Asynchronous and Concurrent WCF service Calls

Question

5.00/5 (1 vote)

See more:

Hi there,

I have a WCF webservice that executes a function that could take around 10 seconds to complete.

The client can call the WCF web service asynchronously by either executing the WCF calls via a thread pool, or using the generated asynchronous methods.

However I would like to execute the functions async AS WELL as concurrently, ie many calls to the same web service to be called very shortly after each other.

So for example wcf call 1 is initiated at 00:00
wcf call 2 is initiated at 00:01, then call 3 at 00:02 etc. They should complete at 00:10 then 00:11 and 00:12.

In the above examples. The web sservice is called asynch but executed sequentially, so call 1 is executed, 10 seconds late call 2 is executed and so forth.

I have change the max connection values, but to no avail.

I notice that if I create the WCF service function as a threaded function within the web service, i get the desired effect, ie "wcf call 2 is initiated at 00:01, then call 3 at 00:02 etc. They should complete at 00:10 then 00:11 and 00:12".

But is this really the way it should be done, is there any alternatives, that are "neater"?

Posted 12-Sep-11 9:58am

faroukg

Add a Solution

1 solution

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov · Answer 1 · 2011-09-12T16:39:00

My opinion is: all asynchronous calls dominated well threading was not introduced or well established. I don't see situation when those could beat threads. Threads are easier to implement as in a single thread all logic is sequential, they are well equipped with thread synchronization primitives and are ultimately more reliable is used properly.

The relatively costly operation of thread creation could be compensated by using thread pools or, better yet, by using "permanent threads" (threads with life time nearly the same of that of the whole process) throttled by thread synchronization and reused for repeated task.

I offer a very regular way of such throttling via a blocking message queue; see my Tips/Trick article: Simple Blocking Queue for Thread Communication and Inter-thread Invocation[^].

Please take a look at my past solutions on this and related topics:
How to get a keydown event to operate on a different thread in vb.net[^],
Control events not firing after enable disable + multithreading[^].

—SA