有时，我需要在放弃之前将一个操作重试几次。我的代码是:
int retries = 3;
while(true) {
try {
DoSomething();
break; // success!
} catch {
if(--retries == 0) throw;
else Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
}
我想在一个通用的重试函数中重写这个:
TryThreeTimes(DoSomething);
这在c#中可行吗?TryThreeTimes()方法的代码是什么?
当前回答
对于那些既想对任何异常进行重试，又想显式设置异常类型的人，可以使用以下方法:
public class RetryManager
{
public void Do(Action action,
TimeSpan interval,
int retries = 3)
{
Try<object, Exception>(() => {
action();
return null;
}, interval, retries);
}
public T Do<T>(Func<T> action,
TimeSpan interval,
int retries = 3)
{
return Try<T, Exception>(
action
, interval
, retries);
}
public T Do<E, T>(Func<T> action,
TimeSpan interval,
int retries = 3) where E : Exception
{
return Try<T, E>(
action
, interval
, retries);
}
public void Do<E>(Action action,
TimeSpan interval,
int retries = 3) where E : Exception
{
Try<object, E>(() => {
action();
return null;
}, interval, retries);
}
private T Try<T, E>(Func<T> action,
TimeSpan interval,
int retries = 3) where E : Exception
{
var exceptions = new List<E>();
for (int retry = 0; retry < retries; retry++)
{
try
{
if (retry > 0)
Thread.Sleep(interval);
return action();
}
catch (E ex)
{
exceptions.Add(ex);
}
}
throw new AggregateException(exceptions);
}
}
其他回答
用c#、Java或其他语言简单地完成:
internal class ShouldRetryHandler {
private static int RETRIES_MAX_NUMBER = 3;
private static int numberTryes;
public static bool shouldRetry() {
var statusRetry = false;
if (numberTryes< RETRIES_MAX_NUMBER) {
numberTryes++;
statusRetry = true;
//log msg -> 'retry number' + numberTryes
}
else {
statusRetry = false;
//log msg -> 'reached retry number limit'
}
return statusRetry;
}
}
并在你的代码中简单地使用它:
void simpleMethod(){
//some code
if(ShouldRetryHandler.shouldRetry()){
//do some repetitive work
}
//some code
}
或者你可以在递归方法中使用它:
void recursiveMethod(){
//some code
if(ShouldRetryHandler.shouldRetry()){
recursiveMethod();
}
//some code
}
如果将简单地重试同一个调用的通用catch语句用作通用异常处理机制，则可能是危险的。话虽如此，这里有一个基于lambda的重试包装器，您可以将其用于任何方法。为了获得更大的灵活性，我选择将重试次数和重试超时作为参数:
public static class Retry
{
public static void Do(
Action action,
TimeSpan retryInterval,
int maxAttemptCount = 3)
{
Do<object>(() =>
{
action();
return null;
}, retryInterval, maxAttemptCount);
}
public static T Do<T>(
Func<T> action,
TimeSpan retryInterval,
int maxAttemptCount = 3)
{
var exceptions = new List<Exception>();
for (int attempted = 0; attempted < maxAttemptCount; attempted++)
{
try
{
if (attempted > 0)
{
Thread.Sleep(retryInterval);
}
return action();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
exceptions.Add(ex);
}
}
throw new AggregateException(exceptions);
}
}
你现在可以使用这个实用程序方法来执行重试逻辑:
Retry.Do(() => SomeFunctionThatCanFail(), TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
or:
Retry.Do(SomeFunctionThatCanFail, TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
or:
int result = Retry.Do(SomeFunctionWhichReturnsInt, TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1), 4);
或者你甚至可以做一个异步重载。
我需要一个支持取消的方法，在此过程中，我添加了返回中间故障的支持。
public static class ThreadUtils
{
public static RetryResult Retry(
Action target,
CancellationToken cancellationToken,
int timeout = 5000,
int retries = 0)
{
CheckRetryParameters(timeout, retries)
var failures = new List<Exception>();
while(!cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested)
{
try
{
target();
return new RetryResult(failures);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
failures.Add(ex);
}
if (retries > 0)
{
retries--;
if (retries == 0)
{
throw new AggregateException(
"Retry limit reached, see InnerExceptions for details.",
failures);
}
}
if (cancellationToken.WaitHandle.WaitOne(timeout))
{
break;
}
}
failures.Add(new OperationCancelledException(
"The Retry Operation was cancelled."));
throw new AggregateException("Retry was cancelled.", failures);
}
private static void CheckRetryParameters(int timeout, int retries)
{
if (timeout < 1)
{
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(...
}
if (retries < 0)
{
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(...
}
}
public class RetryResult : IEnumerable<Exception>
{
private readonly IEnumerable<Exception> failureExceptions;
private readonly int failureCount;
protected internal RetryResult(
ICollection<Exception> failureExceptions)
{
this.failureExceptions = failureExceptions;
this.failureCount = failureExceptions.Count;
}
}
public int FailureCount
{
get { return this.failureCount; }
}
public IEnumerator<Exception> GetEnumerator()
{
return this.failureExceptions.GetEnumerator();
}
System.Collections.IEnumerator
System.Collections.IEnumerable.GetEnumerator()
{
return this.GetEnumerator();
}
}
您可以像这样使用重试功能，重试3次，延迟10秒，但不会取消。
try
{
var result = ThreadUtils.Retry(
SomeAction,
CancellationToken.None,
10000,
3);
// it worked
result.FailureCount // but failed this many times first.
}
catch (AggregationException ex)
{
// oops, 3 retries wasn't enough.
}
或者，除非取消，否则每隔5秒永远重试一次。
try
{
var result = ThreadUtils.Retry(
SomeAction,
someTokenSource.Token);
// it worked
result.FailureCount // but failed this many times first.
}
catch (AggregationException ex)
{
// operation was cancelled before success.
}
正如您可以猜到的那样，在我的源代码中，我重载了Retry函数，以支持我希望使用的不同委托类型。
或者做得更整洁一点....
int retries = 3;
while (retries > 0)
{
if (DoSomething())
{
retries = 0;
}
else
{
retries--;
}
}
我认为抛出异常通常应该避免作为一种机制，除非你想在边界之间传递异常(比如构建一个其他人可以使用的库)。为什么不只是让DoSomething()命令在成功时返回true，否则返回false呢?
编辑:这也可以像其他人建议的那样封装在函数中。唯一的问题是如果您不是自己编写DoSomething()函数
我要实现这个:
public static bool Retry(int maxRetries, Func<bool, bool> method)
{
while (maxRetries > 0)
{
if (method(maxRetries == 1))
{
return true;
}
maxRetries--;
}
return false;
}
我不会像在其他例子中那样使用异常。在我看来，如果我们期待一种方法不会成功的可能性，那么它的失败也不是例外。我调用的方法如果成功就返回true，失败就返回false。
为什么它是Func<bool>而不是Func<bool>?因此，如果我希望一个方法能够在失败时抛出异常，我有一种方法可以通知它这是最后一次尝试。
因此，我可能会将它用于如下代码:
Retry(5, delegate(bool lastIteration)
{
// do stuff
if (!succeeded && lastIteration)
{
throw new InvalidOperationException(...)
}
return succeeded;
});
or
if (!Retry(5, delegate(bool lastIteration)
{
// do stuff
return succeeded;
}))
{
Console.WriteLine("Well, that didn't work.");
}
如果传递一个方法不使用的参数被证明很尴尬，那么实现一个重载的Retry也很简单，它只接受Func<bool>。
