I am looking at my performance profile of one of my slowest requests, and I see an AWAIT_TIME of more than 6 seconds, but I am not able to get any more information regarding it. How do I figure out what exactly the process is "waiting on"?
From Azure's documentation:
Waiting (AWAIT_TIME)
AWAIT_TIME indicates the code is waiting for another task to complete. This typically happens with C# 'await' statement. When the code does a C# 'await', the thread unwinds and returns control to the thread-pool, and there is no thread that is blocked waiting for the 'await' to finish. However, logically the thread that did the await is 'blocked' waiting for the operation to complete. The AWAIT_TIME indicates the blocked time waiting for the task to complete.+
Blocked Time
BLOCKED_TIME indicates the code is waiting for another resource to be available, such as waiting for a synchronization object, waiting for a thread to be available, or waiting for a request to finish.
So it's waiting on something necessary to continue with processing. We have had the same problem of long AWAIT_TIME with file uploads and it turned out the request was waiting for the Request's stream to be read (ReadAsMultiPartAsync() for us)... If you look at the code in RecASPRequest and _RtlUserThreadStart, you'll probably the culprit...
Related
We are doing a simple timeout() call on a Flowable.
Flowable.fromCallable(() -> callToExternalService())
.timeout(500, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS)
The timeout itself works fine, but we noticed that the timed out call callToExternalService, which sometimes could take minutes, even if it is discarded, doesn't free up the thread where it is running on, until it completes fully, and by doing so it's wasting resources. In our case, if the call times out, the thread can be killed straightaway, and so it shouldn't wait for the call to finish.
Is there a way to achieve this?
Add .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) (or some other scheduler) before the .timeout
I have a controller action that does heavy computation and takes 10 minutes or more to complete.
def timeConsumingOperation(){
}
when i request the url /application/timeConsumingOperation after sometime of waiting the browser shows timeout or service unavailable.
My question is does this timeout also stop the backend method from running or even though the connection to the server is detached, the method will run till completion in the backend? Thanks for the answer!
If this timeout is enforced solely by your browser, the operation will continue, but may fail. In particular, the response output stream will be closed and any attempts to write to it will throw exceptions.
AppDelegate.applicationWillTerminate is called when the application is about to terminate. In this function, I am issuing a network request via Alamofire, to notify the server that the app is terminating. Alamofire's response handler is never invoked. It looks to me like the termination completes before the completion handler is invoked.
Alamofire's completion handlers appear to run on the main thread. I found documentation saying that the app is responsible for draining the main queue: "Although you do not need to create the main dispatch queue, you do need to make sure your application drains it appropriately. For more information on how this queue is managed, see Performing Tasks on the Main Thread." (From https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/General/Conceptual/ConcurrencyProgrammingGuide/OperationQueues/OperationQueues.html) And this is where I am stuck.
How do I drain the main thread? I need to ensure that this last Alamofire request runs before the main thread exits.
Don't worry about “draining” the main thread. The problem is more simple than that. It's just a question of how to do something when your app is leaves the “foreground”/“active” state.
When a user leaves your app to go do something else, it is generally not terminated. It enters a “suspended” state where it remains in memory but does not execute any code. So when the app is suspended, it cannot process your request (but the app isn't yet terminated, either).
There are two approaches to solve this problem.
You could just request a little time to finish your request (see Extending Your App's Background Execution Time). By doing this, your app is not suspended, but temporarily enters a "background" state, where execution can continue for a short period of time.
The advantage of this approach is that it is fairly simple process. Just get background task id before starting the request and you tell it that the background task is done in the Alamofire completion handler.
The disadvantage of this approach is that you only have 30 seconds (previously 3 minutes) for the request to be processed. If you have a good connection, this is generally adequate. But if you don't have a good network connection in that period, the request might never get sent.
The second approach is a little more complicated: You could make your request using a background URLSession. In this scenario, you are effectively telling iOS to take over the handling of this request, and the OS will continue to do so, even if your app is suspends (or later terminated during its natural lifecycle).
But this is much more complicated than the first approach I outlined, and you lose much of the ease and elegance of Alamofire in the process. You can contort yourself to do it (see https://stackoverflow.com/a/26542755/1271826 for an example), but it is far from the obvious and intuitive interface that you're used to with Alamofire. For example, you cannot use the simple response/responseJSON completion handlers. You can only download/upload tasks (no data tasks). You have to write code to handle the OS restarting your app to tell you that the network request was sent (even if you're not doing anything meaningful with this response). Etc.
But the advantage of this more complicated approach is that it is more robust. There's no 3 minute limit to this process. The OS will still take care of sending the request on your behalf whenever connectivity is reestablished. Your app may may even be terminated by that point in time, and the OS will still send the request on your behalf.
Note, neither of these approaches can handle a "force-quit" (e.g. the user double taps on the home button and swipes up to terminate the app). It just handles the normal graceful leaving of the app to go do something else.
We are working on a billing invoice system. As a part of processing our request, we need to make an asynchronous call by placing a message in a queue. We work at 20TPS and have SLA for entire transaction of 12 sec. Occasionally, we have observed that when MQ server becomes very slow but still operational it's taking a lot of time just to write the message in the queue. We want to handle this scenario and have a system that throws an exception when it exceeds a predefined limit for writing the message in the queue.
In simple words, we want to implement a write timeout when there is a delay in writing a message in the queue. Any help is appreciated.
We are aware of mentioning timeout for receiving the response but we are unable to find any fix for mentioning timeout while writing the message in the queue.
We have found some suggestions on revalidating the destination. But in our case, we already know the destination is operational and our system becomes slow only during the response.
I have problem suspending the current task being executed, I have tried to set NSOperationQueue setSuspended=YES for pausing and setSuspended=NO for resuming the process.
According to apple docs I can not suspend already executing task.
If you want to issue a temporary halt to the execution of operations, you can suspend the corresponding operation queue using the setSuspended: method. Suspending a queue does not cause already executing operations to pause in the middle of their tasks. It simply prevents new operations from being scheduled for execution. You might suspend a queue in response to a user request to pause any ongoing work, because the expectation is that the user might eventually want to resume that work.
My app needs to suspend the time taking upload operation in case of internet unavailability and finally resume the same operation once internet is available. Is there any work around for this? or I just need to start the currently executing task from zero?
I think you need to start from zero. otherwise two problems will come there. If you resume the current uploading you cant assure that you are not missed any packets or not. At the same time if the connection available after a long period of time, server may delete the data that you uploaded previously because of the incomplete operation.
Whether or not you can resume or pause a operation queue is not your issue here...
If it worked like you imagined it could (and it doesn't) when you get back to servicing the TCP connection it may very well be in a bad state, it could have timed out, closed remotely...
you will want to find out what your server supports and use the parts of a REST (or similar) service to resume a stalled upload on a brand new fresh connection.
If you haven't yet, print out this and put it on the walls of your cube, make t-shirts for your family members to wear... maybe add it as a screensaver?