Develop Reference

thread does not work, it's freezing my application [duplicate]

This question already has an answer here:
Control 'progressBar1' accessed from a thread other than the thread it was created on in my business class [duplicate]
(1 answer)
Closed 4 years ago.
I have a function with several loopings and database query, I want to call it asynchronously by passing a progress bar to show the user the progress.
When I call the thread the program hangs I can not even close
when I call synchContext.Post (state => etlBusiness.LoadData (progressBar), null); it freezes, it is not feasible to bring the logic of loadData to UI there are many methods being called the inside
public partial class Home : Form
{
public Home()
{
InitializeComponent();
synchronizationContext = System.Threading.SynchronizationContext.Current;
}
private SynchronizationContext synchronizationContext;
public SynchronizationContext context = SynchronizationContext.Current;
public Thread _myThread = null;
private void btnSend_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
_myThread = new Thread(() => LoadData(synchronizationContext, progressBar1));
_myThread.Start();
}
private void LoadData(System.Threading.SynchronizationContext synchContext, ProgressBar progressBar)
{
string filePath = tbPath.Text;
ETLBusiness etlBusiness = new ETLBusiness(filePath);
synchContext.Post(state => etlBusiness.LoadData(progressBar), null);
_myThread.Abort();
}
}

You don't need to use Thread.Abort(), SynchronizationContext or even use "asynchronous" code (I assume you're referring to await/async which you cannot call unless your target API actually provides true async functionality, note that using Task.Run is not the same thing): WinForms has built-in functionality for running code in the UI thread in the Invoke/BeginInvoke methods.
For progress reporting, I don't recommend passing-around a ProgressBar as that's a brittle design and means your inner business logic has a dependency on WinForms which prevents you from using it in a WPF, ASP.NET or headless process; instead you could have a private method that updates the UI via a callback, like so:
private ProgressBar progressBar;
public Home()
{
this.InitializeComponent();
}
private void btnSend_Click( Object sender, EventArgs e )
{
Task.Run( (Action)this.LoadData )
}
private void UpdateProgress( Float progress )
{
if( this.InvokeRequired )
{
this.BeginInvoke( (Action<Float>)this.UpdateProgress, progress );
return;
}
this.progressBar.Value = progress * this.progressBar.Maximum;
}
private void LoadData()
{
ETLBusiness etlBusiness = new ETLBusiness(filePath);
etlBusiness.LoadData( this.UpdateProgress ); // You'll need to replace its progressBar parameter with a callback to `this.UpdateProgress`.
}
Where your ETLBusiness.LoadData method should be changed to this:
void LoadData( Action<Float> progressCallback );

me again. I posted a comment in your last post. The problem is coming from my solution. What is happening is you are creating and starting a thread, you then, with synchContext.Post() send the logic of ETLBusiness.LoadData() back to the main thread. What needs to happen is one of the two following options:
Move the logic of ETLBusiness.LoadData() into Form.LoadData() (the method called by the thread), and then use synchContext.Post(state => progressBar1.SetPercent()) to update the progressBar specifically.
Move the thread to the ETLBusiness class. and use synchContext.Post(state => progressBar1.SetPercent()) to update the progressBar specifically.
Sorry again, this problem came from my solution to your previous post

Best way to run Database access tasks, that return objects, in separate thread keeping UI responsive?

[Windows forms application & .NET 4.0]
I need to execute database access methods that return objects (either list of classes or simple classes).
Also i need to open forms that are responsive while main thread does initialization.
I need to run these on separate threads keeping the User Interface responsive and of course to be able to pass the results back to main thread for UI updates.
I have been reading books regarding the various ways for this.
I understand that my job can be done by:
BackGroundWorker
Thread Class
Task Class
Which one i should dive into ?
Update: using the suggested Task class i am getting errot for cross thread safety using this:
private void BtnCheckClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var itm = Task<JDEItemLotAvailability>.Factory.StartNew(() =>
Dal.GetLotAvailabilityF41021(
txtLot.Text,
cmbMcu.SelectedItem.ToString(),
cmbLocn.SelectedItem.ToString())
);
lblDescriptionValue.Text = itm.Result.Description;
lblItemCodeValue.Text = itm.Result.Code;
lblQuantityValue.Text = itm.Result.AvailableQuantity.ToString();
LotFocus(true);
}
On the above exmaple i am getting the exception in cmbMcu control not the txtLot.

I would use the Task class, it's really easy to synchronize it and it already provides a support for returning objects.
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(
() => GetDatabaseData(someArguments),
TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning);
// Example method
public DataSet GetDatabaseData(object args) { ... }
this this tells a scheduler to create and begin a new task and gives it a hint that it might be a good idea not to use a thread-pool thread, if the scheduler uses a thread-pool. Anyway you can now decide how do you want to synchronize.
For example to achieve similar behaviour as in Gregor Primar's answer, you can set up a continuation using ContinueWith method as follows,
task.ContinueWith(oldTask => ProcessReturnedData(oldTask.Result));
// Example method
public IEnumerable<SomeEntity> ProcessReturnedData(DataSet data) { ... }
which will schedule calling the ProcessReturnedData method after the task object has done executing. Note that this will be called even if task fails for some reason, so it may not be always a good solution - or you would have to do some checks in the provided delegate.
If you want to do a non-blocking wait on the main thread and use the returned object there, you can simply use the Wait method.
task.Wait(); // Makes current thread wait until the task is comnpleted.
DataSet result = task.Result; // Accessing the result object.

I hade done a lot of projects using Thread, however Task should be more easy to use.
Here is demo how make async operations using Threads.
This is the class that will return data to ui:
public class MyAsyncClass
{
public delegate void NotifyComplete(DataSet data);
public event NotifyComplete NotifyCompleteEvent;
//Starts async thread...
public void Start()
{
System.Threading.Thread t = new System.Threading.Thread(new System.Threading.ThreadStart(DoSomeJob));
t.Start();
}
void DoSomeJob()
{
//just wait 5 sec for nothing special...
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(5000);
if (NotifyCompleteEvent != null)
{
//TODO: fill your data...
DataSet ds = new System.Data.DataSet();
NotifyCompleteEvent(ds);
}
}
}
And here is ui implementation:
MyAsyncClass myClass = null;
private void button2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
myClass = new MyAsyncClass();
myClass.NotifyCompleteEvent += new MyAsyncClass.NotifyComplete(myClass_NotifyCompleteEvent);
//here I start the job inside working class...
myClass.Start();
}
//here my class is notified from working class when job is completed...
delegate void myClassDelegate(DataSet data);
void myClass_NotifyCompleteEvent(DataSet data)
{
if (this.InvokeRequired)
{
Delegate d = new myClassDelegate(myClass_NotifyCompleteEvent);
this.Invoke(d, new object[] { data });
}
else
{
//TODO: show your data
MessageBox.Show("Data retrieved!");
}
}

Implementing a thread queue/wait, how?

I have a timer calling a function every 15 minutes, this function counts the amount of lines in my DGV and starts a thread for each lines (of yet another function), said thread parse a web page which can take anywhere from 1 second to 10 second to finish.
Whilst it does work fine as it is with 1-6 rows, anymore will cause the requests to time-out.
I want it to wait for the newly created thread to finish processing before getting back in the loop to create another thread without locking the main UI
for (int x = 0; x <= dataGridFollow.Rows.Count - 1; x++)
{
string getID = dataGridFollow.Rows[x].Cells["ID"].Value.ToString();
int ID = int.Parse(getID);
Thread t = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart(UpdateLo));
t.Start(ID);
// <- Wait for thread to finish here before getting back in the for loop
}
I have googled a lot in the past 24 hours, read a lot about this specific issue and its implementations (Thread.Join, ThreadPools, Queuing, and even SmartThreadPool).
It's likely that I've read the correct answer somewhere but I'm not at ease enough with C# to decypher those Threading tools
Thanks for your time

to avoid the UI freeze the framework provide a class expressly for these purposes: have a look at the BackgroundWorker class (executes an operation on a separate thread), here's some infos : http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.backgroundworker.aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc300429.aspx
Btw looks if I understand correctly you don't want to parallelize any operation so just wait for the method parsing the page to be completed. Basically for each (foreach look) row of your grid you get the id and call the method. If you want to go parallel just reuse the same foreach loop and add make it Parallel
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd460720.aspx

What you want is to set off a few workers that do some task.
When one finishes you can start a new one off.
I'm sure there is a better way using thread pools or whatever.. but I was bored so i came up with this.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.ComponentModel;
using System.Threading;
namespace WorkerTest
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
WorkerGroup workerGroup = new WorkerGroup();
Console.WriteLine("Starting...");
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++)
{
var work = new Action(() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(1000); //somework
});
workerGroup.AddWork(work);
}
while (workerGroup.WorkCount > 0)
{
Console.WriteLine(workerGroup.WorkCount);
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
Console.WriteLine("Fin");
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
public class WorkerGroup
{
private List<Worker> workers;
private Queue<Action> workToDo;
private object Lock = new object();
public int WorkCount { get { return workToDo.Count; } }
public WorkerGroup()
{
workers = new List<Worker>();
workers.Add(new Worker());
workers.Add(new Worker());
foreach (var w in workers)
{
w.WorkCompleted += (OnWorkCompleted);
}
workToDo = new Queue<Action>();
}
private void OnWorkCompleted(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
FindWork();
}
public void AddWork(Action work)
{
workToDo.Enqueue(work);
FindWork();
}
private void FindWork()
{
lock (Lock)
{
if (workToDo.Count > 0)
{
var availableWorker = workers.FirstOrDefault(x => !x.IsBusy);
if (availableWorker != null)
{
var work = workToDo.Dequeue();
availableWorker.StartWork(work);
}
}
}
}
}
public class Worker
{
private BackgroundWorker worker;
private Action work;
public bool IsBusy { get { return worker.IsBusy; } }
public event EventHandler WorkCompleted;
public Worker()
{
worker = new BackgroundWorker();
worker.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(OnWorkerDoWork);
worker.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(OnWorkerRunWorkerCompleted);
}
private void OnWorkerRunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if (WorkCompleted != null)
{
WorkCompleted(this, EventArgs.Empty);
}
}
public void StartWork(Action work)
{
if (!IsBusy)
{
this.work = work;
worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
else
{
throw new InvalidOperationException("Worker is busy");
}
}
private void OnWorkerDoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
work.Invoke();
work = null;
}
}
}
This would be just a starting point.
You could start it off with a list of Actions and then have a completed event for when that group of actions is finished.
then at least you can use a ManualResetEvent to wait for the completed event.. or whatever logic you want really.

Call a method directly or do a while loop (with sleep calls) to check the status of the thread.
There are also async events but the would call another method, and you want to continue from the same point.

I have no idea why the requests would timeout. That sounds like a different issue. However, I can make a few suggestions regarding your current approach.
Avoid creating threads in loops with nondeterministic bounds. There is a lot of overhead in creating threads. If the number of operations is not known before hand then use the ThreadPool or the Task Parallel Library instead.
You are not going to get the behavior you want by blocking the UI thread with Thread.Join. The cause the UI to become unresponsive and it will effectively serialize the operations and cancel out any advantage you were hoping to gain with threads.
If you really want to limit the number of concurrent operations then a better solution is to create a separate dedicated thread for kicking off the operations. This thread will spin around a loop indefinitely waiting for items to appear in a queue and when they do it will dequeue them and use that information to kick off an operation asynchronously (again using the ThreadPool or TPL). The dequeueing thread can contain the logic for limiting the number of concurrent operations. Search for information regarding the producer-consumer pattern to get a better understand of how you can implement this.
There is a bit of a learning curve, but who said threading was easy right?

If I understand correctly, what you're currently doing is looping through a list of IDs in the UI thread, starting a new thread to handle each one. The blocking issue you're seeing then could well be that it's taking too many resources to create unique threads. So, personally (without knowing more) would redesign the process like so:
//Somewhere in the UI Thread
Thread worker = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart(UpdateLoWorker));
worker.Start(dataGridFollow.Rows);
//worker thread
private void UpdateLoWorker(DataRowCollection rows)
{
foreach(DataRow r in rows){
string getID = r.Cells["ID"].Value.ToString();
int ID = int.Parse(getID);
UpdateLo(ID);
}
}
Here you'd have a single non-blocking worker which sequentially handles each ID.

Consider using Asynchronous CTP. It's an asynch pattern Microsoft recently released for download. It should simplify asynch programming tremendouesly. The link is http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/async.aspx. (Read the whitepaper first)
Your code would look something like the following. (I've not verified my syntax yet, sorry).
private async Task DoTheWork()
{
for(int x = 0; x <= dataGridFollow.Rows.Count - 1; x++)
{
string getID = dataGridFollow.Rows[x].Cells["ID"].Value.ToString();
int ID = int.Parse(getID);
task t = new Task(new Action<object>(UpdateLo), ID);
t.Start();
await t;
}
}
This method returns a Task that can be checked periodically for completion. This follows the pattern of "fire and forget" meaning you just call it and presumably, you don't care when it completes (as long as it does complete before 15 minutes).
EDIT
I corrected the syntax above, you would need to change UpdateLo to take an object instead of an Int.

For a simple background thread runner that will run one thread from a queue at a time you can do something like this:
private List<Thread> mThreads = new List<Thread>();
public static void Main()
{
Thread t = new Thread(ThreadMonitor);
t.IsBackground = true;
t.Start();
}
private static void ThreadMonitor()
{
while (true)
{
foreach (Thread t in mThreads.ToArray())
{
// Runs one thread in the queue and waits for it to finish
t.Start();
mThreads.Remove(t);
t.Join();
}
Thread.Sleep(2000); // Wait before checking for new threads
}
}
// Called from the UI or elsewhere to create any number of new threads to run
public static void DoStuff()
{
Thread t = new Thread(DoCorestuff);
t.IsBackground = true;
mActiveThreads.Add(t);
}
public static void DoStuffCore()
{
// Your code here
}

How does dispatcher work the a thread?

We have a silverlight application which uses a dispatcher and I would appreciate any help explaining what the following codes does? (unfortunately the developer who wrote the code has left).
So what we have is the following:
public class ABC
{
private Dispatcher dispatcher;
private Thread threadRunner;
public void ABC()
{
threadRunner= new Thread(ThreadRunnerMethod)
{
IsBackground = true,
ApartmentState = ApartmentState.STA
};
threadRunner.Start();
}
private static void ThreadRunnerMethod()
{
Dispatcher.Run();
}
public void MainMethod()
{
dispatcher = Dispatcher.FromThread(threadRunner);
dispatcher.Invoke(new Action(() =>
// "DO SOME WORK WITH A COM OBJECT"
));
}
}
I have some basic experience with threading but I have no idea how this all works?
JD

It's the equivalent of Control.Invoke in Windows Forms, basically - it's just been separated into its own object.
As I understand it, Dispatcher.Run will basically start an event loop, and you can marshall calls into that event loop using Dispatcher.Invoke. Dispatcher.FromThread finds the Dispatcher object which is responsible for a given thread - so in this case, it finds the event loop running in the new thread.
So in your code, the delegate created with the lambda expression will execute in the newly created thread.

How do I run a simple bit of code in a new thread?

I have a bit of code that I need to run in a different thread than the GUI as it currently causes the form to freeze whilst the code runs (10 seconds or so).
Assume I have never created a new thread before; what's a simple/basic example of how to do this in C# and using .NET Framework 2.0 or later?

Good place to start reading is Joe Albahari.
If you want to create your own thread, this is as simple as it gets:
using System.Threading;
new Thread(() =>
{
Thread.CurrentThread.IsBackground = true;
/* run your code here */
Console.WriteLine("Hello, world");
}).Start();

BackgroundWorker seems to be best choice for you.
Here is my minimal example. After you click on the button the background worker will begin working in background thread and also report its progress simultaneously. It will also report after the work completes.
using System.ComponentModel;
...
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
// this allows our worker to report progress during work
bw.WorkerReportsProgress = true;
// what to do in the background thread
bw.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(
delegate(object o, DoWorkEventArgs args)
{
BackgroundWorker b = o as BackgroundWorker;
// do some simple processing for 10 seconds
for (int i = 1; i <= 10; i++)
{
// report the progress in percent
b.ReportProgress(i * 10);
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
});
// what to do when progress changed (update the progress bar for example)
bw.ProgressChanged += new ProgressChangedEventHandler(
delegate(object o, ProgressChangedEventArgs args)
{
label1.Text = string.Format("{0}% Completed", args.ProgressPercentage);
});
// what to do when worker completes its task (notify the user)
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(
delegate(object o, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs args)
{
label1.Text = "Finished!";
});
bw.RunWorkerAsync();
}
Note:
I put everything in single method
using C#'s anonymous method for
simplicity but you can always pull
them out to different methods.
It is safe to update GUI within
ProgressChanged or
RunWorkerCompleted handlers.
However, updating GUI from DoWork
will cause
InvalidOperationException.

The ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem is pretty ideal for something simple. The only caveat is accessing a control from the other thread.
System.Threading.ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(delegate {
DoSomethingThatDoesntInvolveAControl();
}, null);

Here is another option:
Task.Run(()=>{
//Here is a new thread
});

Quick and dirty, but it will work:
Using at top:
using System.Threading;
simple code:
static void Main( string[] args )
{
Thread t = new Thread( NewThread );
t.Start();
}
static void NewThread()
{
//code goes here
}
I just threw this into a new console application for an exmaple

Try using the BackgroundWorker class. You give it delegates for what to run, and to be notified when work has finished. There is an example on the MSDN page that I linked to.

If you want to get a value:
var someValue;
Thread thread = new Thread(delegate()
{
//Do somthing and set your value
someValue = "Hello World";
});
thread.Start();
while (thread.IsAlive)
Application.DoEvents();

Put that code in a function (the code that can't be executed on the same thread as the GUI), and to trigger that code's execution put the following.
Thread myThread= new Thread(nameOfFunction);
workerThread.Start();
Calling the start function on the thread object will cause the execution of your function call in a new thread.

Here how can use threads with a progressBar , its just for understing how the threads works, in the form there are three progressBar and 4 button:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
Thread t, t2, t3;
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
CheckForIllegalCrossThreadCalls = false;
t = new Thread(birinicBar); //evry thread workes with a new progressBar
t2 = new Thread(ikinciBar);
t3 = new Thread(ucuncuBar);
}
public void birinicBar() //to make progressBar work
{
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
progressBar1.Value++;
Thread.Sleep(100); // this progressBar gonna work faster
}
}
public void ikinciBar()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++)
{
progressBar2.Value++;
Thread.Sleep(200);
}
}
public void ucuncuBar()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++)
{
progressBar3.Value++;
Thread.Sleep(300);
}
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) //that button to start the threads
{
t.Start();
t2.Start(); t3.Start();
}
private void button4_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)//that button to stup the threads with the progressBar
{
t.Suspend();
t2.Suspend();
t3.Suspend();
}
private void button2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)// that is for contuniue after stuping
{
t.Resume();
t2.Resume();
t3.Resume();
}
private void button3_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) // finally with that button you can remove all of the threads
{
t.Abort();
t2.Abort();
t3.Abort();
}
}

If you are going to use the raw Thread object then you need to set IsBackground to true at a minimum and you should also set the Threading Apartment model (probably STA).
public static void DoWork()
{
// do some work
}
public static void StartWorker()
{
Thread worker = new Thread(DoWork);
worker.IsBackground = true;
worker.SetApartmentState(System.Threading.ApartmentState.STA);
worker.Start()
}
I would recommend the BackgroundWorker class if you need UI interaction.

// following declaration of delegate ,,,
public delegate long GetEnergyUsageDelegate(DateTime lastRunTime,
DateTime procDateTime);
// following inside of some client method
GetEnergyUsageDelegate nrgDel = GetEnergyUsage;
IAsyncResult aR = nrgDel.BeginInvoke(lastRunTime, procDT, null, null);
while (!aR.IsCompleted) Thread.Sleep(500);
int usageCnt = nrgDel.EndInvoke(aR);
Charles your code(above) is not correct. You do not need to spin wait for completion. EndInvoke will block until the WaitHandle is signaled.
If you want to block until completion you simply need to
nrgDel.EndInvoke(nrgDel.BeginInvoke(lastRuntime,procDT,null,null));
or alternatively
ar.AsyncWaitHandle.WaitOne();
But what is the point of issuing anyc calls if you block? You might as well just use a synchronous call. A better bet would be to not block and pass in a lambda for cleanup:
nrgDel.BeginInvoke(lastRuntime,procDT,(ar)=> {ar.EndInvoke(ar);},null);
One thing to keep in mind is that you must call EndInvoke. A lot of people forget this and end up leaking the WaitHandle as most async implementations release the waithandle in EndInvoke.

another option, that uses delegates and the Thread Pool...
assuming 'GetEnergyUsage' is a method that takes a DateTime and another DateTime as input arguments, and returns an Int...
// following declaration of delegate ,,,
public delegate long GetEnergyUsageDelegate(DateTime lastRunTime,
DateTime procDateTime);
// following inside of some client method
GetEnergyUsageDelegate nrgDel = GetEnergyUsage;
IAsyncResult aR = nrgDel.BeginInvoke(lastRunTime, procDT, null, null);
while (!aR.IsCompleted) Thread.Sleep(500);
int usageCnt = nrgDel.EndInvoke(aR);

There are many ways of running separate threads in .Net, each has different behaviors. Do you need to continue running the thread after the GUI quits? Do you need to pass information between the thread and GUI? Does the thread need to update the GUI? Should the thread do one task then quit, or should it continue running? The answers to these questions will tell you which method to use.
There is a good async method article at the Code Project web site that describes the various methods and provides sample code.
Note this article was written before the async/await pattern and Task Parallel Library were introduced into .NET.

How to: Use a Background Thread to Search for Files
You have to be very carefull with access from other threads to GUI specific stuff (it is common for many GUI toolkits). If you want to update something in GUI from processing thread check this answer that I think is useful for WinForms. For WPF see this (it shows how to touch component in UpdateProgress() method so it will work from other threads, but actually I don't like it is not doing CheckAccess() before doing BeginInvoke through Dispathcer, see and search for CheckAccess in it)
Was looking .NET specific book on threading and found this one (free downloadable). See http://www.albahari.com/threading/ for more details about it.
I believe you will find what you need to launch execution as new thread in first 20 pages and it has many more (not sure about GUI specific snippets I mean strictly specific to threading). Would be glad to hear what community thinks about this work 'cause I'm reading this one. For now looked pretty neat for me (for showing .NET specific methods and types for threading). Also it covers .NET 2.0 (and not ancient 1.1) what I really appreciate.

I'd recommend looking at Jeff Richter's Power Threading Library and specifically the IAsyncEnumerator. Take a look at the video on Charlie Calvert's blog where Richter goes over it for a good overview.
Don't be put off by the name because it makes asynchronous programming tasks easier to code.