Skip to main content

Async/Await–.ConfigureAwait(false)

On one of my projects, a developer asked my help when he noticed that the application just hang after invoking a specific action on a Web API controller.

In this at first innocent looking piece of code he was using a combination of async and non-async code. Here is a simplified example;

If you ran the code above then you end up with a deadlock. This is what happens:

  1. Thread "A" would be given to the request to run on and "Index" would be called
  2. Thread "A" would call "DoSomethingAsync" and get a Task reference
  3. Thread "A" would then request the ".Result" property of that task and would block until the task completed
  4. The "Task.Delay" call would complete and the runtime would try to continue the "DoSomethingAsync" work
  5. The ASP.NET synchronization context would require that work continue on Thread "A" and so the work would be placed on a queue for Thread "A".

Thread "A". is waiting until the DoSomethingAsync task is completed, but the DoSomethingAsync cannot complete because it needs Thread "A". So we end up with a deadlock situation.

The root cause is that ASP.NET applications have a special synchronization context, that returns to the same thread after an async call complete

    To avoid this kind of issues it’s a good idea to set .ConfigureAwait(false). By doing this you no longer use the ASP.NET synchronization context, meaning that the work can continue on any thread available when the async work has completed.

    Remark: Be aware that this requires your code to be thread-safe.

    As most of the time you don’t care on which thread the work continues, it can be a good idea to always add ".ConfigureAwait(false)" to your await calls. If you don’t want to forget this, you can use the following analyzer in your projects: https://www.nuget.org/packages/ConfigureAwaitChecker.Analyzer. This will give you a warning when a possible ConfigureAwait(false) call is missing. The analyzer is quite smart and detects when a configureawait is possible.

    image

    Remark: When you are using ASP.NET Core, you don’t have to worry about this as the synchronization context that was used for previous versions of ASP.NET is gone.

    Labels:

    Popular posts from this blog

    Podman– Command execution failed with exit code 125

    After updating WSL on one of the developer machines, Podman failed to work. When we took a look through Podman Desktop, we noticed that Podman had stopped running and returned the following error message: Error: Command execution failed with exit code 125 Here are the steps we tried to fix the issue: We started by running podman info to get some extra details on what could be wrong: >podman info OS: windows/amd64 provider: wsl version: 5.3.1 Cannot connect to Podman. Please verify your connection to the Linux system using `podman system connection list`, or try `podman machine init` and `podman machine start` to manage a new Linux VM Error: unable to connect to Podman socket: failed to connect: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:2655: connectex: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. That makes sense as the podman VM was not running. Let’s check the VM: >podman machine list NAME         ...
    Read more

    Cache stampede: when our cache turned against us

    While investigating some performance issues, we ran into an ASP.NET Core API that cached a fairly expensive aggregation query for 60 seconds. Under normal load, that was fine: one request rebuilds the cache, everyone else reads from it. Under peak load, dozens of requests would arrive in that same expiry window, all see a cache miss, and all fire the same expensive query in parallel. The database didn't like that. That was the moment when our caching layer stopped helping and started hurting. A burst of requests comes in at the same time, all miss the cache, and all go hammer the database or the downstream API at once. That's a cache stampede . The cache was supposed to protect our backend, and for a few hundred milliseconds it did the opposite. Why this happens IMemoryCache.GetOrCreate (and its async sibling) looks like it protects you, but it doesn't add any locking on its own. Look at the naive version: public async Task<Report> GetReportAsync(string key) ...
    Read more

    The role of ActivitySource in OpenTelemetry for .NET

    While doing some pair programming to integrate OpenTelemetry tracing to a .NET application, we had a discussion on how to use the ActivitySource . It looks simple. You new one up, give it a name, start an activity, done. The discussion started when we added a second ActivitySource with the exact same name in a different class. This made us wonder: "Are we duplicating traces now? Is this a memory leak? Do we need a singleton?" So we decided to dig deeper. This post is what we learned… What ActivitySource actually is ActivitySource is part of System.Diagnostics , not part of the OpenTelemetry NuGet packages. Microsoft built tracing primitives directly into the BCL, and OpenTelemetry's .NET SDK simply listens to them. This is why you can add distributed tracing to a library without taking a dependency on OpenTelemetry at all. An ActivitySource is a factory for Activity objects, and an Activity is .NET's name for what OpenTelemetry calls a span.(don’t ask m...
    Read more