I have a .Net Compact Framework 3.5 application that uses Nlog version 2.0 to log Info, Error and Fatal Exceptions. Most of the time the logging works as expected and logs fatal exceptions before crashing. But at times it is observed that application crashes without leaving any signs of an error/exception.
Let me elaborate the scenario:
The Application creates few threads, all the threads have try-catch block added at the beginning of their call stacks. And hence log fetal
exceptions before crashing.
The main thread have 'AppDomain.CurrentDomain.UnhandledException' to log any fetal exceptions on its call stack.
The application does load some third party managed dlls and performs some PInvokes on Wnce dlls.
But I believe even if some third party DLL crashes (or let’s say it creates a new thread which crashes), I should at least see some ThreadAbortExceptions in the log, logged by my application's thread before exiting.
The key configuration parameters of Nlog are:
a. FileTarget.AutoFlush = true
b. FileTarget.KeepFileOpen= false
c. FileTarget is not wrapped in any async wrapper or in any buffered
wrapper.
Please let me know if I'm missing anything.
Possible reasons for the crash include OutOfMemory exception or StackOverflowException. From the documentation for the latter:
Version Considerations
In prior versions of the .NET Framework, your application could catch a StackOverflowException object (for example, to recover from unbounded recursion). However, that practice is currently discouraged because significant additional code is required to reliably catch a stack overflow exception and continue program execution.
Starting with the .NET Framework version 2.0, a StackOverflowException object cannot be caught by a try-catch block and the corresponding process is terminated by default. Consequently, users are advised to write their code to detect and prevent a stack overflow. For example, if your application depends on recursion, use a counter or a state condition to terminate the recursive loop. Note that an application that hosts the common language runtime (CLR) can specify that the CLR unload the application domain where the stack overflow exception occurs and let the corresponding process continue. For more information, see ICLRPolicyManager Interface and Hosting Overview.
Related
My main program is an ASP.Net Core Web API that has a third party library in a hosted service. The third party library is initializing fine but then it throws some errors sometime throughout its lifecycle.
It supplies a way of hooking into the object via an event and will let me know what the error is so that I can handle it but it still throws in the third party library..
Since I am handling the event myself, I want to completely ignore these errors that are occurring in this library. Is there anyway that I can do that?
I have already tried to add a global exception handler and the strange thing is, this exception handler never gets hit. The only way I can get the exception is to set my exception settings to break when CLR exceptions happen like in the picture above
This does not crash my program. For some reason, the program just hangs. When I turn off CLR exceptions in the "Break when thrown" window, then the program runs just fine. It is almost like visual studio is doing something special to handle these types of exceptions that a console version cannot do
The only way that I can seem to get a console version of this running, is attach a visual studio debugger to the process and when the exception is hit, press the green play button "Continue" in visual studio. Otherwise the application just seems to hang on the exception being thrown by the third party library.
The application will run fine as long as visual studio is attached and the CLR break exceptions are not checked
Does anyone know how to make sure that these types of exceptions do not hang the program when released?
Additional Info:
The third party library is a .NET Framework 4 library
The Asp.Net project is targetting "net5.0-windows"
The 3rd party class is probably using multi-threading
if it helps, this is how I am creating the third party class
Handling NullReferenceException in release code（Official advice）
It's usually better to avoid a NullReferenceException than to handle it after it occurs. Handling an exception can make your code harder to maintain and understand, and can sometimes introduce other bugs. A NullReferenceException is often a non-recoverable error. In these cases, letting the exception stop the app might be the best alternative.
However, there are many situations where handling the error can be useful:
1.Your app can ignore objects that are null. For example, if your app retrieves and processes records in a database, you might be able to ignore some number of bad records that result in null objects. Recording the bad data in a log file or in the application UI might be all you have to do.
2.You can recover from the exception. For example, a call to a web service that returns a reference type might return null if the connection is lost or the connection times out. You can attempt to reestablish the connection and try the call again.
3.You can restore the state of your app to a valid state. For example, you might be performing a multi-step task that requires you to save information to a data store before you call a method that throws a NullReferenceException. If the uninitialized object would corrupt the data record, you can remove the previous data before you close the app.
4.You want to report the exception. For example, if the error was caused by a mistake from the user of your app, you can generate a message to help them supply the correct information. You can also log information about the error to help you fix the problem. Some frameworks, like ASP.NET, have a high-level exception handler that captures all errors to that the app never crashes; in that case, logging the exception might be the only way you can know that it occurs.
So after days of research I've finally found an event to hook into to give you error messages from ANY source no matter how many level deep you go in threads.
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.FirstChanceException += CurrentDomain_FirstChanceException;
Hooking into this event it will allow you to see errors from every library and every thread. Simply place the above into you program.cs (or whatever startup file you have) and magically you will be flooded with all of the unknown errors from all of the 3rd party libraries you thought were once flawless.
private static void CurrentDomain_FirstChanceException(object sender, System.Runtime.ExceptionServices.FirstChanceExceptionEventArgs e)
{
Console.WriteLine(e.Exception.Message, e.Exception.StackTrace);
}
I've done so with the following method and low and behold. The third party library was trying to reference another project in an unsafe way and throwing an error. Since I didn't need this other project reference the built exe did not have a reference to this assembly because I had no direct reference to it in the project (darn smarty pants who need to optimize everything). I was able to run correctly because in my visual studio solution, I had a reference to this other project. So the third party library would pick up on it as soon as visual studio connected with the debugger through some sort of dark magic.
Anyways, I made a throw away object that used the project that was required and the issue was solved.
I really hope that this helps someone else and saves them the days it took me to find this.
My goal is to influence the error descriptions that appear in BizTalk Administration Console in the Error Information tab of suspended instance windows, after errors occur in my custom functoids. If possible, I would also like the ErrorReport.Description promoted property to display this error description on the failed message.
I've read everything I can find about custom functoid development, but I can't find much about error handling within them. In particular, whenever my functoids throw exceptions, I see the boilerplate "Exception has been thrown at the target of an invocation" message that occurs whenever exceptions occur through reflection, rather than the message on the exception itself.
I had hoped to find something within the BaseFunctoid class framework that would allow me to submit an error string, so as to traverse the reflection boundary. Is there some way to pass error information from within a custom functoid, such that the BizTalk Administration Console will display it?
If I emulate the approach taken by DatabaseLookupFunctoid and DatabaseErrorExtractFunctoid, is there some way I can fail the map with the extracted error, rather than mapping it to a field on the destination schema as is shown in its examples?
The simplest way to do this is using custom C#, writing something like this in your code:
System.Diagnostics.EventLog.WriteEntry("EVENT_LOG_SOURCE", "Error message...", System.Diagnostics.EventLogEntryType.Error);
As Johns-305 mentions, you need to make sure your event source is registered (e.g. System.Diagnostics.EventLog.CreateEventSource("EVENT_LOG_SOURCE", "Application") - but this should really be done as part of your installation steps with an EventLogInstaller or some kind of script to set up the environment). It's certainly true that error handling in BizTalk is just .NET error handling, but one thing to keep in mind is that maps are actually executing as XSLT, and the context in which their executing can have a major impact on how exceptions and errors will be handled, particularly unhandled exceptions.
Orchestrations
If you're executing a transform in an orchestration that has exception handling in it, the exception thrown will be handled and may even fall into additional logging you have in the orchestration - in other words, executing a throw from a C# functiod will work the way you'd think it would work elsewhere in C#. However, I try to avoid this since you never know if a map will at some point be used else where and because exception handling in XSLT doesn't always work the way you'd think (see below).
Send/Receive Ports
Unfortunately, if you're executing a map on a send or receive port and throw an exception within it, you will almost definitely get very unhelpful error message in the event log and a suspended instance in the group hub. There is no easy, straightforward way to simple "cancel" a transform - XSLT 1.0 doesn't have any specified way of doing that (see for example Throwing an exception from XSLT). That leaves you with outputting an error string to a particular node in the output (and/or to the EventLog), or writing lots of completely custom XSLT to try to validate input, or designing your schemas properly and using a validating component where necessary. For example, if you have a node that must match a particular regex, or should never be empty, or should never repeat more than X times, make sure you set those restrictions on the schema and then make sure you pass it through the XmlValidator or similar before attempting to map.
The simplest answer is, you just do.
Keep in mind, there is nothing special at all about error handling in BizTalk apps, it's just regular plain old .Net error handling.
So, what you do is catch the error in you code, write the details to the Windows Event Log (be sure to create a custom Event Source) and...that's it. That is all I do. I don't worry about what appear in BT Admin specifically.strong text
I am studying OOP, and I did not understood the concept of exception.
What are the correct uses of exceptions?
Why use exceptions when you already know a possible exception?
For example, I have seen a code sample where the programmer needed to access a file, and had an exception in case the file does not exist. Something like "catch(fileDoesNotExist e)".
Why not use an if to verify before take the action? And use exception only for not known issues, for logging or error messages.
The idea behind the concept of exception was to decouple the error handling code from the "normal" behaviour flow control. That lets to manage/handle the exception further up the call stack.
Historically, with structured language, error handling code (file opening error,...) was mixed within the "business" application code. It was also painful to improve the code in order to manage new error codes.
What are the correct uses of exceptions?
If it is not normal that your file doesn't exist or cannot be opened => it is considered as an exceptional situation => exception => exception handler
Why use exceptions when you already know a possible exception?
To decouple the business application code from the error handling. That eases source code readibility and maintenance.
Exception:
Exception is that interrupt(break) the normal flow of the program.It's thrown at runtime.
Exception Handling
Exception Handling is a mechanism to handle runtime errors such as ClassNotFound, IO, SQL, Remote etc
In java there are mainly two types of exception that checked and unchecked.Other than Error is there
Hierarchy of Exception classes in Java
Why use exceptions when you already know a possible exception?
basically exception handling use to mainly,we assuming in that our particular code will occur some(NullPointerException,ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException etc..)exception.If we not Handle that,program will break.Actually that Exception it may or may not will happen.But so we need to handle normal flow of the program it occurred or not.Otherwise after that particular code section not executing.
How do I trap an Objective C crash (like a bad access or pointer error) so that instead of the application dying with a stack dump, it shows the user a friendlier message and lets them restart the application? That way, I can intercept those and have it email me anonymous errors to a web error log if the end user chose that option on their setup program.
I'm only concerned with OSX Cocoa apps at the moment.
A. Global Behavior
You can configure the exception behavior of an application as described here.
Additionally you can set a custom exception handler with NSSetUncaughtExceptionHandler.
B. Local Behavior
Of course you can handle exception locally with #try-#catch-#finally.
I have a .Net Compact Framework 3.5 application that uses Nlog version 2.0 to log Info, Error and Fatal Exceptions. Most of the time the logging works as expected and logs fatal exceptions before crashing. But at times it is observed that application crashes without leaving any signs of an error/exception.
Let me elaborate the scenario:
The Application creates few threads, all the threads have try-catch block added at the beginning of their call stacks. And hence log fetal
exceptions before crashing.
The main thread have 'AppDomain.CurrentDomain.UnhandledException' to log any fetal exceptions on its call stack.
The application does load some third party managed dlls and performs some PInvokes on Wnce dlls.
But I believe even if some third party DLL crashes (or let’s say it creates a new thread which crashes), I should at least see some ThreadAbortExceptions in the log, logged by my application's thread before exiting.
The key configuration parameters of Nlog are:
a. FileTarget.AutoFlush = true
b. FileTarget.KeepFileOpen= false
c. FileTarget is not wrapped in any async wrapper or in any buffered
wrapper.
Please let me know if I'm missing anything.
Possible reasons for the crash include OutOfMemory exception or StackOverflowException. From the documentation for the latter:
Version Considerations
In prior versions of the .NET Framework, your application could catch a StackOverflowException object (for example, to recover from unbounded recursion). However, that practice is currently discouraged because significant additional code is required to reliably catch a stack overflow exception and continue program execution.
Starting with the .NET Framework version 2.0, a StackOverflowException object cannot be caught by a try-catch block and the corresponding process is terminated by default. Consequently, users are advised to write their code to detect and prevent a stack overflow. For example, if your application depends on recursion, use a counter or a state condition to terminate the recursive loop. Note that an application that hosts the common language runtime (CLR) can specify that the CLR unload the application domain where the stack overflow exception occurs and let the corresponding process continue. For more information, see ICLRPolicyManager Interface and Hosting Overview.