Using Asynchronous Methods in ASP.NET MVC 4http://www.asp.netMon, 10 Jun 2013 10:30:41 GMTumbracoComments for Using Asynchronous Methods in ASP.NET MVC 4enComment Posted by dizzyguyhttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Tue, 03 Jul 2012 08:50:18 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000015895Exactly the kind of tutorial I needed. Time to give it a go!

]]>Comment Posted by venkateswaranrhttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Thu, 02 Aug 2012 02:38:45 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000016098I thought it is something I will never get to know. You made it simple. Thanks

]]>Comment Posted by jcilibertihttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:31:42 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000016156Hi Rick,

Have you actually tested this under load?

I have been testing it and I find the Async Actions are much slower. In my test I have 2 Win Server 2012 servers each with 4 CPUs. I have one set up running a simple web API with an actions that sleeps for 1 second. The other server is set up with a MVC 4 app that calls the Web service on the other machine several times. I have two actions one set up as Async and the other normal. I have set up a 2 load tests. One always calls the Async version, the other calls the normal one. For the normal test the response times are about the same no matter how many users. For Async I start to see degradation after 4 concurrent users. Response times increase in a linear fashion as more users are added.

My advice is to stay away from async actions unless you have a real need. And then test test test to see if you get any benefit. If you start using this stuff for the hell of it, you will be in for a world of hurt.

]]>Comment Posted by RakeshYadavhttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Fri, 24 Aug 2012 17:17:02 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000016279A very useful article. Very systematic and indepth with simplyfied approach. Thank you Rick..... i would like to read more and more article on MVC.

Thank you very much

Rakesh

]]>Comment Posted by ricka6http://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:23:50 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000016330@jciliberti test under load.

I agree you need to test your app to verify the additional complexity is worth the effort.

]]>Comment Posted by lcdhttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Mon, 10 Sep 2012 17:38:00 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000016409Who can tell me what the following sentences mean.

When you’re doing asynchronous work, you’re not always using a thread. For example, when you make an asynchronous web service request, ASP.NET will not be using any threads between the async method call and the await. Using the thread pool to service requests with high latency can lead to a large memory footprint and poor utilization of the server hardware.

]]>Comment Posted by tayebihttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Thu, 27 Sep 2012 01:09:59 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000016532it's awesome. Thank you

]]>Comment Posted by davegrovehttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Thu, 25 Oct 2012 09:50:16 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000016679Hi Rick,

Found that the article really useful. Thanks very much.

I have a small concern about suffixing action names with "Async": if you follow this convention then unless your view names have the "Async" suffix you'll need to specify the view name when returning a view result.

Suffixing the name of a view with Async feels a bit strange. Any comments warmly welcomed.

Thanks,

Dave

]]>Comment Posted by ricka6http://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Wed, 14 Nov 2012 21:14:15 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000016804@davegrove ": if you follow this convention then unless your view names have the "Async" suffix you'll need to specify the view name when returning a view result.

I agree. The convention for .Net programming is to use the "Async" suffix but that makes for ugly view names.

]]>Comment Posted by dob_xmlhttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Fri, 07 Dec 2012 08:16:53 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000016960By using an async controller am I losing access to anything that I would have had when using a regular controller e.g. HttpContext.Current

And if so are there recommended patterns to overcome?

]]>Comment Posted by Stewa11http://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Tue, 08 Jan 2013 17:39:05 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000017138A great piece of work, but what do we do if we are stuck with VS 2012 4.0 for a while longer?

]]>Comment Posted by biggreycathttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:35:36 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000018162Hi Rick,

I think only a MVC action with at least one I/O bound (or network bound) operation and at least nother operations which can be executed in parallel with the I/O bound operation. Otherwise the performance can not be improved. So the performance of GetGizmosAsync in your article can not be improved while the performance of PWGasync can be improved.

Please let me know if I am wrong.

Limin

]]>Comment Posted by biggreycathttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:39:53 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000018163To make my previous comments clearer. No matter whether the action is CPU intensive or IO intensive, as long as the action can be finished in parallel. The performance of the task can be improved.

]]>Comment Posted by ricka6http://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Wed, 13 Feb 2013 20:59:13 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000018426@Stewa11: By using an async controller am I losing access to anything

No, there is only one controller in MVC now, the async controller.

@biggreycat network/IO parallel improve perf

There is a big improvement in response time for parallel operations. WHen there is only one I/O or network call, the user doesn't see any difference, but the server can be more efficient.

]]>Comment Posted by ricka6http://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Wed, 13 Feb 2013 21:00:29 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000018427@Stewa11 VS10

All of this works in VS10

]]>Comment Posted by anjankanthttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Wed, 03 Apr 2013 07:49:45 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000018841Thanks! very helpful to understand Asynchronous Controller in ASP.NET MVC.

]]>Comment Posted by anjankanthttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Wed, 03 Apr 2013 07:55:17 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000018842To understand more on Asynchronous Methods in ASP.NET MVC 4 you can visit the link msdn.microsoft.com/#performing_multiple_operations_in_parallel

]]>Comment Posted by urihttp://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/mvc-4/using-asynchronous-methods-in-aspnet-mvc-4Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:30:41 GMT00000000-0000-0000-0000000019274Thanks for the post, what happens if I have a long method and I close the browser before it completes? does it still finish?

I am building some reports and I don't care to wait until these are done, but just want to fire the process and then come back to get them.

If I use async and await and I close the browser, do I lose the processing instance?

]]>