Search Results

Search found 26 results on 2 pages for 'threadabortexception'.

Page 1/2 | 1 2  | Next Page >

• ThreadAbortException (WebClient using DownloadFile to grab file from server)

  - by baron

  Hi Everyone, Referencing my Earlier Question, regarding downloading a file from a server and handling exceptions properly. I am positive that I had this solved, then in classic programming fashion, returned days later to frustratingly find it broken :-( Updated code: private static void GoGetIt(HttpContext context) { var directoryInfoOfWhereTheDirectoryFullOfFilesShouldBe = new FileInfo(......); var name = SomeBasicLogicToDecideName(); //if (!directoryInfoOfWhereTheDirectoryFullOfFilesShouldBe.RefreshExists()) //{ // throw new Exception(string.Format("Could not find {0}.", name)); //} var tempDirectory = ""; //Omitted - creates temporary directory try { directoryInfoOfWhereTheDirectoryFullOfFilesShouldBe.CopyAll(tempDirectory); var response = context.Response; response.ContentType = "binary/octet-stream"; response.AddHeader("Content-Disposition", string.Format("attachment;filename={0}.zip", name)); ZipHelper.ZipDirectoryToStream(tempDirectory, response.OutputStream); response.End(); } catch (Exception ex) { Debug.WriteLine(ex.ToString()); context.Response.StatusCode = 404; } finally { tempDirectory.DeleteWithPrejudice(); } } This was working fine, and returning the zip, otherwise if the file didn't exist returning 404. Then on the client side I could handle this: public bool Download() { try { using (var client = new WebClient()) { client.DownloadFile(name, tempFilePath); } } catch (Exception) { fileExists = false; } return fileExists; } But the problem now is two things. 1) I get System.Threading.ThreadAbortException: Thread was being aborted in the server side try-catch block. Usually this was just a file not found exception. I have no idea what or why that new exception is throwing? 2) Now that a different exception is throwing on the server side instead of the file not found, it would seem I can't use this set up for the application, because back on client side, any exception is assumed to be filenotfound. Any help, especially info on why this ThreadAbortException is throwing!?!? greatly appreciated. Cheers

  Read the article

• System.Threading.ThreadAbortException executing WCF service

  - by SURESH GIRIRAJAN

  In one of our prod server we recently ran into issue when we went and update the web.config and try to browse the service. We started seeing the service was not responding and getting the following warning in the application log. Our service is WCF service, BizTalk orchestration exposed as service. We have other prod server where we never ran into this issue, so what’s different with this server. After going thru lot of forum and came up on some Microsoft service pack and hot fix which related to FCN. But I don’t want to apply any patch on this server then we need to do on all the other servers too. So solution is simple, I dropped the existing website, created a new site with different name with updated web.config browse the service. Then dropped that site and recreate the original web site and it worked fine without any issue. Event Viewer:  Event Type:        Warning Event Source:    ASP.NET 2.0.50727.0 Event Category:                Web Event Event ID:              1309 Date:                     6/6/2011 Time:                    5:41:42 PM User:                     N/A Computer:          PRODP02 Description: Event code: 3005 Event message: An unhandled exception has occurred. Event time: 6/6/2011 5:41:42 PM Event time (UTC): 6/6/2011 9:41:42 PM Event ID: a71769f42b304355a58c482bfec267f2 Event sequence: 3 Event occurrence: 1 Event detail code: 0  Application information:     Application domain: /LM/W3SVC/518296899/ROOT/PortArrivals-2-129518698821558995     Trust level: Full     Application Virtual Path: /TESTSVC     Application Path: D:\inetpub\wwwroot\RFID\TESTSVC\     Machine name: PRODP02  Process information:     Process ID: 8752     Process name: w3wp.exe     Account name: domain\BizTalk_Svc_Hostlso  Exception information:     Exception type: ThreadAbortException     Exception message: Thread was being aborted.  Request information:     Request URL: http://localhost:81/TESTSVC/TESTSVCS.svc     Request path: /TESTSVC/TESTSVCS.svc     User host address: 127.0.0.1     User:      Is authenticated: False     Authentication Type:      Thread account name: domain\BizTalk_Svc_Hostlso  Thread information:     Thread ID: 22     Thread account name: domain\BizTalk_Svc_Hostlso     Is impersonating: False     Stack trace:    at System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously)    at System.Web.HttpApplication.ApplicationStepManager.ResumeSteps(Exception error)  at System.Web.HttpApplication.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContext context, AsyncCallback cb, Object extraData)    at System.Web.HttpRuntime.ProcessRequestInternal(HttpWorkerRequest wr)  <Description>Handling an exception.</Description> <AppDomain>/LM/W3SVC/518296899/ROOT/TESTSVC-6-129518741899334691</AppDomain> <Exception> <ExceptionType>System.Threading.ThreadAbortException, mscorlib, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089</ExceptionType> <Message>Thread was being aborted.</Message> <StackTrace> at System.Threading.Monitor.Enter(Object obj) at System.ServiceModel.ServiceHostingEnvironment.HostingManager.EnsureServiceAvailable(String normalizedVirtualPath) at System.ServiceModel.ServiceHostingEnvironment.EnsureServiceAvailableFast(String relativeVirtualPath) at System.ServiceModel.Activation.HostedHttpRequestAsyncResult.HandleRequest() at System.ServiceModel.Activation.HostedHttpRequestAsyncResult.BeginRequest() at System.ServiceModel.Activation.HostedHttpRequestAsyncResult.OnBeginRequest(Object state) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.IOThreadScheduler.CriticalHelper.WorkItem.Invoke2() at System.ServiceModel.Channels.IOThreadScheduler.CriticalHelper.WorkItem.Invoke() at System.ServiceModel.Channels.IOThreadScheduler.CriticalHelper.ProcessCallbacks() at System.ServiceModel.Channels.IOThreadScheduler.CriticalHelper.CompletionCallback(Object state) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.IOThreadScheduler.CriticalHelper.ScheduledOverlapped.IOCallback(UInt32 errorCode, UInt32 numBytes, NativeOverlapped* nativeOverlapped) at System.ServiceModel.Diagnostics.Utility.IOCompletionThunk.UnhandledExceptionFrame(UInt32 error, UInt32 bytesRead, NativeOverlapped* nativeOverlapped) </StackTrace> <ExceptionString>System.Threading.ThreadAbortException: Thread was being aborted.    at System.Threading.Monitor.Enter(Object obj)    at System.ServiceModel.ServiceHostingEnvironment.HostingManager.EnsureServiceAvailable(String normalizedVirtualPath)    at System.ServiceModel.ServiceHostingEnvironment.EnsureServiceAvailableFast(String relativeVirtualPath)    at System.ServiceModel.Activation.HostedHttpRequestAsyncResult.HandleRequest()    at System.ServiceModel.Activation.HostedHttpRequestAsyncResult.BeginRequest()    at System.ServiceModel.Activation.HostedHttpRequestAsyncResult.OnBeginRequest(Object state)    at System.ServiceModel.Channels.IOThreadScheduler.CriticalHelper.WorkItem.Invoke2()    at System.ServiceModel.Channels.IOThreadScheduler.CriticalHelper.WorkItem.Invoke()    at System.ServiceModel.Channels.IOThreadScheduler.CriticalHelper.ProcessCallbacks()    at System.ServiceModel.Channels.IOThreadScheduler.CriticalHelper.CompletionCallback(Object state)    at System.ServiceModel.Channels.IOThreadScheduler.CriticalHelper.ScheduledOverlapped.IOCallback(UInt32 errorCode, UInt32 numBytes, NativeOverlapped* nativeOverlapped)    at System.ServiceModel.Diagnostics.Utility.IOCompletionThunk.UnhandledExceptionFrame(UInt32 error, UInt32 bytesRead, NativeOverlapped* nativeOverlapped)</ExceptionString>

  Read the article

• Response.Redirect causes System.Threading.ThreadAbortException

  - by RandomBen

  When I use Response.Redirect(...) to redirect my form to a new page I get the error: A first chance exception of type 'System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' occurred in mscorlib.dll An exception of type 'System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' occurred in mscorlib.dll but was not handled in user code My understanding of this is that the error is being caused by the webserver aborting the remainder of the page the response.redirect was called on. I know I can add a second parameter to Response.Redirect that is called endResponse. If I set endResponse to True I still get the error but if I set it to False then I do not. I am pretty sure though that that means the webserver is running the rest of the page I redirected away from. Which would seem to be inefficient to say the least. Is there a better way to do this? Something other than Response.Redirect or is there a way to force the old page to stop loading where I will not get a ThreadAbortException?

  Read the article

• How to handle ThreadAbortException Without Specifying False for Response.End

  - by coffeeaddict

  I know all about this exception, read the msdn article here http://support.microsoft.com/kb/312629/EN-US/ but I do not know how to handle this when my boss does not want me to throw in false for the Response.End. Here's what I have: else { try { VoidlOrder(transactionID); } catch (Exception ex) { LogError(ex.ToString()); } finally { RedirectUser(sessionID,"showfmsg=1", true); } } RedirectUser is just a utility method we run that ultimately passes in true for the reponse.redirect resopnse.end param. So what other option is there other than putting false as this param? He's stating to catch it and do something...ok do what? I don't see any other fix than to send false into this call every time because I can't get pass this exception..I get it every time.

  Read the article

• Will a Response.Redirect exception go to global.asax?

  - by mgmedick

  I'm aware that when you call Response.Redirect it fires a ThreadAbortException. A co-worker has demonstrated calling response.redirect and then it goes to the global.asax. For the life of me I cannot get the ThreadAbortException to go to the global.asax, its like it is being suppressed naturally in the system. The reason I'm asking this is we believe the response.redirect is the cause of some automated error emails, but I'm not convinced this is the case especially if I can't even get it to debug into the global.asax. Any Ideas why I can't get the Response.Redirect to fire the global error handler?

  Read the article

• .net framework execution aborted while executing CLR sproc?

  - by Sean Ochoa

  I constructed a sproc that does the equivalent of FOR XML AUTO in SQL 2008. Now that I'm testing it, it gives me a really unhelpful error msg. Any idea what this error means? Msg 10329, Level 16, State 49, Procedure ForXML, Line 0 .Net Framework execution was aborted. System.Threading.ThreadAbortException: Thread was being aborted. System.Threading.ThreadAbortException: at System.Runtime.InteropServices.Marshal.PtrToStringUni(IntPtr ptr, Int32 len) at System.Data.SqlServer.Internal.CXVariantBase.WSTRToString() at System.Data.SqlServer.Internal.SqlWSTRLimitedBuffer.GetString(SmiEventSink sink) at System.Data.SqlServer.Internal.RowData.GetString(SmiEventSink sink, Int32 i) at Microsoft.SqlServer.Server.ValueUtilsSmi.GetValue(SmiEventSink_Default sink, ITypedGettersV3 getters, Int32 ordinal, SmiMetaData metaData, SmiContext context) at Microsoft.SqlServer.Server.ValueUtilsSmi.GetValue200(SmiEventSink_Default sink, SmiTypedGetterSetter getters, Int32 ordinal, SmiMetaData metaData, SmiContext context) at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReaderSmi.GetValue(Int32 ordinal) at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReaderSmi.GetValues(Object[] values) at System.Data.ProviderBase.DataReaderContainer.CommonLanguageSubsetDataReader.GetValues(Object[] values) at System.Data.ProviderBase.SchemaMapping.LoadDataRow() at System.Data.Common.DataAdapter.FillLoadDataRow(SchemaMapping mapping) at System.Data.Common.DataAdapter.FillFromReader(DataSet dataset, DataTable datatable, String srcTable, DataReaderContainer dataReader, Int32 startRecord, Int32 maxRecords, DataColumn parentChapterColumn, Object parentChapterValue) at System.Data.Common.DataAdapter.Fill(DataTable[] dataTables, IDataReader dataReader, Int32 startRecord, Int32 maxRecords) at System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.FillInternal(DataSet dataset, DataTable[] datatables, Int32 startRecord, Int32 maxRecords, String srcTable, IDbCommand command, CommandBehavior behavior) at System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.Fill(DataTable[] dataTables, Int32 startRecord, Int32 maxRecords, IDbCommand command, CommandBehavior behavior) at System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.Fill(DataTable dataTable) at ForXML.GetXML...

  Read the article

• .NET framework execution aborted while executing CLR stored procedure?

  - by Sean Ochoa

  I constructed a stored procedure that does the equivalent of FOR XML AUTO in SQL Server 2008. Now that I'm testing it, it gives me a really unhelpful error message. What does this error mean? Msg 10329, Level 16, State 49, Procedure ForXML, Line 0 .NET Framework execution was aborted. System.Threading.ThreadAbortException: Thread was being aborted. System.Threading.ThreadAbortException: at System.Runtime.InteropServices.Marshal.PtrToStringUni(IntPtr ptr, Int32 len) at System.Data.SqlServer.Internal.CXVariantBase.WSTRToString() at System.Data.SqlServer.Internal.SqlWSTRLimitedBuffer.GetString(SmiEventSink sink) at System.Data.SqlServer.Internal.RowData.GetString(SmiEventSink sink, Int32 i) at Microsoft.SqlServer.Server.ValueUtilsSmi.GetValue(SmiEventSink_Default sink, ITypedGettersV3 getters, Int32 ordinal, SmiMetaData metaData, SmiContext context) at Microsoft.SqlServer.Server.ValueUtilsSmi.GetValue200(SmiEventSink_Default sink, SmiTypedGetterSetter getters, Int32 ordinal, SmiMetaData metaData, SmiContext context) at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReaderSmi.GetValue(Int32 ordinal) at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReaderSmi.GetValues(Object[] values) at System.Data.ProviderBase.DataReaderContainer.CommonLanguageSubsetDataReader.GetValues(Object[] values) at System.Data.ProviderBase.SchemaMapping.LoadDataRow() at System.Data.Common.DataAdapter.FillLoadDataRow(SchemaMapping mapping) at System.Data.Common.DataAdapter.FillFromReader(DataSet dataset, DataTable datatable, String srcTable, DataReaderContainer dataReader, Int32 startRecord, Int32 maxRecords, DataColumn parentChapterColumn, Object parentChapterValue) at System.Data.Common.DataAdapter.Fill(DataTable[] dataTables, IDataReader dataReader, Int32 startRecord, Int32 maxRecords) at System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.FillInternal(DataSet dataset, DataTable[] datatables, Int32 startRecord, Int32 maxRecords, String srcTable, IDbCommand command, CommandBehavior behavior) at System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.Fill(DataTable[] dataTables, Int32 startRecord, Int32 maxRecords, IDbCommand command, CommandBehavior behavior) at System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.Fill(DataTable dataTable) at ForXML.GetXML...

  Read the article

• What's the deal with the hidden Throw when catching a ThreadAbortException?

  - by priehl

  I'm going through a book of general c# development, and I've come to the thread abort section. The book says something along the lines that when you call Thread.Abort() on another thread, that thread will throw a ThreadAbortException, and even if you tried to supress it it would automatically rethrow it, unless you did some bs that's generally frowned upon. Here's the simple example offered. using System; using System.Threading; public class EntryPoint { private static void ThreadFunc() { ulong counter = 0; while (true) { try { Console.WriteLine("{0}", counter++); } catch (ThreadAbortException) { // Attempt to swallow the exception and continue. Console.WriteLine("Abort!"); } } } static void Main() { try { Thread newThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(EntryPoint.ThreadFunc)); newThread.Start(); Thread.Sleep(2000); // Abort the thread. newThread.Abort(); // Wait for thread to finish. newThread.Join(); } catch (Exception e) { Console.WriteLine(e.ToString()); } } } The book says: When your thread finishes processing the abort exception, the runtime implicitly rethrows it at the end of your exception handler. It’s the same as if you had rethrown the exception yourself. Therefore, any outer exception handlers or finally blocks will still execute normally. In the example, the call to Join won’t be waiting forever as initially expected. So i wrapped a try catch around the Thread.Abort() call and set a break point, expecting it to hit this, considering the text says "any outer exception handlers or finally blocks will still execute normally". BUT IT DOES NOT. I'm racking my brain to figure out why. Anyone have any thoughts on why this isn't the case? Is the book wrong? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Response.Redirect exception

  - by Tedd Hansen

  Executing the line: Response.Redirect("Whateva.aspx", true); Results in: A first chance exception of type 'System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' occurred in mscorlib.dll An exception of type 'System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' occurred in mscorlib.dll but was not handled in user code The exception is because of the "true" part, telling it to end the current request immediately. Is this how it should be? If we consider: Exceptions are generally considered heavy, and many times the reason for ending the request early is to avoid processing the rest of the page. Exceptions show up in performance monitoring, so monitoring the solution will show a false number of exceptions. Is there an alternative way to achieve the same?

  Read the article

• SSRS 2005 giving me "Invalid URI: The format of the URI could not be determined" when trying to cust

  - by Brian

  Hello, I'm getting the error "Invalid URI: The format of the URI could not be determined" when customizing it. I've made several changes to the configuration files and UI, but I keep getting this error. It isn't logging it too in the event log nor the log files, which makes it very annoying to debug. So how do I figure out where the error is coming from? Is it with the URL that's pointing to the ReportServer2005.asmx file, or something else? Updated: The specific error being logged is: aspnet_wp!library!9!3/11/2010-15:52:49:: i INFO: Initializing WatsonDumpOnExceptions to default value of 'Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.InternalCatalogException,Microsoft.ReportingServices.Modeling.InternalModelingException' because it was not specified in Configuration file. aspnet_wp!library!9!3/11/2010-15:52:49:: i INFO: Initializing WatsonDumpExcludeIfContainsExceptions to default value of 'System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException,System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' because it was not specified in Configuration file. aspnet_wp!library!9!3/11/2010-15:52:49:: i INFO: Initializing SecureConnectionLevel to default value of '1' because it was not specified in Configuration file. aspnet_wp!library!9!3/11/2010-15:52:49:: i INFO: Initializing DisplayErrorLink to 'True' as specified in Configuration file. aspnet_wp!library!9!3/11/2010-15:52:49:: i INFO: Initializing WebServiceUseFileShareStorage to default value of 'False' because it was not specified in Configuration file. aspnet_wp!ui!9!3/11/2010-15:52:52:: e ERROR: Invalid URI: The format of the URI could not be determined. aspnet_wp!ui!9!3/11/2010-15:52:53:: e ERROR: HTTP status code -- 500 -------Details-------- System.UriFormatException: Invalid URI: The format of the URI could not be determined. at Microsoft.SqlServer.ReportingServices2005.RSConnection.GetSecureMethods() at Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.Global.RSWebServiceWrapper.GetSecureMethods() at Microsoft.SqlServer.ReportingServices2005.RSConnection.IsSecureMethod(String methodname) at Microsoft.SqlServer.ReportingServices2005.RSConnection.ValidateConnection() at Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.Global.SecureAllAPI() at Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.ReportingPage.EnsureHttpsLevel(HttpsLevel level) at Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.ReportingPage.ReportingPage_Init(Object sender, EventArgs args) at System.EventHandler.Invoke(Object sender, EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Control.OnInit(EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Page.OnInit(EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Control.InitRecursive(Control namingContainer) at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint) aspnet_wp!ui!9!3/11/2010-15:52:53:: e ERROR: Exception in ShowErrorPage: System.Threading.ThreadAbortException: Thread was being aborted. at System.Threading.Thread.AbortInternal() at System.Threading.Thread.Abort(Object stateInfo) at System.Web.HttpResponse.End() at System.Web.HttpServerUtility.Transfer(String path, Boolean preserveForm) at Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.ReportingPage.ShowErrorPage(String errMsg) at at System.Threading.Thread.AbortInternal() at System.Threading.Thread.Abort(Object stateInfo) at System.Web.HttpResponse.End() at System.Web.HttpServerUtility.Transfer(String path, Boolean preserveForm) at Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.ReportingPage.ShowErrorPage(String errMsg) Thanks.

  Read the article

• Exception from Response.Redirect?

  - by allencoded

  I keep getting an error: A first chance exception of type 'System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' occurred in mscorlib.dll An exception of type 'System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' occurred in mscorlib.dll but was not handled in user code The thread '' (0x27ee4) has exited with code 0 (0x0). I was told it was related to this: protected void Button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { Response.Redirect("Results.aspx?Keywords=" + searchString.Text); } I figured it may help to include my complete code. The code above is the only C# code on my first asp page. That code relates to this code on this page. It is also the only C# code I have on my second page. I am simply just trying to pass a keyword from a search form to this block of code: if (Request.QueryString["Keywords"] != null){ string keywords = Request.QueryString["Keywords"]; string myAppID = "HIDDEN"; var xml = XDocument.Load("http://svcs.ebay.com/services/search/FindingService/v1?OPERATION-NAME=findItemsByKeywords&SERVICE-VERSION=1.0.0&SECURITY-APPNAME=" + myAppID + "&RESPONSE-DATA-FORMAT=XML&REST-PAYLOAD&keywords=" + keywords + "&paginationInput.entriesPerPage=5"); XNamespace ns = "http://www.ebay.com/marketplace/search/v1/services"; var titles = from item in xml.Root.Descendants(ns + "title") select new{ title = xml.Descendants(ns + "title").Select (x => x.Value), }; foreach (var item in titles){ Label1.Text += item; } } This block of code calls the keyword value and uses it in an api to perform a search. The code of the xml(api) formats like this: <findItemsByKeywordsResponse xmlns="http://www.ebay.com/marketplace/search/v1/services"> <searchReslut count="5"> <item> <title></title> </item> <item> <title></title> </item> <item> <title></title> </item> Why am I getting this error how do you fix it?

  Read the article

• Issue with translating a delegate function from c# to vb.net for use with Google OAuth 2

  - by Jeremy

  I've been trying to translate a Google OAuth 2 example from C# to Vb.net for a co-worker's project. I'm having on end of issues translating the following methods: private OAuth2Authenticator<WebServerClient> CreateAuthenticator() { // Register the authenticator. var provider = new WebServerClient(GoogleAuthenticationServer.Description); provider.ClientIdentifier = ClientCredentials.ClientID; provider.ClientSecret = ClientCredentials.ClientSecret; var authenticator = new OAuth2Authenticator<WebServerClient>(provider, GetAuthorization) { NoCaching = true }; return authenticator; } private IAuthorizationState GetAuthorization(WebServerClient client) { // If this user is already authenticated, then just return the auth state. IAuthorizationState state = AuthState; if (state != null) { return state; } // Check if an authorization request already is in progress. state = client.ProcessUserAuthorization(new HttpRequestInfo(HttpContext.Current.Request)); if (state != null && (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(state.AccessToken) || !string.IsNullOrEmpty(state.RefreshToken))) { // Store and return the credentials. HttpContext.Current.Session["AUTH_STATE"] = _state = state; return state; } // Otherwise do a new authorization request. string scope = TasksService.Scopes.TasksReadonly.GetStringValue(); OutgoingWebResponse response = client.PrepareRequestUserAuthorization(new[] { scope }); response.Send(); // Will throw a ThreadAbortException to prevent sending another response. return null; } The main issue being this line: var authenticator = new OAuth2Authenticator<WebServerClient>(provider, GetAuthorization) { NoCaching = true }; The Method signature reads as for this particular line reads as follows: Public Sub New(tokenProvider As TClient, authProvider As System.Func(Of TClient, DotNetOpenAuth.OAuth2.IAuthorizationState)) My understanding of Delegate functions in VB.net isn't the greatest. However I have read over all of the MSDN documentation and other relevant resources on the web, but I'm still stuck as to how to translate this particular line. So far all of my attempts have resulted in either the a cast error (see below) or no call to GetAuthorization. The Code (vb.net on .net 3.5) Private Function CreateAuthenticator() As OAuth2Authenticator(Of WebServerClient) ' Register the authenticator. Dim client As New WebServerClient(GoogleAuthenticationServer.Description, oauth.ClientID, oauth.ClientSecret) Dim authDelegate As Func(Of WebServerClient, IAuthorizationState) = AddressOf GetAuthorization Dim authenticator = New OAuth2Authenticator(Of WebServerClient)(client, authDelegate) With {.NoCaching = True} 'Dim authenticator = New OAuth2Authenticator(Of WebServerClient)(client, GetAuthorization(client)) With {.NoCaching = True} 'Dim authenticator = New OAuth2Authenticator(Of WebServerClient)(client, New Func(Of WebServerClient, IAuthorizationState)(Function(c) GetAuthorization(c))) With {.NoCaching = True} 'Dim authenticator = New OAuth2Authenticator(Of WebServerClient)(client, New Func(Of WebServerClient, IAuthorizationState)(AddressOf GetAuthorization)) With {.NoCaching = True} Return authenticator End Function Private Function GetAuthorization(arg As WebServerClient) As IAuthorizationState ' If this user is already authenticated, then just return the auth state. Dim state As IAuthorizationState = AuthState If (Not state Is Nothing) Then Return state End If ' Check if an authorization request already is in progress. state = arg.ProcessUserAuthorization(New HttpRequestInfo(HttpContext.Current.Request)) If (state IsNot Nothing) Then If ((String.IsNullOrEmpty(state.AccessToken) = False Or String.IsNullOrEmpty(state.RefreshToken) = False)) Then ' Store Credentials HttpContext.Current.Session("AUTH_STATE") = state _state = state Return state End If End If ' Otherwise do a new authorization request. Dim scope As String = AnalyticsService.Scopes.AnalyticsReadonly.GetStringValue() Dim _response As OutgoingWebResponse = arg.PrepareRequestUserAuthorization(New String() {scope}) ' Add Offline Access and forced Approval _response.Headers("location") += "&access_type=offline&approval_prompt=force" _response.Send() ' Will throw a ThreadAbortException to prevent sending another response. Return Nothing End Function The Cast Error Server Error in '/' Application. Unable to cast object of type 'DotNetOpenAuth.OAuth2.AuthorizationState' to type 'System.Func`2[DotNetOpenAuth.OAuth2.WebServerClient,DotNetOpenAuth.OAuth2.IAuthorizationState]'. Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.InvalidCastException: Unable to cast object of type 'DotNetOpenAuth.OAuth2.AuthorizationState' to type 'System.Func`2[DotNetOpenAuth.OAuth2.WebServerClient,DotNetOpenAuth.OAuth2.IAuthorizationState]'. I've spent the better part of a day on this, and it's starting to drive me nuts. Help is much appreciated.

  Read the article

• How to stop worker threads in a multithreaded Windows service on service stop

  - by RobW

  I have a Windows service that uses the producer/consumer queue model with multiple worker threads processing tasks off a queue. These tasks can be very long running, in the order of many minutes if not hours, and do not involve loops. My question is about the best way to handle the service stop to gracefully end processing on these worker threads. I have read in another SO question that using thread.Abort() is a sign of bad design, but it seems that the service OnStop() method is only given a limited amount of time to finish before the service is terminated. I can do sufficient clean-up in the catch for ThreadAbortException (there is no danger of inconsistent state) so calling thread.Abort() on the worker threads seems OK to me. Is it? What are the alternatives?

  Read the article

• How to Automatically re-raise Exceptions

  - by Brian

  If you wrap a call to HttpResponse.End within a try catch block, the ThreadAbortException would automatically be re-raised. I assume this is the case even if you wrap the try catch block in a try catch block. How can I accomplish the same thing? I do not have a real-world application for this. namespace Program { class ReJoice { public void End() //This does not automatically re-raise the exception if caught. { throw new Exception(); } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { try { ReJoice x = new ReJoice(); x.End(); } catch (Exception e) {} } } }

  Read the article

• .Net Thread Synchronization

  - by user209293

  Hello, I am planning to use Auto reset Event Handle for Inter Thread communication. EventWaitHandle handle = new EventWaitHandle(false, EventResetMode.AutoReset); My producer thread code look like below produceSomething(); handle.Set(); In the consumer thread, I have to download data for every one minute or when prodcuer is called Set method try { while(true) { handle.WaitOne(60000, false); doSomething(); - downloads data from internet. takes lot of time to complete it. } } catch(ThreadAbortException) { cleanup(); } My question is if consumer thread is running doSomething funtion and producer calls set function, what would be state of Auto reset event object? My requreiment is as soon as producer calls set method i have to downlaod fresh data from intenet . If doSomething function is running, when Producer calls set method, i have to interrupt it and call again. Any help is appreciated. Regards Raju

  Read the article

• Symbols taking very, very long time to load when hosting ASP.NET app in IIS

  - by joshcomley

  Hi, I'm hosting my project using IIS, running from Visual Studio. Whenever I recompile, on the first run it takes several minutes (on a not awful machine) to load all the symbols. Please see http://joshz.com/so/symbols.html for a list of the symbols that are loaded. At the bottom there is a ThreadAbortException, I'm not sure if this is playing a role. Any advice would be greatly appreciated; it's slowing my day down enormously! As a note: the project has never run quickly since I joined the company and started working with it.

  Read the article

• Why a thread is aborted in ASP.NET MVC (again)?

  - by Dario Solera

  Here is what I do in a controller action: create and start a new Thread that does a relatively long processing task (~30 seconds on average, but might be several minutes) immediately return the page response so the user knows processing has started (trivially, a Json with a task ID for polling purposes). At some random point, ThreadAbortException is thrown, so the async task does not complete. The exception is not thrown every time, it just happens randomly roughly 25% of the times. Points to note: I'm not calling Response.End or Response.Redirect - there isn't even a request running when the exception is thrown I tried using ThreadPool and I got the same behavior I know running threads in ASP.NET has several caveats but I don't care right now Any suggestion?

  Read the article

• When is it safe to do a Response.Redirect() without throwing an exception?

  - by DDechant

  I have an intermediary class extending System.Web.UI.Page for all of my pages that require authentication. The class mostly does custom authentication handling. When a user with insufficient access attempts to visit a page, I try to redirect the user back to the login page while preventing any further page events from being executed (ie. Page_load). The first solution that came to mind was the default implementation of Response.Redirect. Of course the downside to this is the possibility of ThreadAbortExceptions being thrown. So my question is this: When (if at all) during the page life cycle is it actually safe to execute Response.Redirect() without ThreadAbortException ever being thrown? public class CustomPage : System.Web.UI.Page { protected override void OnInit(EventArgs e) { base.OnInit(e); if (!IsValid()) Response.Redirect("login.aspx", true); } }

  Read the article

• Double type returns -1.#IND/NaN error when calculating pi iteratively

  - by Draak

  I am working through a problem for my MCTS certification. The program has to calculate pi until the user presses a key, at which point the thread is aborted, the result returned to the main thread and printed in the console. Simple enough, right? This exercise is really meant to be about threading, but I'm running into another problem. The procedure that calculates pi returns -1.#IND. I've read some of the material on the web about this error, but I'm still not sure how to fix it. When I change double to Decimal type, I unsurprisingly get Overflow Exception very quickly. So, the question is how do I store the numbers correctly? Do I have to create a class to somehow store parts of the number when it gets too big to be contained in a Decimal? Class PiCalculator Dim a As Double = 1 Dim b As Double = 1 / Math.Sqrt(2) Dim t As Double = 1 / 4 Dim p As Double = 1 Dim pi As Double Dim callback As DelegateResult Sub New(ByVal _callback As DelegateResult) callback = _callback End Sub Sub Calculate() Try Do While True Dim a1 = (a + b) / 2 Dim b1 = Math.Sqrt(a * b) Dim t1 = t - p * (a - a1) ^ 2 Dim p1 = 2 * p a = a1 b = b1 t = t1 p = p1 pi = ((a + b) ^ 2) / (4 * t) Loop Catch ex As ThreadAbortException Finally callback(pi) End Try End Sub End Class

  Read the article

• .NET Thread.Abort again

  - by hoodoos

  Again I want to talk about safety of the Thread.Abort function. I was interested to have some way to abort operations which I can't control really and don't want actually, but I want to have my threads free as soon as possible to prevent thread thirsty of my application. So I wrote some test code to see if it's possible to use Thread.Abort and have the aborting thread clean up resources propertly. Here's code: int threadRunCount = 0; int threadAbortCount = 0; int threadFinallyCount = 0; int iterations = 0; while( true ) { Thread t = new Thread( () => { threadRunCount++; try { Thread.Sleep( Random.Next( 45, 55 ) ); } catch( ThreadAbortException ) { threadAbortCount++; } finally { threadFinallyCount++; } } ); t.Start(); Thread.Sleep( 45 ); t.Abort(); iterations++; } So, so far this code worked for about 5 mins, and threadRunCount was always equal to threadFinally and threadAbort was somewhat lower in number, because some threads completed with no abort or probably got aborted in finally. So the question is, do I miss something?

  Read the article

• In .NET when Aborting Thread, can this piece of code get corrupted?

  - by bosko

  Little intro: In complex multithreaded aplication (enterprise service bus EBS), I need to use Thread.Abort, because this EBS accepts user written modules which communicates with hardware security modules. So if this module gets deadlocked or hardware stops responding - i need to just unload this module and rest of this server aplication must keep runnnig. So there is abort sync mechanism which ensures that code can be aborted only in user section and this section must be marked as AbortAble. If this happen there is possibility that ThreadAbortException will be thrown in this pieace of code: public void StopAbortSection() { var id = Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId; lock (threadIdMap[id]) { .... } } If module is on AbortSection and Aplication decides to abort module, but after this decision but before actual Thread.Abort, module enters NonAbortableSection by calling this method, but lock is actualy taken on that locking object. So lock will block until Abort or abort can be executed before reaching this block by this code. But Object with this method is essential and i need to be sure that this pieace of code is safe to abort in any moment. Probably i have to mention that threadIdMap is Dictionary(int,ManualResetEvent), so locking object is instance of ManualResetEvent. I hope you now understad my question. Sorry for its largeness.

  Read the article

• Do I need Response.End() in ASP.Net 2.0

  - by Hamish Grubijan

  Hi, I am just starting with ASP.Net. I copied a ex-co-worker's code (from .Net 1.1 era) and it has a Response.End(); in case of an error. There is also a: catch (Exception ex) { Response.Write(ex.Message); Response.End(); } at the end of Page_Load(object sender, System.EventArgs e) which always appends "Thread was aborted." or something like that at the end. I suspect that this worked differently before, or the error conditions were not tested very well. Anyhow, I was able to stop using Response.End(); in case when I do not like the GET parameters, and use return; instead. It seemed to do the right think in a simple case. Is this Ok in general? There are some problems with the code I copied, but I do not want to do a rewrite; I just want to get it running first and find wrinkles later. The Response.End(); caused a mental block for me, however, so I want to figure it out. I want to keep the catch all clause just in case, at least for now. I could also end the method with: catch (System.Threading.ThreadAbortException) { Response.End(); } catch (Exception ex) { Response.Write(ex.Message); Response.End(); } but that just seems extremely stupid, once you think about all of the exceptions being generated. Please give me a few words of wisdom. Feel free to ask if something is not clear. Thanks! P.S. Ex-coworker was not fired and is a good coder - one more reason to reuse his example.

  Read the article

• Validate a XDocument against schema without the ValidationEventHandler (for use in a HTTP handler)

  - by Vaibhav Garg

  Hi everyone, (I am new to Schema validation) Regarding the following method, System.Xml.Schema.Extensions.Validate( ByVal source As System.Xml.Linq.XDocument, ByVal schemas As System.Xml.Schema.XmlSchemaSet, ByVal validationEventHandler As System.Xml.Schema.ValidationEventHandler, ByVal addSchemaInfo As Boolean) I am using it as follows inside a IHttpHandler - Try Dim xsd As XmlReader = XmlReader.Create(context.Server.MapPath("~/App_Data/MySchema.xsd")) Dim schemas As New XmlSchemaSet() : schemas.Add("myNameSpace", xsd) : xsd.Close() myXDoxumentOdj.Validate(schemas, Function(s As Object, e As ValidationEventArgs) SchemaError(s, e, context), True) Catch ex1 As Threading.ThreadAbortException 'manage schema error' Return Catch ex As Exception 'manage other errors' End Try The handler- Function SchemaError(ByVal s As Object, ByVal e As ValidationEventArgs, ByVal c As HttpContext) As Object If c Is Nothing Then c = HttpContext.Current If c IsNot Nothing Then HttpContext.Current.Response.Write(e.Message) HttpContext.Current.Response.End() End If Return New Object() End Function This is working fine for me at present but looks very weak. I do get errors when I feed it bad XML. But i want to implement it in a more elegant way. This looks like it would break for large XML etc. Is there some way to validate without the handler so that I get the document validated in one go and then deal with errors? To me it looks Async such that the call to Validate() would pass and some non deterministic time later the handler would get called with the result/errors. Is that right? Thanks and sorry for any goofy mistakes :).

  Read the article

• Thread.Interrupt Is Evil

  - by Alois Kraus

  Recently I have found an interesting issue with Thread.Interrupt during application shutdown. Some application was crashing once a week and we had not really a clue what was the issue. Since it happened not very often it was left as is until we have got some memory dumps during the crash. A memory dump usually means WindDbg which I really like to use (I know I am one of the very few fans of it).  After a quick analysis I did find that the main thread already had exited and the thread with the crash was stuck in a Monitor.Wait. Strange Indeed. Running the application a few thousand times under the debugger would potentially not have shown me what the reason was so I decided to what I call constructive debugging. I did create a simple Console application project and try to simulate the exact circumstances when the crash did happen from the information I have via memory dump and source code reading. The thread that was  crashing was actually MS code from an old version of the Microsoft Caching Application Block. From reading the code I could conclude that the main thread did call the Dispose method on the CacheManger class which did call Thread.Interrupt on the cache scavenger thread which was just waiting for work to do. My first version of the repro looked like this   static void Main(string[] args) { Thread t = new Thread(ThreadFunc) { IsBackground = true, Name = "Test Thread" }; t.Start(); Console.WriteLine("Interrupt Thread"); t.Interrupt(); } static void ThreadFunc() { while (true) { object value = Dequeue(); // block until unblocked or awaken via ThreadInterruptedException } } static object WaitObject = new object(); static object Dequeue() { object lret = "got value"; try { lock (WaitObject) { } } catch (ThreadInterruptedException) { Console.WriteLine("Got ThreadInterruptException"); lret = null; } return lret; } I do start a background thread and call Thread.Interrupt on it and then directly let the application terminate. The thread in the meantime does plenty of Monitor.Enter/Leave calls to simulate work on it. This first version did not crash. So I need to dig deeper. From the memory dump I did know that the finalizer thread was doing just some critical finalizers which were closing file handles. Ok lets add some long running finalizers to the sample. class FinalizableObject : CriticalFinalizerObject { ~FinalizableObject() { Console.WriteLine("Hi we are waiting to finalize now and block the finalizer thread for 5s."); Thread.Sleep(5000); } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { FinalizableObject fin = new FinalizableObject(); Thread t = new Thread(ThreadFunc) { IsBackground = true, Name = "Test Thread" }; t.Start(); Console.WriteLine("Interrupt Thread"); t.Interrupt(); GC.KeepAlive(fin); // prevent finalizing it too early // After leaving main the other thread is woken up via Thread.Abort // while we are finalizing. This causes a stackoverflow in the CLR ThreadAbortException handling at this time. } With this changed Main method and a blocking critical finalizer I did get my crash just like the real application. The funny thing is that this is actually a CLR bug. When the main method is left the CLR does suspend all threads except the finalizer thread and declares all objects as garbage. After the normal finalizers were called the critical finalizers are executed to e.g. free OS handles (usually). Remember that I did call Thread.Interrupt as one of the last methods in the Main method. The Interrupt method is actually asynchronous and does wake a thread up and throws a ThreadInterruptedException only once unlike Thread.Abort which does rethrow the exception when an exception handling clause is left. It seems that the CLR does not expect that a frozen thread does wake up again while the critical finalizers are executed. While trying to raise a ThreadInterrupedException the CLR goes down with an stack overflow. Ups not so nice. Why has this nobody noticed for years is my next question. As it turned out this error does only happen on the CLR for .NET 4.0 (x86 and x64). It does not show up in earlier or later versions of the CLR. I have reported this issue on connect here but so far it was not confirmed as a CLR bug. But I would be surprised if my console application was to blame for a stack overflow in my test thread in a Monitor.Wait call. What is the moral of this story? Thread.Abort is evil but Thread.Interrupt is too. It is so evil that even the CLR of .NET 4.0 contains a race condition during the CLR shutdown. When the CLR gurus can get it wrong the chances are high that you get it wrong too when you use this constructs. If you do not believe me see what Patrick Smacchia does blog about Thread.Abort and List.Sort. Not only the CLR creators can get it wrong. The BCL writers do sometimes have a hard time with correct exception handling as well. If you do tell me that you use Thread.Abort frequently and never had problems with it I do suspect that you do not have looked deep enough into your application to find such sporadic errors.

  Read the article

• .NET threading: how can I capture an abort on an unstarted thread?

  - by Groxx

  I have a chunk of threads I wish to run in order, on an ASP site running .NET 2.0 with Visual Studio 2008 (no idea how much all that matters, but there it is), and they may have aborted-clean-up code which should be run regardless of how far through their task they are. So I make a thread like this: Thread t = new Thread(delegate() { try { /* do things */ System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("try"); } catch (ThreadAbortException) { /* cleanup */ System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("catch"); } }); Now, if I wish to abort the set of threads part way through, the cleanup may still be desirable later on down the line. Looking through MSDN implies you can .Abort() a thread that has not started, and then .Start() it, at which point it will receive the exception and perform normally. Or you can .Join() the aborted thread to wait for it to finish aborting. Presumably you can combine them. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ty8d3wta(v=VS.80).aspx To wait until a thread has aborted, you can call the Join method on the thread after calling the Abort method, but there is no guarantee the wait will end. If Abort is called on a thread that has not been started, the thread will abort when Start is called. If Abort is called on a thread that is blocked or is sleeping, the thread is interrupted and then aborted. Now, when I debug and step through this code: t.Abort(); // ThreadState == Unstarted | AbortRequested t.Start(); // throws ThreadStartException: "Thread failed to start." // so I comment it out, and t.Join(); // throws ThreadStateException: "Thread has not been started." At no point do I see any output, nor do any breakpoints on either the try or catch block get reached. Oddly, ThreadStartException is not listed as a possible throw of .Start(), from here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/a9fyxz7d(v=VS.80).aspx (or any other version) I understand this could be avoided by having a start parameter, which states if the thread should jump to cleanup code, and foregoing the Abort call (which is probably what I'll do). And I could .Start() the thread, and then .Abort() it. But as an indeterminate amount of time may pass between .Start and .Abort, I'm considering it unreliable, and the documentation seems to say my original method should work. Am I missing something? Is the documentation wrong? edit: ow. And you can't call .Start(param) on a non-parameterized Thread(Start). Is there a way to find out if a thread is parameterized or not, aside from trial and error? I see a private m_Delegate, but nothing public...

  Read the article

1 2  | Next Page >