just hangs endlessly when I call method above. If I am debugging and have some breakpoints in the code above, I will be able to go through the method entirely but if I call it 2nd time, app just hangs forever.
I am new to Tasks and Async programming, so I am also not sure I do my cancellations and exception handling properly here?
UPDATE AND FIX
I figured out how to fix the deadlock issue. In hope this will help others sho might run into the same issue, I'll first explain it. The articles that helped me a lot are:
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/pfxteam/await-and-ui-and-deadlocks-oh-my/ by Stephen Taub
https://montemagno.com/c-sharp-developers-stop-calling-dot-result/ by James Montemagno
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/jj991977.aspx by StephenCleary
https://blog.xamarin.com/getting-started-with-async-await/ by Jon Goldberger
#StephenCleary was great help understanding the issue. Calling Result or Wait (above, I call Result when calling GetDataAsync) will lead to dead-lock.
The context thread (UI in this case) is now waiting for GetDataAsync to complete, but GetDataAsync captures the current context-thread (UI thread), so it can resume on it once it gets data from TCP. But since this context-thread is now blocked by call to Result, it cannot resume.
The end result is that it looks like call to GetDataAsync has deadlocked but in reality, it is call to Result that deadlocked.
After reading tons of articles from #StephenTaub, #StephenCleary, #JamesMontemagno, #JoeGoldenberger (thank you all), I started getting understanding of the issue (I am new to TAP/async/await).
Then I discovered continuations in Tasks and how to use them to resolve the issue (thanks to Stephen Taub's article above).
So, instead of calling it like:
IList<MyModel> models = GetDataAsync("111").Result;
foeach(var model in models)
{
MyModelsObservableCollection.Add(model);
}
, I call it with continuation like this:
GetDataAsync(id)
.ContinueWith((antecedant) =>
{
foreach(var model in antecedant.Result)
{
MyModelsObservableCollection.Add(model);
}
}, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion)
.ContinueWith((antecedant) =>
{
var error = antecedant.Exception.Flatten();
}, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
This seam to have fixed my deadlocking issue and now my list will load fine even though it is loaded from the constructor.
So, this seam to work just fine. But #JoeGoldenberger also suggests another solution in his article https://blog.xamarin.com/getting-started-with-async-await/ which is to use Task.Run(async()=>{...}); and inside that await GetDataAsync and load ObservableCollection. So, I gave that a try as well and that is not blocking either, so working great:
Task.Run(async() =>
{
IList<MyModel> models = await GetDataAsync(id);
foreach (var model in models)
{
MyModelsObservableCollection.Add(model);
}
});
So, it looks like either of these 2 will remove deadlock just fine. And since above my Init method is called from a c-tor; therefore, I cannot make it Async and await on this, using one of the 2 methods described above resolves my problem. I dont know which one is better but in my tests, they do work.
Your problem is most likely due to GetDataAsync("111").Result. You shouldn't block on async code.
This can cause deadocks. E.g., if you're on a UI thread, the UI thread will start GetDataAsync and run it until it hits an await. At this point, GetDataAsync returns an incomplete task, and the .Result call blocks the UI thread until that task is completed.
Eventually, the inner async call completes and GetDataAsync is ready to resume executing after its await. By default, await captures its context and resumes on that context. Which in this example is the UI thread. Which is blocked since it called Result. So, the UI thread is waiting for GetDataAsync to complete, and GetDataAsync is waiting for the UI thread so it can complete: deadlock.
The proper solution is to go async all the way; replace .Result with await, and make the necessary changes to other code for that to happen.
As stated in my update, going async all the way by providing an async lambda like below resolved the issue for me
Task.Run(async() =>
{
IList<MyModel> models = await GetDataAsync(id);
foreach (var model in models)
{
MyModelsObservableCollection.Add(model);
}
});
Loading asynchronously an observable collection in a ctor this way (in my case, ctor calls Init which then uses this Task.Run) solves problem
My code looks like this:
public void Init() {
if (AS.pti == PTI.UserInput)
{
AS.runCardTimer = false;
}
else
{
AS.runCardTimer = true;
Device.BeginInvokeOnMainThread(() => showCards().ContinueWith((arg) => { }));
}
}
The Init method is called from the constructor. Can someone please explain to me why the developer might have added the Device.BeginInvokeOnMainThread() instead of just calling the method showCards?
Also what does the ContinueWith((arg)) do and why would that be included?
The class where this Init() method is might be created on a background thread. I'm assuming showCards() are updating some kind of UI. UI can only be updated on the UI/Main thread. Device.BeginInvokeOnMainThread() ensures that the code inside the lambda is executed on the main thread.
ContinueWith() is a method which can be found on Task. If showCards() returns a task, ContinueWith() makes sure the task will complete before exiting the lambda.
UI actions must be performed on UI thread (different name for main thread). If you try to perform UI changes from non main thread, your application will crash. I think developer wanted to make sure it will work as intended.
The simple answer is: Background thread cannot modify UI elements because most UI operations in iOS and Android are not thread-safe; therefore, you need to invoke UI thread to execute the code that modifies UI such MyLabel.Text="New Text".
The detailed answer can be found in Xamarin document:
For iOS:
IOSPlatformServices.BeginInvokeOnMainThread() Method simply calls NSRunLoop.Main.BeginInvokeOnMainThread
public void BeginInvokeOnMainThread(Action action)
{
NSRunLoop.Main.BeginInvokeOnMainThread(action.Invoke);
}
https://developer.xamarin.com/api/member/Foundation.NSObject.BeginInvokeOnMainThread/p/ObjCRuntime.Selector/Foundation.NSObject/
You use this method from a thread to invoke the code in the specified object that is exposed with the specified selector in the UI thread. This is required for most operations that affect UIKit or AppKit as neither one of those APIs is thread safe.
The code is executed when the main thread goes back to its main loop for processing events.
For Android:
Many People think on Xamarin.Android BeginInvokeOnMainThread() method use Activity.runOnUiThread(), BUT this is NOT the case, and there is a difference between using runOnUiThread() and Handler.Post():
public final void runOnUiThread(Runnable action) {
if (Thread.currentThread() != mUiThread) {
mHandler.post(action);//<-- post message delays action until UI thread is scheduled to handle messages
} else {
action.run();//<--action is executed immediately if current running thread is UI thread.
}
}
The actual implementation of Xamarin.Android BeginInvokeOnMainThread() method can be found in AndroidPlatformServices.cs class
public void BeginInvokeOnMainThread(Action action)
{
if (s_handler == null || s_handler.Looper != Looper.MainLooper)
{
s_handler = new Handler(Looper.MainLooper);
}
s_handler.Post(action);
}
https://developer.android.com/reference/android/os/Handler.html#post(java.lang.Runnable)
As you can see, you action code is not executed immediately by Handler.Post(action). It is added to the Looper's message queue, and is handled when the UI thread's scheduled to handle its message.
I have an activity which has an async method in it. This async method is long running. After the async method returns, the UI needs to be updated and some of the controls reference the activity.
At the moment, everything works correctly if you do not have a configuration change (like screen rotation) while the async task is running. However, if a configuration change happens while it is running, then the exception Activity is destroyed is thrown and the UI is not updated. From what reading I have done, this seems to be because the async method captures context and then tries to update the old context which is of course destroyed after the configuration change.
My question is: What are the best ways to solve this problem or at worst case scenario work around it?
I personally think you have only three options
You can disable rotation permanently or temporary, but this is a bad practice
To disable it permanently set ConfigurationChanges
[Activity(Label = "...", ConfigurationChanges = Android.Content.PM.ConfigChanges.KeyboardHidden | Android.Content.PM.ConfigChanges.Orientation | Android.Content.PM.ConfigChanges.ScreenSize)]
To disable it temporary while task working you should disable rotation handling,
disable
this.RequestedOrientation = Android.Content.PM.ScreenOrientation.Nosensor;
enable
this.RequestedOrientation = Android.Content.PM.ScreenOrientation.Sensor;
If you are using fragment you can prevent fragment destroy with RetainInstance = true. That might work, but i never tested it.
You can cancel task with CancelationToken and restart it in OnRestoreInstanceState()
Here is example how to cancel task
{
CancellationTokenSource cts;
...
// If a download process is already underway, cancel it.
if (cts != null)
{
cts.Cancel();
}
// Now set cts to cancel the current process if the button is chosen again.
CancellationTokenSource newCTS = new CancellationTokenSource();
cts = newCTS;
try
{
//Send cts.Token to carry the message if there is a cancellation request.
await AccessTheWebAsync(cts.Token);
}
// Catch cancellations separately.
catch (OperationCanceledException)
{
ResultsTextBox.Text += "\r\nDownloads canceled.\r\n";
}
catch (Exception)
{
ResultsTextBox.Text += "\r\nDownloads failed.\r\n";
}
// When the process is complete, signal that another process can proceed.
if (cts == newCTS)
cts = null;
}
And in the task
async Task AccessTheWebAsync(CancellationToken ct)
{
...
// Retrieve the website contents from the HttpResponseMessage.
byte[] urlContents = await response.Content.ReadAsByteArrayAsync();
// Check for cancellations before displaying information about the
// latest site.
ct.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
...
}
There are plenty of things you could do, but please don't go and disable the phones ability to turn the screen -- that is just going to ignore your users.
At a highlevel you will have to do two things:
Make sure the async task keeps running and is not restarted if the activity dies.
You can solve that by moving the task either into the application class or (cleaner) into a headless fragment with setRetainInstance set to true.
In the onDestroy method in the activity, remove it from the async task, in the onCreate task give the activity to the async task (if it exist).
This is what prevents the async task from calling the old context and can be done with a simple java setter on the async task. Don't forget to cache the result in the task if the activity is currently not connected.
In the end what I ended up doing was encapsulating the async task in another class which held a reference to the current activity, which implemented and interface which defined a method which handles the async response and updates the UI.
The activity held a static variable of the encapsulated async task, and if it was running during a config change, the encapsulated async's task reference to the activity was updated to the new activity.
I have an ICEfaces web app which contains a component with a property linked to a backing bean variable. In theory, variable value is programmatically modified, and the component sees the change and updates its appearance/properties accordingly.
However, it seems that the change in variable isn't "noticed" by the component until the end of the JSF cycle (which, from my basic understanding, is the render response phase).
The problem is, I have a long file-copy operation to perform, and I would like the the inputText component to show a periodic status update. However, since the component is only updated at the render response phase, it doesn't show any output until the Java methods have finished executing, and it shows it all changes accumulated at once.
I have tried using FacesContext.getCurrentInstance().renderResponse() and other functions, such as PushRenderer.render(String ID) to force XmlHttpRequest to initialize early, but no matter what, the appearance of the component does not change until the Java code finishes executing.
One possible solution that comes to mind is to have an invisible button somewhere that is automatically "pressed" by the bean when step 1 of the long operation completes, and by clicking it, it calls step 2, and so on and so forth. It seems like it would work, but I don't want to spend time hacking together such an inelegant solution when I would hope that there is a more elegant solution built into JSF/ICEfaces.
Am I missing something, or is resorting to ugly hacks the only way to achieve the desired behavior?
Multithreading was the missing link, in conjunction with PushRenderer and PortableRenderer (see http://wiki.icesoft.org/display/ICE/Ajax+Push+-+APIs).
I now have three threads in my backing bean- one for executing the long operation, one for polling the status, and one "main" thread for spawning the new threads and returning UI control to the client browser.
Once the main thread kicks off both execution and polling threads, it terminates and it completes the original HTTP request. My PortableRenderer is declared as PortableRender portableRenderer; and in my init() method (called by the class constructor) contains:
PushRenderer.addCurrentSession("fullFormGroup");
portableRenderer = PushRenderer.getPortableRenderer();
For the threading part, I used implements Runnable on my class, and for handling multiple threads in a single class, I followed this StackOverflow post: How to deal with multiple threads in one class?
Here's some source code. I can't reveal the explicit source code I've used, but this is a boiled-down version that doesn't reveal any confidential information. I haven't tested it, and I wrote it in gedit so it might have a syntax error or two, but it should at least get you started in the right direction.
public void init()
{
// This method is called by the constructor.
// It doesn't matter where you define the PortableRenderer, as long as it's before it's used.
PushRenderer.addCurrentSession("fullFormGroup");
portableRenderer = PushRenderer.getPortableRenderer();
}
public void someBeanMethod(ActionEvent evt)
{
// This is a backing bean method called by some UI event (e.g. clicking a button)
// Since it is part of a JSF/HTTP request, you cannot call portableRenderer.render
copyExecuting = true;
// Create a status thread and start it
Thread statusThread = new Thread(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
try {
// message and progress are both linked to components, which change on a portableRenderer.render("fullFormGroup") call
message = "Copying...";
// initiates render. Note that this cannot be called from a thread which is already part of an HTTP request
portableRenderer.render("fullFormGroup");
do {
progress = getProgress();
portableRenderer.render("fullFormGroup"); // render the updated progress
Thread.sleep(5000); // sleep for a while until it's time to poll again
} while (copyExecuting);
progress = getProgress();
message = "Finished!";
portableRenderer.render("fullFormGroup"); // push a render one last time
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
System.out.println("Child interrupted.");
}
});
statusThread.start();
// create a thread which initiates script and triggers the termination of statusThread
Thread copyThread = new Thread(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
File someBigFile = new File("/tmp/foobar/large_file.tar.gz");
scriptResult = copyFile(someBigFile); // this will take a long time, which is why we spawn a new thread
copyExecuting = false; // this will caue the statusThread's do..while loop to terminate
}
});
copyThread.start();
}
I suggest looking at our Showcase Demo:
http://icefaces-showcase.icesoft.org/showcase.jsf?grp=aceMenu&exp=progressBarBean
Under the list of Progress Bar examples is one called Push. It uses Ajax Push (a feature provided with ICEfaces) to do what I think you want.
There is also a tutorial on this page called Easy Ajax Push that walks you through a simple example of using Ajax Push.
http://www.icesoft.org/community/tutorials-samples.jsf