Async Void, ASP.Net, and Count of Outstanding Operations
Microsoft made the decision to avoid as much backwards-compatibility issues as possible when bringing async
into ASP.NET. And they wanted to bring it to all of their "one ASP.NET" - so async
support for WinForms, MVC, WebAPI, SignalR, etc.
Historically, ASP.NET has supported clean asynchronous operations since .NET 2.0 via the Event-based Asynchronous Pattern (EAP), in which asynchronous components notify the SynchronizationContext
of their starting and completing. .NET 4.5 brings the first fairly hefty changes to this support, updating the core ASP.NET asynchronous types to better enable the Task-based Asynchronous Pattern (TAP, i.e., async
).
In the meantime, each different framework (WebForms, MVC, etc) all developed their own way to interact with that core, keeping backwards compatibility a priority. In an attempt to assist developers, the core ASP.NET SynchronizationContext
was enhanced with the exception you're seeing; it will catch many usage mistakes.
In the WebForms world, they have RegisterAsyncTask
but a lot of people just use async void
event handlers instead. So the ASP.NET SynchronizationContext
will allow async void
at appropriate times during the page lifecycle, and if you use it at an inappropriate time it will raise that exception.
In the MVC/WebAPI/SignalR world, the frameworks are more structured as services. So they were able to adopt async Task
in a very natural fashion, and the framework only has to deal with the returned Task
- a very clean abstraction. As a side note, you don't need AsyncController
anymore; MVC knows it's asynchronous just because it returns a Task
.
However, if you try to return a Task
and use async void
, that's not supported. And there's little reason to support it; it would be quite complex just to support users that aren't supposed to be doing that anyway. Remember that async void
notifies the core ASP.NET SynchronizationContext
directly, bypassing the MVC framework completely. The MVC framework understands how to wait for your Task
but it doesn't even know about the async void
, so it returns completion to the ASP.NET core which sees that it's not actually complete.
This can cause problems in two scenarios:
- You're trying to use some library or whatnot that uses
async void
. Sorry, but the plain fact is that the library is broken, and will have to be fixed. - You're wrapping an EAP component into a
Task
and properly usingawait
. This can cause problems because the EAP component interacts withSynchronizationContext
directly. In this case, the best solution is to modify the type so it supports TAP naturally or replace it with a TAP type (e.g.,HttpClient
instead ofWebClient
). Failing that, you can use TAP-over-APM instead of TAP-over-EAP. If neither of those are feasible, you can just useTask.Run
around your TAP-over-EAP wrapper.
Regarding "fire and forget":
I personally never use this phrase for async void
methods. For one thing, the error handling semantics most certainly do not fit in with the phrase "fire and forget"; I half-jokingly refer to async void
methods as "fire and crash". A true async
"fire and forget" method would be an async Task
method where you ignore the returned Task
rather than waiting for it.
That said, in ASP.NET you almost never want to return early from requests (which is what "fire and forget" implies). This answer is already too long, but I have a description of the problems on my blog, along with some code to support ASP.NET "fire and forget" if it's truly necessary.