Re: Hard killing a thread that's got resources open (SqlDataAdapter, SqlConnection)
- From: "Robin Tucker" <idontwanttobespammedanymore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 13:54:44 +0100
I don't think aborting a thread like this is a good idea (I've been through
the wringer with almost exactly the same issue). I think aborting any .NET
thread that is making use of COM resources is generally considered bad
practice with unpredictable results. Cancel the command by all means, but
let the thread run through to terminate normally.
"Sgt. Sausage" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3b690$42846fee$42a1e6c9$9583@xxxxxxxxxxx
> New to multi-threading (less than 24 hours at it <grin>)
>
> Anyway, it's all making sense, and working fairly well
> thus far, but I'm having a minor issue I'm not sure how
> to get around.
>
> I've got a form that uses SqlDataAdapter. It fires off
> a thread to fill a DataSet. Not a big deal, this works.
> I've also got a requirement that the Thread that's going
> off to do the work -- if it takes too long, it has to
> honor a timeout, or a cancellation request from the
> user.
>
> No problems here, I've got them both done and working
> to where they kill the Thread (Thread.Abort()). The
> problem is, that killing the Thread leaves the SqlDataAdapter
> in an inconsistent state, in particular, the SqlConnection
> for the Procedures (InsertProcedure, UpdateProcedure, etc) --
> the SqlConnection is still open, but hosed and can't be
> re-used.
>
> If I try to .Close() it, I get an error. It can't be closed.
>
> What I've done is to, just prior to the Thread.Abort(), I
> issue a Cancel() on the Command object. This seems to have
> fixed most of the issue, but not all. The Cancel() appears
> to only *attempt* a true cancel of the command, and is not
> actually successful every time. Of course, the other issue
> is that .Cancle returns void, so I don't have a return
> value to check if it actually was successful.
>
> So, I do
>
> theCommand.Cancel()
> Thread.Abort()
>
> and hope that the Command gets cancelled. Sometimes it's
> not. This leaves me holding the bag, as the next time
> the Adapter attempts to do something on that connection,
> it's hosed. There's a lot of data access going on with
> this form, so I keep reusing the same connection. That
> gets to be a problem when you try to reuse a hosed
> connection.
>
> Are you following me on this?
>
> What's a guy to do?
>
>
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: reference not removed revisited
- Next by Date: Re: Why can't overloads take into account the return type.
- Previous by thread: Hard killing a thread that's got resources open (SqlDataAdapter, SqlConnection)
- Next by thread: Re: Hard killing a thread that's got resources open (SqlDataAdapter, SqlConnection)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
