Difference between NSOperationQueue: currentQueue/new? - ios

I'm trying to figure out what is the difference between those 2.
Does it mean currentQueue cannot be mainQueue or it's a wrong assumption?

currentQueue return mainQueue if you call it in main-thread.
new is new queue with new threads

new is initializer method which NSOperationQueue inherits from NSObject
Documentation says:
This method is a combination of alloc and init. Like alloc, it initializes the isa instance variable of the new object so it points to the class data structure. It then invokes the init method to complete the initialization process.
This means calling +new creates new instance of NSOperationQueue
currentQueue returns you the queue on which the method was called.
NSOperationQueue docs of currentQueue says:
The operation queue that started the operation or nil if the queue could not be determined
I.e. if method calling +currentQueue is mainQueue, it can return mainQueue

prove of concept write by #Cy-4AH. Hop this can clarify a bit.
-(void) viewDidLoad {
NSBlockOperation *blockOperation = [NSBlockOperation blockOperationWithBlock:^(void){
//this block will executed in a separate thread (not the main thread)
if ([NSOperationQueue currentQueue] == [NSOperationQueue mainQueue]) {
NSLog(#"= in block");
} else {
NSLog(#"not = in block"); //This will be log
}
}];
NSOperationQueue *operationQueue = [[NSOperationQueue alloc] init];
[operationQueue addOperation:blockOperation];
//this block will executed in the main thread
if ([NSOperationQueue currentQueue] == [NSOperationQueue mainQueue]) {
NSLog(#"= outside of block"); //This will be log
} else {
NSLog(#"not = outside of block");
}
}

Related

Yin&Yang Initialization - Wait for pieces before calling init

Say you have a method that returns information in two separate blocks, like so:
#interface SomeObject : NSObject
- (instancetype)initWithA:(NSString *)aInfo bInfo:(NSString *)bInfo;
#end
- (void)someMethod:(void (^)(NSString *aInfo))firstBlock
secondBlock:(void (^)(NSString *bInfo))secondBlock {
firstBlock(#"a"); secondBlock(#"b");
}
- (void)ourMethod:(void (^)(SomeObject *object))completionBlock {
SomeObject *someObject = [[SomeObject alloc] initWithA:aInfo bInfo:bInfo];
[self someMethod:^(NSString *aInfo) {
//
} secondBlock:^(NSString *bInfo) {
//
}];
completionBlock(someObject);
}
How would you initialize someObject and pass it back when both of the blocks have completed?
Assume that both blocks are executed asynchronously.
I tried fiddling with GCD's dispatch groups to solve this, however, it didn't seem optimal.
Since you need to create your someObject with the values obtained from the two blocks used in the call to someMethod, you need to create someObject after both blocks have been called.
- (void)ourMethod:(void (^)(BOOL initializationComplete))completionBlock {
__block NSString *a = nil;
__block NSString *b = nil;
dispatch_group_t group = dispatch_group_create();
dispatch_group_enter(group);
dispatch_group_enter(group);
[self someMethod:^(NSString *aInfo) {
a = aInfo;
dispatch_group_leave(group);
} secondBlock:^(NSString *bInfo) {
b = bInfo;
dispatch_group_leave(group);
}];
dispatch_group_notify(group, dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
SomeObject *someObject = [[SomeObject alloc] initWithA:a bInfo:b];
completionBlock(someObject);
});
}
This doesn't block the caller of ourMethod and it ensures the completion block is only called once both blocks are done.
This solution assumes the two blocks are run asynchronously.
You can use a semaphore, but-- in general-- making an asynchronous operation synchronous is a red flag indicating bad design.
Are the two blocks asynchronous in and of themselves? If so, you could have __block BOOL firstDone = NO; and __block BOOL secondDone = NO; and check appropriately to see if it is time to call the completionBlock. Still ugly and you'll want a synchronization primitive in there to ensure you don't hit a race, but that'd work.
If firstBlock() and secondBlock() are synchronous and on the same queue, then just call completionBlock() after the second is done.
Or, alternatively, if they are asynchronous and simultaneously scheduled, toss 'em on an asynchronous queue and then toss a barrier block on the queue that calls the completionBlock.

Finishing NSOperation on different thread

I'm curious whether it is safe to finish custom NSOperation on different thread that their origin thread e.g.:
I have my custom operation class which is executed on different thread let say thread B (not main thread), then in this operation class I have obviously start() method, where on very beginning I'm invoking [self markAsExecuting]; method to indicate that operation already starts their work and of course after some stuff I have to invoke [self markAsFinished]; to indicate that all work has been done and operation is finished.
My question is: whether it is safe to invoke [self markAsFinished]; method on different thread that my operation itself is execute let say thread C?
Some snipped code:
- (void)start {
#autoreleasepool {
// *** Thread B
[self markAsExecuting];
[apiManager fetchData completion:^(NSDictionary *data, NSError *error) {
if (error == nil) {
// As we know in this case when we do not indicate that AFNetworking response handle should be executed on different thread by default it will be executed on main thread, so that why I'm dispatching expensive work to the background
self.queue = dispatch_queue_create("com.something.myapp.backgroundQueue", 0);
dispatch_async(self.queue, ^{
// Some expensive work
// *** Thread C
[weakSelf markAsFinished];
});
} else {
// *** Main Thread
[weakSelf markAsFinished];
}
}];
}
}
I'm hope that my problem explanation was clear enough.
My question was maybe not precisely enough, markAsFinish method only set the Operation state to .finish so it doesn't make big different from which thread it is called in this case

How to do async task in non-concurrent custom nsoperation

Maybe I let NSOperation to play a wrong role in non-concurrent job. My requirement is , I want to do a lot of async jobs, but I want them to be completed in order. When task1 is finished after the async callback, task2 can be take into work now. And I make all the task a NSOperation. However, NSOperation is used to multiple thread programming most time. Is my choice wrong. But it remind me to think more about the NSOperation in this case, we can't manage manually the isFinished and isExecute in a sync block since the operation have been release in non-concurrent nsoperation,it means i couldnot use the powerful operation queue to automatically manage the task.Any idea?Thanks for your answer..
edit with code :
-(void)main {
[super main];
self.isOperationExcuting = YES;
self.isOperationFinished = NO;
WEAKSELF
[self query:^(NSArray *array, NSError *error) {
//I set my custom property, but it do not cause my NSOperation to be finished
weakSelf.isOperationFinished = YES;
weakSelf.isOperationExcuting = NO;
}];
}
-(void)query:(void (^)(NSArray *array, NSError *error))block {
BmobQuery *query = [BmobQuery queryWithClassName:#"Room"];
[query findObjectsInBackgroundWithBlock:block];
}
-(BOOL)isFinished {
return self.isOperationFinished;
}
- (BOOL)isExecuting {
return self.isOperationExcuting;
}
- (void)start {
[super start];
NSLog(#"start");
}
- (void)cancel {
[super cancel];
NSLog(#"cancel");
}
Just make all added operations serial by setting maxConcurrentOperationCount to 1.
NSOperationQueue* queue = [[ NSOperationQueue alloc ] init];
queue.maxConcurrentOperationCount = 1;
[queue addOperation:operation1];
[queue addOperation:operation2];
[queue addOperation:operation3];
NSOperationQueue
The NSOperationQueue class regulates the execution of a set of
NSOperation objects. After being added to a queue, an operation
remains in that queue until it is explicitly canceled or finishes
executing its task.

Best way to manage many block calls

I am developing an app and when it starts its execution it has to get some data from the webService, categories, Image of loading(it changes sometimes), info "how to use" ( also can change in the server, client specifications..). To get this data I call some methods like this one (I have four similar methods, one for each thing I need) :
-(void) loadAppInfo
{
__weak typeof(self) weakSelf = self;
completionBlock = ^(BOOL error, NSError* aError) {
if (error) {
// Lo que sea si falla..
}
[weakSelf.view hideToastActivity];
};
[self.view makeToastActivity];
[wpNetManager getApplicationInfoWithCompletionBlock:completionBlock];
}
In my Network manager I have methods like this one :
- (void)getApplicationInfoWithCompletionBlock:(CompletionBlock)completionBlock
{
NSString * lang = #"es";//[[NSLocale preferredLanguages] objectAtIndex:0];
NSString *urlWithString = [kAPIInfoScreens stringByAppendingString:lang];
NSMutableURLRequest *request = nil;
request = [self requestWithMethod:#"GET" path:urlWithString parameters:nil];
AFHTTPRequestOperation *operation = [[AFHTTPRequestOperation alloc] initWithRequest:request];
[self registerHTTPOperationClass:[AFHTTPRequestOperation class]];
[operation setCompletionBlockWithSuccess:^(AFHTTPRequestOperation *operation, id responseObject) {
// Print the response body in text
NSDictionary* json = [NSJSONSerialization JSONObjectWithData:responseObject options:kNilOptions error:nil];
NSDictionary *informations = [json objectForKey:kTagInfoSplash];
if([json count]!= 0){
for (NSDictionary *infoDic in informations) {
Info *info = [Info getInfoByTitle:[infoDic objectForKey:kTagInfoTitle]];
if (info) {
// [User updateUserWithDictionary:dic];
} else {
[Info insertInfoWithDictionary:infoDic];
}
}
[wpCoreDataManager saveContext];
}
if (completionBlock) {
completionBlock(NO, nil);
}
} failure:^(AFHTTPRequestOperation *operation, NSError *error) {
NSLog(#"Error Registro: %#", error);
if (completionBlock) {
completionBlock(YES, error);
}
}];
[self enqueueHTTPRequestOperation:operation];
}
So what I do is call this methods in the viewDidLoad:
[self loadAppInfo];
[self loadCountriesFromJson];
[self loadCategoriesFromWS];
[self loadSplashFromWS];
So, instead of call this methods one by one. I think I can use GCD to manage this while a load image is called until everything is done and then call the next ViewController. It is a good solution what I believe? if it is the problem is that I do not know how to add some blocks to a gcd.
I am trying to do this instead of calling he last four methods in ViewDidLoad. But it works weird:
-(void)myBackGroundTask
{
[self.view makeToastActivity];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
[self loadAppInfo];
[self loadCountriesFromJson];
[self loadCategoriesFromWS];
[self loadSplashDataFromWS ];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
[self.view hideToastActivity];
[self nextController];
});
});
}
[self nextController] method is called before I had everything save in Core Data and I have errors..
Since all your four methods
[self loadAppInfo];
[self loadCountriesFromJson];
[self loadCategoriesFromWS];
[self loadSplashFromWS];
are asynchronous, it should be clear why the statement
[self nextController];
is executed before those four methods finish. Right?
Thus, there are completion handlers which get invoked when the asynchronous method finished. Too bad, none of your asynchronous methods have completion handlers. ;)
The key to approach the problem seems to have completion handlers for your asynchronous methods:
typedef void (^completion_t)(id result, NSError* error);
- (void) loadAppInfo:(completion_t)completionHandler;
- (void) loadCountriesFromJson:(completion_t)completionHandler;
- (void) loadCategoriesFromWS:(completion_t)completionHandler;
- (void) loadSplashFromWS:(completion_t)completionHandler;
It seems, you want to start ALL four asynchronous methods concurrently.
How and when you have to invoke the statement [self nextController] depends on whether there are any dependencies for this call to the eventual result of the above four asynchronous methods.
For example, you may state:
A. [self nextController] shall be executed when loadAppInfo: finishes successfully. All other asynchronous methods are irrelevant.
The solution looks like this:
[self loadAppInfo:^(id result, NSError*error){
if (error == nil) {
[self nextController];
}
}];
[self loadCountriesFromJson:nil];
[self loadCategoriesFromWS:nil];
[self loadSplashFromWS:nil];
If the above statement depends only on one of those methods, the solution is quite obvious and simple. It will get immediately more complex when you have a requirement like this:
B. [self nextController] shall be executed when ALL four asynchronous methods finished successfully (or more than one, and all other methods are irrelevant).
There are a few approaches how one can solve that. One would be to use a dispatch group, or a semaphore and a few state variables and dispatch queues to ensure concurrency. However, this is quite elaborate, would ultimately cause to block a thread, cannot be cancelled, and is also quite suboptimal (besides that it also looks hackish). Thus, I will not discuss that solution.
Using NSOperation and Dependencies
Another approach is to utilize NSOperation's dependencies. This requires to wrap each asynchronous method into a NSOperation subclass. Your methods are already asynchronous, this means that you need to take this into account when designing your subclasses.
Since one can only establish a dependency from one to another NSOperation, you also need to create a NSOperation subclass for your statement
[self nextController]
which needs to be wrapped into its own NSOperation subclass.
Well assuming you correctly subclassed NSOperation, at the end of the day, you get five modules and five header files:
LoadAppInfoOperation.h, LoadAppInfoOperation.m,
LoadCountriesFromJsonOperation.h, LoadCountriesFromJsonOperation.m,
LoadCategoriesFromWSOperation.h, LoadCategoriesFromWSOperation.m,
LoadSplashFromWSOperation.h, LoadSplashFromWSOperation.m
NextControllerOperation.h, NextControllerOperation.m
B. NextControllerOperation shall be started when ALL four Operations finished successfully:
In code this looks as follows:
LoadAppInfoOperation* op1 = ...;
LoadCountriesFromJsonOperation* op2 = ...;
LoadCategoriesFromWSOperation* op3 = ...;
LoadSplashFromWSOperation* op4 = ...;
NextControllerOperation* controllerOp = ...;
[controllerOp addDependency:op1];
[controllerOp addDependency:op2];
[controllerOp addDependency:op3];
[controllerOp addDependency:op4];
NSOperationQueue *queue = [NSOperationQueue new];
[queue addOperation: op1];
[queue addOperation: op2];
[queue addOperation: op3];
[queue addOperation: op4];
[queue addOperation: controllerOp];
Looks nice? No?
A more appealing approach: Promises
If this solution with NSOperations doesn't look nice, is too elaborated (five NSOperation subclasses!) or whatever, here is a more appealing approach which uses a third party library which implements Promises.
Before I explain how Promises work and what they are for (see wiki for a more general description), I would like to show the final code right now here, and explain how to get there later.
Disclosure: The example code here utilizes a third party library RXPromise which implements a Promise according the Promise/A+ specification. I'm the author of the RXPromise library.
There are a few more Promise libraries implemented in Objective-C, but you may take a look into RXPromise anyway ;) (see below for a link)
The key is to create asynchronous methods which return a promise. Assuming ALL your methods are now asynchronous and have a signature like below:
- (RXPromise*) doSomethingAsync;
Then, your final code will look as follows:
// Create an array of promises, representing the eventual result of each task:
NSArray* allTasks = #[
[self loadAppInfo],
[self loadCountriesFromJson],
[self loadCategoriesFromWS],
[self loadSplashFromWS]
];
...
This above statement is a quite a short form of starting a number of tasks and holding their result objects (a promise) in an array. In other words, the array allTasks contains promises whose task has been started and which now run all concurrently.
Now, we continue and define what shall happen when all tasks within this array finished successfully, or when any tasks fails. Here we use the helper class method all::
...
[RXPromise all: allTasks]
.then(^id(id results){
// Success handler block
// Parameter results is an array of the eventual result
// of each task - in the same order
... // do something with the results
return nil;
},^id(NSError*error){
// Error handler block
// error is the error of the failed task
NSLog(#"Error: %#, error");
return nil;
});
See the comments in the code above to get an idea how the success and the error handler - which get called when all tasks have been finished - is defined with the "obscure" then.
The explanation follows:
Explanation:
The code below uses the RXPromise library. You can obtain the source code of RXPromise Library which is available at GitHub.
There are a few other implementations (SHXPromise, OMPromises and more) and with a little effort it should be possible to port the code below to other promise libraries as well.
First, you need a variant of your asynchronous methods which looks as follows:
- (RXPromise*) loadAppInfo;
- (RXPromise*) loadCountriesFromJson;
- (RXPromise*) loadCategoriesFromWS;
- (RXPromise*) loadSplashFromWS;
Here, note that the asynchronous methods don't have a completion handler. We don't need this since the returned object -- a Promise -- represents the eventual result of the asynchronous task. This result may also be an error when the task fails.
I've refactored your original methods in order to better utilize the power of promises:
An asynchronous task will create the promise, and it must eventually "resolve" it either with the eventual result via fulfillWithValue:, or when it fails, with an error via rejectWithReason:. See below how a RXPromise is created, immediately returned from the asynchronous method, and "resolved" later when the task finished or failed.
Here, your method getApplicationInfo returns a promise whose eventual value will be the HTTP response data, that is a NSData containing JSON (or possibly an error):
- (RXPromise*)getApplicationInfo
{
RXPromise* promise = [[RXPromise alloc] init];
NSString * lang = #"es";//[[NSLocale preferredLanguages] objectAtIndex:0];
NSString *urlWithString = [kAPIInfoScreens stringByAppendingString:lang];
NSMutableURLRequest *request = nil;
request = [self requestWithMethod:#"GET" path:urlWithString parameters:nil];
AFHTTPRequestOperation *operation = [[AFHTTPRequestOperation alloc] initWithRequest:request];
[self registerHTTPOperationClass:[AFHTTPRequestOperation class]];
[operation setCompletionBlockWithSuccess:^(AFHTTPRequestOperation *operation, id responseObject) {
[promise fulfillWithValue:responseObject]
} failure:^(AFHTTPRequestOperation *operation, NSError *error) {
[promise rejectWithReason:error];
}];
[self enqueueHTTPRequestOperation:operation];
return promise;
}
A few further notes about promises:
A client can obtain the eventual result respectively the error through registering handler blocks through using the property then:
promise.then(<success_handler>, <error_handler>);
Handlers or optional, but you usually set either one or both which handle the result.
Note: With RXPromise you can register handler blocks when and where you want, and as many as you want! RXPromise is fully thread safe. You just need to keep a strong reference to the promise somewhere or as long as needed. You don't need to keep a reference, even when you setup handlers, though.
The handler block will be executed on a private queue. This means, you don't know the execution context aka thread where the handler will be executed, except you use this variant:
promise.thenOn(dispatch_queue, <success_handler>, <error_handler>);
Here, dispatch_queue specifies the queue where the handler (either the success OR the error handler) will be executed.
Two or more asynchronous tasks can be executed subsequently (aka chained), where each task produces a result which becomes the input of the subsequent task.
A short form of "chaining" of two async methods looks like this:
RXPromise* finalResult = [self asyncA]
.then(^id(id result){
return [self asyncBWithResult:result]
}, nil);
Here, asyncBWithResult: will be executed only until after asyncA has been finished successfully. The above expression returns a Promise finalResult which represents the final result of what asyncBWithResult: "returns" as its result when it finishes, or it contains an error from any task that fails in the chain.
Back to your problem:
Your method loadAppInfo now invokes asynchronous method getApplicationInfo in order to obtain the JSON data. When that succeeded, it parsers it, creates managed objects from it and saves the managed object context.
It returns a promise whose value is the managed object context where the objects have been saved:
- (RXPromise*) loadAppInfo {
RXPromise* promise = [[RXPromise alloc] init];
[self getApplicationInfo]
.then(^(id responseObject){
NSError* err;
NSDictionary* json = [NSJSONSerialization JSONObjectWithData:responseObject options:kNilOptions error:&err];
if (json == nil) {
return err;
}
else {
[wpCoreDataManager.managedObjectContext performBlock:^{
NSDictionary *informations = [json objectForKey:kTagInfoSplash];
if([json count]!= 0){
for (NSDictionary *infoDic in informations) {
Info *info = [Info getInfoByTitle:[infoDic objectForKey:kTagInfoTitle]];
if (info) {
// [User updateUserWithDictionary:dic];
} else {
[Info insertInfoWithDictionary:infoDic];
}
}
[wpCoreDataManager saveContext]; // check error here!
[promise fulfillWithValue:wpCoreDataManager.managedObjectContext];
}
else {
[promise fulfillWithValue:nil]; // nothing saved
}
}];
}
}, nil);
return promise;
}
Notice how performBlock has been utilized to ensure the managed objects are properly associated to the execution context of its managed object context. Additionally, the asynchronous version is used, which fits nicely into the solution utilizing promises.
Having refactored these two methods, which merely perform what you intend to accomplish, and also having refactored the other asynchronous methods which now return a promise like the refactored above methods, you can now finish your task as shown at the start.
GCD to manage this while a load image is called until everything is done and then call the next ViewController. It is a good solution what I believe?
The general rule of thumb is to operate on the highest level of abstraction available.
In this case it means using NSOperation subclasses. You can create a private queue, and schedule you operations in such a way that turning off the loading image will happen only after all operations are complete, e.g. by
NSOperation *goForward = [MyGoForwardOperation new]; // you define this subclass
NSOperation *loadSomething = [MyLoadSomethingOperation new];
NSOperation *loadAnother = [MyLoadAnotherThingOperation new];
[goForward addDependency: loadOperation];
[goForward addDependency: loadAnother];
NSOperationQueue *queue = [NSOperationQueue new];
[queue addOperation: loadSomething];
[queue addOperation: loadAnother];
[[NSOperationQueue mainQueue] addOperation: goForward];
Note that in this example goForward will run on main thread, but after background operations finish.
You'll need to carefully program your MyLoadSomethingOperation for this to work, read up on subclassing NSOperation or subclass AFHTTPRequestOperation since you're using it anyway.
[self nextController] method is called before I had everything
Yes, you should search on saving to Core Data on background thread; this is a big topic in itself.

How to timeout an asynchronous method when ran synchronously

This is essentially what I'm doing to run an asynchronous method synchronously:
This essentially works when called once, but when called multiple times, it will eventually stay inside the while loop and never get signaled. Any ideas on how to set a timer to eventually time out after sometime?
__block SomeClass *result = nil;
dispatch_semaphore_t semaphore = dispatch_semaphore_create(0);
dispatch_queue_t queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_LOW, 0UL);
dispatch_async(queue, ^{
[[SomeManager sharedInstance] someMethodWithCallback:^(id responseObject, NSError *error) {
if (!error) {
result = (SomeClass *)ResponseObject;
}
dispatch_semaphore_signal(semaphore);
}];
});
// wait with a time limit
while (dispatch_semaphore_wait(semaphore, DISPATCH_TIME_NOW)) {
[[NSRunLoop currentRunLoop] runMode:NSDefaultRunLoopMode beforeDate:[NSDate dateWithTimeIntervalSinceNow:0]];
}
dispatch_release(semaphore);
Thanks
That looks kind of like GCD abuse to me. ;) Are you running the run loop because this is executing on the main thread? Why not just use a dispatch_async() from your completion handler to invoke a handler on the main thread? eg:
- (void)handleDataReady: (id) results error: (NSError *) error {
// update your app
}
- (void)performAsyncUpdate {
dispatch_queue_t queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_LOW, 0UL);
dispatch_async(queue, ^{
[[SomeManager sharedInstance] someMethodWithCallback:^(id responseObject, NSError *error) {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
[self handleDataReady:responseObject error:error];
}];
});
}
If you really want to make it synchronous, i.e. blocking the calling thread until the operation completes then use the following pattern (of course you want to avoid blocking threads if possible)
NSCondition *waitCondtion = [NSCondition new];
__block BOOL completed = NO;
dispatch_queue_t queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_LOW, 0UL);
dispatch_async(queue, ^{
[[SomeManager sharedInstance] someMethodWithCallback:^(id responseObject, NSError *error) {
if (!error) {
result = (SomeClass *)ResponseObject;
}
[waitCondtion lock];
completed = YES;
[waitCondition signal];
[waitCondition unlock];
}];
});
[waitCondtion lock];
if (!completed)
[waitCondtion wait];
[waitCondition unlock];
You can also use "waitUntilDate:" to timeout the wait after a period.
However, this pattern only works as long as the "someMethodWithCallback does not call its callback block on the same thread that is being blocked. I have copied your code because it is not obvious how "someMethodWithCallback" is implemented. Since this method is using an asynchronous pattern, then it must be doing something asynchronously therefore why are you calling it inside a dispatch_async? What thread will it call its callback block on?
You should "fill" the completion handler with whatever code you require to process the result when the completion handler finished (and also completely removing that run loop).
In order to "abort" an asynchronous operation, you should provide a cancel message which you send the asynchronous result provider.
In your case, since you have a singleton, the cancel message would have to be send like this:
[[SomeManager sharedInstance] cancel];
When the operation receives the cancel message, it should as soon as possible abort its task and call the completion handler with an appropriate NSError object indicating that it has been cancelled.
Note, that cancel messages may be asynchronous - that means, when it returns, the receiver may still execute the task.
You may achieve a "timeout" with setting up a timer, which sends the cancel message the operation, unless it has been invalidated when the operation finished.

Resources