我为此创建了一个扩展方法，它使用SemaphoreSlim，还允许设置最大并行度

    /// <summary>
    /// Concurrently Executes async actions for each item of <see cref="IEnumerable<typeparamref name="T"/>
    /// </summary>
    /// <typeparam name="T">Type of IEnumerable</typeparam>
    /// <param name="enumerable">instance of <see cref="IEnumerable<typeparamref name="T"/>"/></param>
    /// <param name="action">an async <see cref="Action" /> to execute</param>
    /// <param name="maxDegreeOfParallelism">Optional, An integer that represents the maximum degree of parallelism,
    /// Must be grater than 0</param>
    /// <returns>A Task representing an async operation</returns>
    /// <exception cref="ArgumentOutOfRangeException">If the maxActionsToRunInParallel is less than 1</exception>
    public static async Task ForEachAsyncConcurrent<T>(
        this IEnumerable<T> enumerable,
        Func<T, Task> action,
        int? maxDegreeOfParallelism = null)
    {
        if (maxDegreeOfParallelism.HasValue)
        {
            using (var semaphoreSlim = new SemaphoreSlim(
                maxDegreeOfParallelism.Value, maxDegreeOfParallelism.Value))
            {
                var tasksWithThrottler = new List<Task>();

                foreach (var item in enumerable)
                {
                    // Increment the number of currently running tasks and wait if they are more than limit.
                    await semaphoreSlim.WaitAsync();

                    tasksWithThrottler.Add(Task.Run(async () =>
                    {
                        await action(item).ContinueWith(res =>
                        {
                            // action is completed, so decrement the number of currently running tasks
                            semaphoreSlim.Release();
                        });
                    }));
                }

                // Wait for all tasks to complete.
                await Task.WhenAll(tasksWithThrottler.ToArray());
            }
        }
        else
        {
            await Task.WhenAll(enumerable.Select(item => action(item)));
        }
    }

示例用法:

await enumerable.ForEachAsyncConcurrent(
    async item =>
    {
        await SomeAsyncMethod(item);
    },
    5);

如果你只想要简单的并行，你可以这样做:

var bag = new ConcurrentBag<object>();
var tasks = myCollection.Select(async item =>
{
  // some pre stuff
  var response = await GetData(item);
  bag.Add(response);
  // some post stuff
});
await Task.WhenAll(tasks);
var count = bag.Count;

如果你需要更复杂的东西，看看Stephen Toub的ForEachAsync帖子。

一个新的。net 6 api是Parallel。ForEachAsync，一种调度异步工作的方法，允许你控制并行度:

var urls = new [] 
{
    "https://dotnet.microsoft.com",
    "https://www.microsoft.com",
    "https://stackoverflow.com"
};

var client = new HttpClient();

var options = new ParallelOptions { MaxDegreeOfParallelism = 2 };
await Parallel.ForEachAsync(urls, options, async (url, token) =>
{
    var targetPath = Path.Combine(Path.GetTempPath(), "http_cache", url);

    var response = await client.GetAsync(url);

    if (response.IsSuccessStatusCode)
    {
        using var target = File.OpenWrite(targetPath);

        await response.Content.CopyToAsync(target);
    }
});

另一个例子是Scott Hanselman的博客。

来源，供参考。

下面的设置是使用IAsyncEnumerable，但可以通过更改类型和删除foreach上的“await”来修改为使用IEnumerable。它更适合于大型数据集，而不是创建无数并行任务，然后等待它们全部完成。

    public static async Task ForEachAsyncConcurrent<T>(this IAsyncEnumerable<T> enumerable, Func<T, Task> action, int maxDegreeOfParallelism, int? boundedCapacity = null)
    {
        ActionBlock<T> block = new ActionBlock<T>(
           action, 
           new ExecutionDataflowBlockOptions 
           { 
             MaxDegreeOfParallelism = maxDegreeOfParallelism, 
             BoundedCapacity = boundedCapacity ?? maxDegreeOfParallelism * 3 
           });

        await foreach (T item in enumerable)
        {
           await block.SendAsync(item).ConfigureAwait(false);
        }

        block.Complete();
        await block.Completion;
    }

在接受的应答中，ConcurrentBag不是必需的。 下面是一个没有它的实现:

var tasks = myCollection.Select(GetData).ToList();
await Task.WhenAll(tasks);
var results = tasks.Select(t => t.Result);

任何"// some pre stuff"和"// some post stuff"都可以进入GetData实现(或另一个调用GetData的方法)

除了更短之外，没有使用“async void”lambda，这是一种反模式。

从其他答案和接受的asnwer引用的文章编译的最简单的可能扩展方法:

public static async Task ParallelForEachAsync<T>(this IEnumerable<T> source, Func<T, Task> asyncAction, int maxDegreeOfParallelism)
{
    var throttler = new SemaphoreSlim(initialCount: maxDegreeOfParallelism);
    var tasks = source.Select(async item =>
    {
        await throttler.WaitAsync();
        try
        {
            await asyncAction(item).ConfigureAwait(false);
        }
        finally
        {
            throttler.Release();
        }
    });
    await Task.WhenAll(tasks);
}

更新:这是一个简单的修改，也支持取消令牌，就像在评论中要求的(未经测试)

public static async Task ParallelForEachAsync<T>(this IEnumerable<T> source, Func<T, CancellationToken, Task> asyncAction, int maxDegreeOfParallelism, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
    var throttler = new SemaphoreSlim(initialCount: maxDegreeOfParallelism);
    var tasks = source.Select(async item =>
    {
        await throttler.WaitAsync(cancellationToken);
        if (cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested) return;

        try
        {
            await asyncAction(item, cancellationToken).ConfigureAwait(false);
        }
        finally
        {
            throttler.Release();
        }
    });
    await Task.WhenAll(tasks);
}