Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest andreif

"Item is not completed. Removing would orphan asynchronous callbacks" exception

Recommended Posts

Guest andreif

This exceptions happens from time to time (when using price ticks streaming), I haven’t found any system yet:

System.InvalidOperationException: Item is not completed. Removing would orphan asynchronous callbacks.
at CityIndex.JsonClient.RequestCache.RemoveTDTO in c:\dev\workspace\CIAPI.CS\src\JsonClient\RequestCache.cs:line 109
at CityIndex.JsonClient.Client.<>cDisplayClassb`1.ba(IAsyncResult ac) in c:\dev\workspace\CIAPI.CS\src\JsonClient\Client.cs:line 375
at System.Net.LazyAsyncResult.Complete(IntPtr userToken)
at System.Net.ContextAwareResult.CaptureOrComplete(ExecutionContext& cachedContext, Boolean returnContext)
at System.Net.ContextAwareResult.FinishPostingAsyncOp()
at System.Net.HttpWebRequest.BeginGetRequestStream(AsyncCallback callback, Object state)
at CityIndex.JsonClient.Client.SetPostEntityAndEnqueueRequestTDTO in c:\dev\workspace\CIAPI.CS\src\JsonClient\Client.cs:line 359
at CityIndex.JsonClient.Client.CreateRequestTDTO in c:\dev\workspace\CIAPI.CS\src\JsonClient\Client.cs:line 424
at CityIndex.JsonClient.Client.BeginRequestTDTO in c:\dev\workspace\CIAPI.CS\src\JsonClient\Client.cs:line 282
at CityIndex.JsonClient.Client.RequestTDTO in c:\dev\workspace\CIAPI.CS\src\JsonClient\Client.cs:line 167
at CIAPI.Rpc.Client.LogIn(String userName, String password) in c:\dev\workspace\CIAPI.CS\src\CIAPI\Rpc\ApiClient.cs:line 67
at CityIndexScreensaver.Data.GetDataThreadEntry(String topic, Action onSuccess, Action`1 onError) in d:\Projects\CityIndexScreensaver\CityIndexScreensaver\Data.cs:line 29

Share this post


Link to post
Guest sky.sanders

I have not encountered this issue myself but the underlying plumbing for the code in question has undergone a radical refactor. The stack you show above kinda smells like something that would be eliminated by the refactor.

give me a comment if this pops up after using the latest source.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest andreif

I have not encountered this issue myself but the underlying plumbing for the code in question has undergone a radical refactor. The stack you show above kinda smells like something that would be eliminated by the refactor.

give me a comment if this pops up after using the latest source.

It seems this bug is gone.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
×