I am currently working on a project in C#. I have a method called updateProgress() which has two int parameters (count and totalRows).
If I have call the method by saying updateProgress(count, totalRows) this works fine but I want to run this method within a new thread.
How can I go about doing this, I have looked online and everything looks overly complicated for what I am wanting to do.
Thanks for your help with this
Something like this:
new Thread(delegate () {
updateProgress(count, totalRows);
}).Start();
Be aware that threading actually is quite a complex topic, so if you have troubles understanding the asynchronous APIs available in the .NET Framework, I doubt if you should start using threads in the first place.
Anyway, you have several options:
Spin off a thread by your own (like cdhowie pointed out), which is rather discouraged.
Use the TPL (task parallel library) if you are running on .NET 4. Here is a good introduction.
TaskFactory.StartNew(() => updateProgress(count, totalRows));
Use the ThreadPool if you are running on an older version of .NET.
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(s => updateProgress(count, totalRows));
Of course there are other ways too, but this are imo the most important ones.
Best Regards,
Oliver Hanappi
This has been almost a year, and my answer will not add anything "new" to what has already been said in other answers.
If someone is using .Net 4.0 or higher, best options would be to use a task and let the framework decide the best, by calling TaskFactory.StartNew(...). For older versions, still it's better to utilize the thread pool by using ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(...).
Now, if still someone wants to use the thread in the basic way (creating new thread) for some reason, then this
new Thread(delegate () {
updateProgress(count, totalRows);
}).Start();
can be written in a little cleaner way, using the lambda expression, like this
new Thread(() => updateProgress(count, totalRows)).Start();
There are different ways to run a method in a different thread, like Thread, BackgroundWorker, ThreadPool or Task. Which one to choose depends of various things.
From the name of the method, it sounds like the method should show some progress in the GUI of your application. If that's the case, you have to run the method on the GUI thread. If you want to call it from another thread, you have to use Dispatcher.Invoke() in WPF and Control.Invoke() in WinForms.
try following
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem((o) => { updateProgress(5, 6); });
Here's a more complex example without anonymous delegates. Look at result in the completed function.
using System;
using System.Threading;
using System.ComponentModel;
class Program
{
static BackgroundWorker _bw;
static void Main()
{
_bw = new BackgroundWorker
{
WorkerReportsProgress = true,
WorkerSupportsCancellation = true
};
_bw.DoWork += bw_DoWork;
_bw.ProgressChanged += bw_ProgressChanged;
_bw.RunWorkerCompleted += bw_RunWorkerCompleted;
_bw.RunWorkerAsync ("Hello to worker");
Console.WriteLine ("Press Enter in the next 5 seconds to cancel");
Console.ReadLine();
if (_bw.IsBusy) _bw.CancelAsync();
Console.ReadLine();
}
static void bw_DoWork (object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
for (int i = 0; i <= 100; i += 20)
{
if (_bw.CancellationPending) { e.Cancel = true; return; }
_bw.ReportProgress (i);
Thread.Sleep (1000); // Just for the demo... don't go sleeping
} // for real in pooled threads!
e.Result = 123; // This gets passed to RunWorkerCompleted
}
static void bw_RunWorkerCompleted (object sender,
RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if (e.Cancelled)
Console.WriteLine ("You canceled!");
else if (e.Error != null)
Console.WriteLine ("Worker exception: " + e.Error.ToString());
else
Console.WriteLine ("Complete: " + e.Result); // from DoWork
}
static void bw_ProgressChanged (object sender,
ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
Console.WriteLine ("Reached " + e.ProgressPercentage + "%");
}
}
Related
I have a thread which calls one of the methods, now this method executes a query which can take a very long time possibly 40 minutes or so to complete,
I want to give user a a choice to be able to cancel this operation (meaning stop the thread and stop the query to release database).
I should mention that I am developing WPF Application using .net 4.5, SQL SERVER DB and C#.
You should use backgroundworker, it is exactly what you want.
Eather drag and drop it from the toolbox or create it in code - behind. It supports Cancellation, reports progress, notifies when complete and know if it is running or not.
Here is an example.
void method(){
BackgroundWorker worker = new BackgroundWorker();
worker.RunWorkerCompleted += worker_RunWorkerCompleted;
worker.ProgressChanged += worker_ProgressChanged;
worker.DoWork += worker_DoWork;
worker.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
if(!worker.IsBusy)
{
worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
}
void worker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
//do whatever needs to be done on the other thread here.
object argument = e.Argument; //if passed argument in RunWorkerAsync().
object result = new object();
e.Result = result;
//after making worker global, you can report progress like so:
worker.ReportProgress(50); //you can also pass a userState, which can be any object, to show some data already.
}
void worker_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
//you can update a progress bar in here
int progress = e.ProgressPercentage;
}
void worker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
//when done
}
void CancelTheTask()
{
if (worker.IsBusy)
{
//make worker global first, but then
worker.CancelAsync();
}
}
A important things to look at: Never use resources in the DoWork method that are not created inside it. Thus pass things you need in the background worker as Arguments. And things that are created by the backgroundworker should not be set to a global variable ether, pass by result.
When cancelling, RunWorkCompleted will also be fired. Now the query to the database is already being executed, so that is still running, even when your application lost all resources to it.
To cancel that, we would need to know how you execute the query, like #S.Akbari mentioned is one way. Entity Framework 6 also supports cancellation.
For that: check this when using Queryable
here is another example
Or this solution without Entity Framework.
Using Task Parallel Library (TPL) you can use the Task Cancellation pattern.
When you have your Thread blocked on waiting for the query, it's useless for stopping anything.
Make sure the SqlConnection of the query is accessible from your UI and Close it. Abandon the Thread, it will terminate (with an error you've got to suppress).
If the UI thread is doing a Long-time operation it won't be able to process
UI requests. This is also known as Not Responding.
Use ThreadPool like this:
CancellationTokenSource ct;//instantiate it before ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem line
private void operation_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
ct = new CancellationTokenSource();
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(_ =>
{
var result = LongTimeOperation();//set the operation in another thread so that the UI thread is kept responding
//use the Dispatcher to "return" to the UI thread
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(new Action(() =>
{
//Use result for example : Label1.Text = result.ToString();
}));
});
}
To give user a choice to be able to cancel the operation use CancellationTokenSource like this:
private void cancel_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
if (ct != null)
{
ct.Cancel();
ct= null;
}
}
Note: in LongTimeOperation() you must have one more parameter of type CancellationToken
private float LongTimeOperation(CancellationToken ct)
{
if (ct.IsCancellationRequested)
return -1;
....
....
}
This link is useful about Cancellation in Managed Threads.
this is a common problem.But in WPF and WinForm, i'd like to use BackGroundWorker. See Here
I've asked a question on how to know when a string of another other party library code changes in my code. I can get access to the string itself at any time. but can't implement INotifyPropertyChanged since it's not my code.
I was offered to use a BackgroundWorker and this solution does work for me!
but, I was trying to make sure it is the best solution and got an advise to look at TPL, further researching showed that Task.Run of TPL might be a better solution, as mentioned here for example: Task parallel library replacement for BackgroundWorker? but I couldn't implement it in code.
I am trying to replace this code by Task.Run (Thanks to #a.azemia)
BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
bw.DoWork += (s, e) =>
{
while (true)
{
if (!fc.SecondString.Equals(AnotherPartyLibrary.firstString))
{
fc.SecondString = AnotherPartyLibrary.firstString;
}
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
};
bw.RunWorkerAsync();
I couldn't find any example that fit my scenario and tried to learn from other examples with no success. I need a while loop inside the task and it needs to run asynchronously like the BackgroundWorker does.
couldn't find any example with a while loop in the task, so I am not sure of how this can be done.
I've also read that Lambda expressions uses more resources and it was shown in some test that I've seen so I would've liked to avoid Lambda if possible.
Thanks for the help!
Try this (untested):
public async Task DoWork()
{
while (true)
{
if (!fc.SecondString.Equals(AnotherPartyLibrary.firstString))
{
fc.SecondString = AnotherPartyLibrary.firstString;
}
await Task.Delay(1000);
}
}
I've used Task.Delay instead of Thread.Sleep as the former does not block a thread while delay is happening. You can invoke this function with await
await DoWork();
I still see no real benefit, but here you go:
private Task T;
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// ... make sure your string stuff is setup first ...
T = Task.Run(delegate() {
while (true)
{
// ... code ...
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
});
}
I know that the question may not make sense, and I'm having a tough time trying to think of a way to explain it, so I will show a snippet of code to help. I'm using Winforms on visual studio express 2010:
private void button1(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
txtOutput.Text += "Auto-collecting variables. This may take several minutes";
string v = foo();
txtOutput.Text += "\n" + v;
string b = bar();
txtOutput.Text += "\n" + b;
txtOutput.SelectionStart = txtOutput.Text.Length;
txtOutput.ScrollToCaret(); //scrolls to the bottom of textbox
}
So basically, when the user clicks button1, I want "Auto-collecting variables..." to be displayed in the textbox, and then have foo() execute, display that, and then have bar() execute, and then display that.
What is currently happening is that foo() and bar() execute, and then everything is displayed all at once after foo() and bar() have executed (functions that take several minutes). Is there anyway to fix this, or is there a work around?
Edit: Version of C# is 4.0. If I update to 4.5 or 5.0, will computers without .NET 4.5/5.0 be able to run the .exe?
C# 5.0 makes doing this trivial.
Execute the long running tasks in a background thread using Task.Run and use await to execute the rest of the method as a continuation in the UI thread without blocking the UI thread for the duration of the asynchronous task.
private async void button1(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
txtOutput.Text += "Auto-collecting variables. This may take several minutes";
string v = await Task.Run(() => foo());
txtOutput.Text += "\n" + v;
string b = await Task.Run(() => bar());
txtOutput.Text += "\n" + b;
txtOutput.SelectionStart = txtOutput.Text.Length;
txtOutput.ScrollToCaret(); //scrolls to the bottom of textbox
}
You can do the same in C# 4.0 like so: (The first solution will be transformed by the compiler into something similar.)
private void button1(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
txtOutput.Text += "Auto-collecting variables. This may take several minutes";
Task.Factory.StartNew(() => foo())
.ContinueWith(t => txtOutput.Text += "\n" + t.Result
, TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext())
.ContinueWith(t => bar())
.ContinueWith(t =>
{
txtOutput.Text += "\n" + t.Result;
txtOutput.SelectionStart = txtOutput.Text.Length;
txtOutput.ScrollToCaret(); //scrolls to the bottom of textbox
}
, TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext());
}
Use the BackgroundWorker class to do your processing without blocking UI updates. It has events that can be used to transfer progress information to the UI thread.
Depending on the version of .NET, you can use BackgroundWorker (Pre 4.0) or Tasks (Post 4.0 - 3.5 with an add-on)...to name a few.
Backgroundworker Pseudocode:
var backgroundWorker = new BackgroundWorker()
method
{
//Update UI
backgroundWorker.RunWorkAsync()
}
asyncworkmethod
{
//do main logic
}
asynccompletemethod
{
//Update UI to say done
}
Task Pseudocode:
method
{
//Update UI
TaskFactory.StartNew(()=>DoWork).ContinueWith((previousTask)=>UpdateUIToSayDone)
}
And, if you are using 4.5, then you can use the async/await keyword, however that is just syntactic sugar around tasks (mostly...). Servy already has a decent example of this, though if you go that approach
Using a background process (read the other answers) is the correct way to go but if you are looking at a very quick workaround you can call Application.DoEvents() after updating the TextBox. In most cases this call will result in your form updating to reflect the changes you made.
txtOutput.Update() should do what you want, but you should consider using background thread to complete long running task without blocking UI thread.
i'm using wpf, there's a button on my ui.
when the user clicks it, i have a for loop that runs a new method, on a new thread using autoresetevent.
in that method on that new thread, i'm using a label, let's call it lblStatus. i want to update that label on this thread that's not on the ui. using wpf, i have to use Dispatcher.Invoke.
here's a sample of my code:
Thread thread= new Thread(StartLooking);
thread.Start();
_waitHandle.WaitOne();
private void StartLooking(object value)
{
if (lblStatus.Dispatcher.Thread == Thread.CurrentThread)
{
lblStatus.Content = "Scanning>...";
}
else
{
lblStatus.Dispatcher.Invoke(DispatcherPriority.Background, new Action(() => lblStatus.Content = "Scanning>>>>>"));
}
_waitHandle.Set();
}
the program just stops here. it doesn't change the content of the label, it returns to my ui, but blocks it.
i've tried
lblStatus.Dispatcher.Invoke(DispatcherPriority.Normal, new LblStatusThreadCheck(lblStatusThreadCheck), "Scanning...");
as well, but that isn't working also. any ideas?
The problem is that you're making it impossible for this to execute, since you're using Invoke.
Dispatcher.Invoke will not return until the UI thread processes. However, you've blocked the UI thread by calling _waitHandle.WaitOne();, and don't set the wait handle until AFTER this processes. The two effectively cause a dead lock.
If you switch this to use BeginInvoke instead, the UI will queue the element, the wait handle will set, THEN the label will update. It will work and not block, however.
Since the two previous posts already cover the problem in your code, just a suggestion: instead of
if (lblStatus.Dispatcher.Thread == Thread.CurrentThread)
try using
if (!lblStatus.CheckAccess())
It's cleaner and has the exact intent you want. Just read about it here.
You probably want to use BeginInvoke instead. Invoke will block the thread that called it until the UI thread has run the Action, and since you're setting the priority to Background, this could take some time.
Best solution I have found for .net 4.5+ is using SynchronizationContext Post
Example (Task.Run's can be as many as you want in parallel accessing UI):
private void MainWindow_Loaded(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
var context = SynchronizationContext.Current;
Task.Run(() =>
{
var i = 0;
while (true)
{
context.Post((tmp) =>
{
uiText.Text = $"{i}";
}), this);
Thread.Sleep(1000);
i++;
}
});
}
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.