Forgive me for this question, but I can't seem to find a good source of when to use which. Would be happy if you can explain it in simple terms.
Furthermore, I am facing this dilemma:
See, I am coding a simple application. I want it to show the elapsed time (hh:mm:ss format or something). But also, to be able to "speed up" or "slow down" its time intervals (i.e. speed up so that a minute in real time equals an hour in the app).
For example, in Youtube videos (* let's not consider the fact that we can jump to specific parts of the vid *), we see the actual time spent in watching that video on the bottom left corner of the screen, but through navigating in the options menu, we are able to speed the video up or down.
And we can actually see that the time gets updated in a manner that agrees with the speed factor (like, if you choose twice the speed, the timer below gets updated twice faster than normal), and you can change this speed rate whenever you want.
This is what I'm kinda after. Something like how Youtube videos measure the time elapsed and the fact that they can change the time intervals. So, which of the two do you think I should choose? Timer or StopWatch?
I'm just coding a Windows Form Application, by the way. I'm simulating something and I want the user to be able to speed up whenever he or she wishes to. Simple as this may be, I wish to implement a proper approach.
As far as I know the main differences are:
Timer
Timer is just a simple scheduler that runs some operation/method once in a while
It executes method in a separate thread. This prevents blocking of the main thread
Timer is good when we need to execute some task in certain time interval without blocking anything.
Stopwatch
Stopwatch by default runs on the same thread
It counts time and returns TimeSpan struct that can be useful in case when we need some additional information
Stopwatch is good when we need to watch the time and get some additional information about how much elapsed processor ticks does the method take etc.
This has already been covered in a number of other questions including
here. Basically, you can either have Stopwatch with a Speed factor then the result is your "elapsed time". A more complicated approach is to implement Timer and changing the Interval property.
Related
I am working on application that is testing human reaction time and I want it to be able to count the difference between reaction of one person and reaction of the other person. I tried to use timers but those standard timers in C# are not very effective and not really accurate, they can't count ~1ms difference, not even 5ms difference is accurate enough. Is there any way I could recognize the difference quite exactly? I could not really find something but I think that I could maybe take time of first reaction and then time of second reaction and get the difference but I did not manage to get exact time, is there any way to do that or should I use multimedia timer instead?
(I am looking for simple solution..)
You need to use the System.Diagnostics.Stopwatch class. Stopwatch will provide you with elapsed milliseconds, an elapsed TimeSpan, or elapsed ticks (each tick represents 100ns).
I have an application and I have 6 timers. each timer have different interval which mean 1s, 1s, 3s, 3s, 3s, 3s, respectively. Require CPU is always 2% to 3%.
in my PC is fine due to my PC's capability.
I am sure it may cause application if PC's capability is low.
Is there any effective way to use timer? or other running background?
The reason, I use timer because this timer will query database(get total amount) whenever user added or edit or delete product record, not just product record any record.
Timer 1s is for show Date and Time label
Timer 1s is to interact with datagriview, update the whole column
and Other timers is to get data from MySql Server. As my estimation, the max num of records can be 10 records.
Thanks
It's unclear why you think you need multiple timers here, and you don't even say which timer implementation you are using - and it would likely make a difference.
Employing a single timer that triggers on a reasonable minimal precision (1s, 100ms, etc) would reduce the overall overhead and would likely serve your purpose better. Of course that's said without any indication of what your actually trying to achieve.
It sounds as if you may have multiple issues, but to answer your question, running multiple timers will no cause your application to crash. How you implement the timers and if you are locking the code blocks that are called when a time is fired are important. If you are allowing code blocks to be executed before the code block has finished executing a previous call it can cause your application to become unstable. You should look at timers and perhaps even threads. Without knowing more about what you are doing it is difficult to provide a an more definitive answer to your question.
I'm writing an application for a touch table using WPF and C#. (And, I'm not terribly familiar with WPF. At all.) We suspect we're not getting the framerate we're "requesting" from the API so I'm trying to write my own FPS calculator. I'm aware of the math to calculate it based on the internal clock, I just don't know how to access a timer within the Windows/WPF API.
What library/commands do I need to get access to a timer?
Although you could use a DispatcherTimer (which marshalls its ticks onto the ui thread, causing relativity problems), or a System.Threading.Timer (which might throw an exception if you try to touch any UI controls), i'd recommend you just use the WPF profiling tools :)
I think you're looking for the StopWatch. Just initialize it and reset it with each start of your iteration. At the end of an iteration, do your calculation.
First of all, are you aware that Microsoft provides a free diagnostic tool that will tell you the frame rate at which WPF is updating the screen? I guess if you're not convinced you're getting the framerate you're asking for, then perhaps you might not trust it, but I've found it to be a reliable tool. It's called Perforator, and it's part of the WPF Performance Suite, which you can get by following the instructions here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/aa969767
That's probably simpler than writing your own.
Also, how exactly are you "requesting" a frame rate? What API are you using? Are you using the Timeline's DesiredFrameRate property? If so, this is more commonly used to reduce the frame rate than increase it. (The docs also talk about increasing the frame rate to avoid tearing, but that doesn't really make sense - tearing is caused by presenting frames out of sync with the monitor, and isn't an artifact of slow frame rates. In any case, on Vista or Windows 7, you won't get tearing with the DWM enabled.) It's only a hint, and WPF does not promise to match the suggested frame rate.
As for the measurement technique, there are a number of ways you could go. If you're just trying to work out whether the frame rate is in the right ballpark, you could just increment a counter once per frame (which you'd typically do in an event handler for CompositionTarget.Rendering), and set up a DispatcherTimer to fire once a second, and have it show the value in the UI, and then reset the counter. It'll be somewhat rough and ready as DispatcherTimer isn't totally accurate, but it'll show you whether you've got 15fps when you were expecting 30fps, for example.
If you're trying to get a more precise view (e.g., you want to try to work out whether frames are being rendered constantly, or if you seem to be getting lost frames from time to time), then that gets a bit more complex. But I'll wait to see if Perforator does the trick for you before making more suggestions.
You want to either wrap the win32 timing calls you'd normally call (such as QueryPerformanceCounter), by using p/Invoke, or use something in .NET that already wraps them.
You could use DateTime.Ticks, but it's probably not high enough resolution. The Stopwatch class uses QueryPerformanceCounter under the covers.
If you want something that's reusable on a lot of systems, rather than a simple diagnostic, be warned about processor related issues w/ QPC and Stopwatch. See this question: Can the .NET Stopwatch class be THIS terrible?
How does XNA maintain a consistent and precise 60 FPS frame rate? Additionally, how does it maintain such precise timing without pegging the CPU at 100%?
While luke’s code above is theoretical right the used methods and properties are not the best choices:
As the precision of DateTime.Now is only about 30ms (see C# DateTime.Now precision and give or take 20ms) its use for high performance timing is not advisable (60 FPS are 16ms). System.Diagnostics.Stopwatch is the timer of choice for real time .NET
Thread.Sleep suffers the same precision/resolution problem and is not guaranteed to sleep for the specified time only
The current XNA FX seems to hook into the Windows message loop and execute its internal pre-update each step and calling Game.Update only if it the elapsed time since the last update matches the specified framerate (e.g. each 16ms for the default settings). If you want to really know how the XNA FX does the job Reflector is your friend :)
Random tidbit: Back in the XNA GameStudio 1.0 Alpha/Beta time frame there were quite a few blog posts about the “perfect WinForms game loop”, albeit I fail to find them now…
I don't know specifically how XNA does it but when playing around with OpenGL a few years ago I accomplished the same thing using some very simple code.
at the core of it i assume XNA has some sort of rendering loop, it may or may not be integrated with a standard even processing loop but for the sake of example lets assume it isn't. in this case you could write it some thing like this.
TimeSpan FrameInterval = TimeSpan.FromMillis(1000.0/60.0);
DateTime PrevFrameTime = DateTime.MinValue;
while(true)
{
DateTime CurrentFrameTime = DateTime.Now;
TimeSpan diff = DateTime.Now - PrevFrameTime;
if(diff < FrameInterval)
{
DrawScene();
PrevFrameTime = CurrentFrameTime;
}
else
{
Thread.Sleep(FrameInterval - diff);
}
}
In reality you would probably use something like Environment.Ticks instead of DateTimes (it would be more accurate), but i think that this illustrates the point. This should only call drawScene about 60 times a second, and the rest of the time the thread will be sleeping so it will not incur any CPU time.
games should run at 60fps but that doesn't mean that they will. That's actually an upper limit for a released game.
If you run a game in debug mode you could get much higher frames per second - for example a blank starter template on my laptop in debug mode runs well over 1,000fps.
That being said the XNA framework in a released game will do its best to run at 60fps - but the code you included in your project has the chance of lowering that performance. For example having something constantly fire the garbage collection you normally would see a dip in the fps of the game, or throwing some complex math in the update or draw methods - thus having them fire every frame..which would usually be a bit excessive. There are a number of things to keep in mind to keep your game as streamlined as possible.
If you are asking how the XNA framework makes that ceiling happen - that I cant really explain - but I can say that depending on how you layout your code - and what you can do can definitely negatively impact this number, and it doesnt always have to be CPU related. In the instance of garbage Collection its just the cleaning up of a RAM which may not show a spike in CPU usage at all - but could impact your FPS, depending on the amount of garbage and interval it has to run.
You can read all about how the XNA timer was implemented here Game timing in XNA Game Studio but basicly it would try and wiat 1/60 of a second before continuing the loop again, also note that update can be called multiple times before a render if XNA needs to "catch up".
I have an app that needs to fire off a couple of events at certain times during the day - the times are all defined by the users. I can think of a couple of ways of doing it but none of them sit too well. The timing doesn't have to be of a particularly high resolution - a minute or so each way is fine.
My ideas :
When the app starts up read all the times and start timers off that will Tick at the appropriate time
Start a timer off that'll check every minute or so for 'current events'
tia for any better solutions.
Store/index the events sorted by when they next need attention. This could be in memory or not according to how many there are, how often you make changes, etc. If all of your events fire once a day, this list is basically a circular buffer which only changes when users change their events.
Start a timer which will 'tick' at the time of the event at the head of the list. Round up to the next minute if you like.
When the timer fires, process all events which are now in the past [edit - and which haven't already been processed], re-insert them into the list if necessary (i.e. if you don't have the "circular buffer" optimisation), and set a new timer.
Obviously, when you change the set of events, or change the time for an existing event, then you may need to reset the timer to make it fire earlier. There's usually no point resetting it to fire later - you may as well just let it go off and do nothing. And if you put an upper limit of one minute on how long the timer can run (or just have a 1 minute recurring timer), then you can get within 1-minute accuracy without ever resetting. This is basically your option 2.
Arguably you should use an existing framework rather than rolling your own, but I don't know C# so I have no idea what's available. I'm generally a bit wary of the idea of setting squillions of timers, because some environments don't support that (or don't support it well). Hence this scheme, which requires only one. I don't know whether C# has any problems in that respect, but this scheme can easily be arranged to use O(1) RAM if necessary, which can't be beat.
Have a look at Quartz.Net. It is a scheduler framework (originally for Java).
This sounds like a classic case for a Windows Service. I think there is a Windows Service project type in VS2005/2008. The service coupled with a simple database and a front-end application to allow users to set the trigger times would be all you need.
If it won't change very often, Scheduled Tasks is also an option.
I've written a few programs along these lines.
I suggest #2. All you need to to is keep a list of times that events are "due" at, and every X amount of time (depending on your resolution) check your list for "now" events. You can pick up some optimization if you can guarantee the list is sorted, and that each event on the list is due exactly once. Otherwise, if you have recurring events, you have to make sure you cover your window. What I mean is, if you have an event that is due at 11:30 am, and you're checking every seconds, then it's possible that you could check at 11:29:59, and then not again until 11:31:01, due to the inprecision of the CPU time-slices. So you'll need to be sure that one of those checks (11:29 or 11:31) still picks up the 11:30 hit, and that ONLY one of them does (i.e., you don't run at both 11:29 and 11:31).
The advantage this approach has over checking only on times you know to be on your list is that allows your list to be modified by 3rd parties without your knowledge, and your event handler will continue to 'just work'.
The simplest way would likely be to use Windows scheduler.
Otherwise you need to use one of the Timer classes, calculating how long until the first event. This approach, unlike the scheduler, allows new events to be found by the running process (and, possibly, resetting the timer).
The problem with #1 is that the number of milliseconds before an event may be too large to store in the Timer's interval, and as the number of events increase, your number of timers could get unweildly.
I dont see anything wrong with #2, but I would opt for a background worker or a thread.