CODEWITHSUNDEEP
asp.net-mvcasynchronous.net-coretask-parallel-library
Bercovici Adrian
Bercovici Adrian

Reputation: 9360

Why would i use async instead of non async method

I do not understand , i have seen that there are many methods provided by the .Net Framework that have both async and non-async variants.

My question is what advantage does an async method provide me given the following constraints: - I will not fetch the Task.Result multiple times in the same method
- I am not using CPU-bound tasks (Task.Run(...))

I am in a MVC controller and i want to process a post request:

 [HttPost]
 [Route(..)]
 public async Task DoSomething(MyModel model)
 {  
    var asyncResult=await NETMethodAsync(model); //PostAsync,WriteAsync....
    var nonAsyncResult= NETMethod(model); //Post,Write,....etc..
    return result;
 }

In this case i will use the result only once in my method and i will not demand it multiple times ( where await would just give me the completed task-result) what is the difference ? I am basically creating a StateMachine in my MethodAsync for what? I could do the operation non-async faster i suppose.

If i am not delegating the method on a separate Task (like below) why would i use the async version ? I am asking because even the MVC Controller templates by default provide all CRUD operations using the async versions.

Task tsk=Task.Run(async()=> await MethodAsync() );

P.S In my scenario is it something that i missed.Is it faster to use the async (that internally spins a state-machine) ,then the non-async version ?

Upvotes: 2

Views: 3101

Answers (1)

Stephen Cleary
Stephen Cleary

Reputation: 456342

what is the difference?

Scalability. Specifically, synchronous methods block the calling thread, and asynchronous methods do not.

What this means (for an ASP.NET application) is that synchronous action methods block the request thread for the duration of the request, and that asynchronous action methods do not block that thread.

This, in turn, yields greater scalability. Since the thread pool is a limited resource (and in particular, since it has a limited thread injection rate), asynchronous code allows your app to handle greater load with fewer threads.

For more information, see the "Synchronous vs. Asynchronous Request Handling" section in my article on async ASP.NET; that section of the article applies to all server technologies, including ASP.NET Core. You can also check out this gist which demonstrates the scalability difference by limiting the thread pool growth rate. I haven't ported that example to ASP.NET Core, but it should be straightforward to do.

Upvotes: 12

Related Questions