Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Post History
One of the legacy applications our team manages contained the following pattern (in the controller): // initialization private readonly IServiceScopeFactory _serviceScopeFactory; public FooCon...
#2: Post edited
by
Alexei
·
2022-01-10T16:42:09Z (almost 3 years ago)
minor formatting fix
- One of the legacy applications our team manages contained the following pattern (in the controller):
- ```
- // initialization
- private readonly IServiceScopeFactory _serviceScopeFactory;
- public FooController(IServiceScopeFactory serviceScopeFactory)
- {
- _serviceScopeFactory = serviceScopeFactory;
- }
- ```
- ```
- // IServiceScopeFactory was polluting the application services
- public IActionResult Foo()
- {
- Task.Run(() => _fooService.DoFoo(_serviceScopeFactory));
- return Ok();
- }
- ```
- The main purpose was to allow for fire-and-forget tasks because some of them could be quite long and the client should not wait for them to complete.
- I guess that this was required to still benefit from DI since all application logic relies on it.
- I have found this [SO question](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49318224/c-sharp-asp-net-core-fire-and-forget) dealing and [this answer](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49318224/c-sharp-asp-net-core-fire-and-forget) seems to do the trick, but votes = 0 suggests that was not found particularly useful (despite the 10K views).
**Is there a quick way to allow for fire-and-forget tasks with DI support? **
- One of the legacy applications our team manages contained the following pattern (in the controller):
- ```
- // initialization
- private readonly IServiceScopeFactory _serviceScopeFactory;
- public FooController(IServiceScopeFactory serviceScopeFactory)
- {
- _serviceScopeFactory = serviceScopeFactory;
- }
- ```
- ```
- // IServiceScopeFactory was polluting the application services
- public IActionResult Foo()
- {
- Task.Run(() => _fooService.DoFoo(_serviceScopeFactory));
- return Ok();
- }
- ```
- The main purpose was to allow for fire-and-forget tasks because some of them could be quite long and the client should not wait for them to complete.
- I guess that this was required to still benefit from DI since all application logic relies on it.
- I have found this [SO question](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49318224/c-sharp-asp-net-core-fire-and-forget) dealing and [this answer](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49318224/c-sharp-asp-net-core-fire-and-forget) seems to do the trick, but votes = 0 suggests that was not found particularly useful (despite the 10K views).
- **Is there a quick way to allow for fire-and-forget tasks with DI support?**
#1: Initial revision
by
Alexei
·
2022-01-10T16:34:12Z (almost 3 years ago)
How to create fire and forget tasks Q&A in ASP.NET Core with dependency injection support?
One of the legacy applications our team manages contained the following pattern (in the controller):
```
// initialization
private readonly IServiceScopeFactory _serviceScopeFactory;
public FooController(IServiceScopeFactory serviceScopeFactory)
{
_serviceScopeFactory = serviceScopeFactory;
}
```
```
// IServiceScopeFactory was polluting the application services
public IActionResult Foo()
{
Task.Run(() => _fooService.DoFoo(_serviceScopeFactory));
return Ok();
}
```
The main purpose was to allow for fire-and-forget tasks because some of them could be quite long and the client should not wait for them to complete.
I guess that this was required to still benefit from DI since all application logic relies on it.
I have found this [SO question](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49318224/c-sharp-asp-net-core-fire-and-forget) dealing and [this answer](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49318224/c-sharp-asp-net-core-fire-and-forget) seems to do the trick, but votes = 0 suggests that was not found particularly useful (despite the 10K views).
**Is there a quick way to allow for fire-and-forget tasks with DI support? **