threadpool

I have a NetworkStream which I read asynchronously (using async/await) await Task<int>.Factory.FromAsync((cb, state) => stream.BeginRead(buffer, offset, readLen - offset), stream.EndRead, null); Unfortunatly, an io exception sometimes occurs: "The I/O operation has been aborted because of either a thread exit or an application request." I believe I hit a requirement documented in Socke.EndReceive: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/w7wtt64b.aspx . Which states: All I/O initiated by a given thread is canceled when that thread exits. A pending asynchronous operation can fail if the thread

I've got a collection of records to process, and the processing can be parallelized, so I've created an ExecutorService (via Executors#newCachedThreadPool() ). The processing of an individual record is, itself, composed of parallelizable steps, so I'd like to use another ExecutorService . Is there an easy way to make this new one use the same underlying thread pool? Is it even desirable? Thanks. Yuval Adam To answer your question: no , two ExecutorService objects cannot share a thread pool. However you can share an ExecutorService between your objects, or alternatively create several Executors

Why the default value for CreationOptions of a Task created using Task.Run is DenyChildAttach rather than None ? Has it anything to do with making work with the new async and await in C# 5.0 simpler (by preventing you from escaping current scheduler of current context I guess)? Stephen Toub explains this well in his blog post on the subject . Parent and child tasks are somewhat common when using Task s in a parallel fashion. Note that when a parent Task has a child, the parent's completion semantics change subtly. Parent/child tasks are almost never used when using Task s in an async fashion.

I have a Windows Form with a ListView in Report Mode. For each item in the view, I need to perform a long running operation, the result of which is a number. The way I would do this in native win32 is to create a worker thread for each item (naively; of course I won't create an unbounded number of threads) and then MsgWaitForMultipleObjects() on the array of thread handles. As each calculation finishes, the threads signal and the main UI thread wakes up and updates. In the mean time, we pump messages so the UI thread remains responsive. Can anyone provide an example of how this might work in C

Is there a way to find out how many managed thread I use (including ThreadPool)? When I get count of unmanaged threads through GetProcess I have an insane number of it (21 at very beginning) That's not the way it works. Any thread in a managed program can execute managed code, including ones that were originally started as an unmanaged thread. Which most are, the main thread and any threadpool thread starts life executing purely unmanaged code. It thunks into managed code though the kind of gateway provided by Marshal.GetDelegateForFunctionPointer(). Seeing dozens of (otherwise inactive)

I have a following code example that is used in ASP.NET MVC application. The purpose of this code is to create "fire and forget" request for queuing some long running operation. public JsonResult SomeAction() { HttpContext ctx = HttpContext.Current; Task.Run(() => { HttpContext.Current = ctx; //Other long running code here. }); return Json("{ 'status': 'Work Queued' }"); } I know this is not a good way for handling HttpContext.Current in asynchronous code, but currently our implementation not allows us to do something else. I would like to understand how much this code is dangerous... The