Can some kind soul please explain why the following psudocode would not work. The problem is that the lock can never be aquired on the backgroundWorker (Monitor.TryEnter(bw)) when called from a new thread. If I call it from the main UI thread it works fine.
Thanks
P
public class MyClass
{
private BackgroundWorker bw;
private void Button_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
System.Threading.Thread t =
new System.Threading.Thread(new System.Threading.ThreadStart(DoStuff));
t.IsBackground = true;
t.Start();
}
private void DoStuff()
{
if (Monitor.TryEnter(bw))
{
WorkDetails wd = new WorkDetails('some stuff here');
bw.RunWorkerAsync(wd);
// etc... etc...
}
}
}
Are you missing a Monitor.Exit at the end of the if block.
Without a Monitor.Exit, whichever thread first does a Monitor.TryEnter successfully will be the only thread that can enter again.
I'm not sure you are using the background worker (BGW) as it was intended
The idea behind it, usually, is that you don't create threads yourself but rather specify to the BGW what you want to be done asynchronously. so your code should look like:
private BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker ();
ctor
{
bw.DoWork += (sender, e) => DoStuff();
}
private void Button_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
bw.RunWorkerAsync();
}
For more information, see here
comments:
As a rule of thumb, never lock on arbitrary objects (like you do on bw) but rather on objects whose sole purpose is locking. I recommend you read Jon Skeet's excellent multi threading guide
You can add the BGW declaratively via the designer, saving yourself the instantiation and event hooking code
Related
I have the following constellation:
MainForm.cs -> Including all my Form Elements
Program.cs -> includes the main part, which is a xmlreader/writer to alter xml attributes in xml files that can be as large as 4gb
So this little app works but of course the UI gets unresponsive and freezes which I want to avoid, I also hope to reduce the duration of this process on the way
I start the call of my xmlread/write method from a BtnClick event:
void BtnApplyChangesClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Program p = Program.Instance;
pbApplyChanges.Minimum = 0;
pbApplyChanges.Step = 1;
Cursor.Current = Cursors.WaitCursor;
foreach(DataGridViewRow cr in dataGridView2.Rows)
{
pbApplyChanges.Maximum = dataGridView2.Rows.Count;
p.changeElements(cr.Cells["Filename"].Value.ToString(), txtTenant.Text, txtDate.Text, txtEvtId2.Text);
pbApplyChanges.PerformStep();
}
Cursor.Current = Cursors.Arrow;
MessageBox.Show("Job done");
}
In the call I use my singleton instance of Program.cs and my main Method there (changeElements) uses 4 String params, that are all taken from information in the Form! (I suppose this is kinda bad practice but it worked so far...)
When I tried to replace this method call with a backgroundWorker (itself made the method call then) I failed as the method call wasn't even made... I found out that UI elements can't be accessed from the BW thread, so I suppose this is also the reason for my method call not working?!
So how can I get this constellation to work? Do I have to pass all 4 string Params AND the class instance (of Program.cs) to the background worker? Is BW even the best tool for the job?
In general the BackgroundWorker shouldn't access any UI-Elements. It's an old advice in Winforms that accessing UI-Elements should just happen from the UI-Thread.
You can use the Background-Worker like this:
private void Main(string[] args)
{
BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
bw.DoWork += Bw_DoWork;
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += Bw_RunWorkerCompleted;
//Parameter you need to work in Background-Thread for example your strings
string[] param = new[] {"Text1", "Text2", "Text3", "Text4"};
//Start work
bw.RunWorkerAsync(param);
}
//Do your Background-Work
private void Bw_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
string[] param = e.Argument as string[];
//Process your long running task
e.Result = null; //Set your Result of the long running task
}
//Taking your results
private void Bw_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
//Apply your Results to your GUI-Elements
myTextBox1.Text = e.Result.ToString();
}
Background-Worker is some old school stuff by the way, so if you like to learn something new take a look here and inform yourself about the TPL. This gives you a better handling of asynchronous.
In fact I think it's not really good to store 4gb data in a XML-File. Do you think about a Database? Or split the XML-File in many XML-Files? So you would be able to read data in chunks.
I hope this helps you.
I don't use background worker for this. I use normal threads instead. Try this code:
public void ButtonDoWork_Click(eventArgs......) {
DoWorkThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(DoWork)); // Setup thread
DoWorkThread.isBackground = true; // Its background so, we need to set background flag
DoWorkThread.Start(); // Start the thread
}
private Thread DoWorkThread: // our Thread object
private void DoWork() { // This void contains action that will be performed by thread
//TODO: Background processing. To update UI from another thread use Control.Invoke(...)
}
Please note, I don't tested this code - I write it from my memory and it's late so it can not work.
You can also read about Threads at MSDN :)
This question is possibly a duplicate of How do you add a timer to a C# console application and few other similar questions but couldn't find the answer I'm looking for so asking again.
Question: How do you pass data from the Elapsed event of a Timer (System.Timers.Timer) to the thread that created the timer (that thread may not be the Main thread but another thread spawned by Main)?
I assume there could be some trivial way of achieving this eg. like the BackgroundWorker ProgressChanged event being called in the thread that created the worker, but couldn't find a way in MSDN documentation or SO. Most examples I've seen do some action in the timer thread (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.timers.timer(v=vs.110).aspx) but don't pass anything to the original thread. Needless to say I'm pretty new to C#/.NET so a solution + pointers to references are appreciated.
Edit: I'd prefer not to use the Invoke()/InvokeRequired pattern (cf. How to use safe threading for a timer(Change timer properties from different thread) ) as this is not for a Forms application. I'm tempted to solve this by creating a BackgroundWorker that reports to the original thread at intervals (DoWork will be just a sleep() inside a loop) but thought .NET might have this already and hence the question.
Will you consider use a dispatcher? (although you need invoke some method too)
When some thread (maybe not the main thread) create the timer which you mentioned, you can create the dispatcher with the same thread too. After that, dispatcher.invoke() will let the original thread to do those task for you. See the MSDN for more information.
It seems to me that a simple locking mechanism is what you need:
private Object _sync = new Object();
void MyTimerFinished()
{
lock (_sync)
{
// Access shared data
...
}
}
void CodeExecutingInMainThread()
{
lock (_sync)
{
// Access shared data
...
}
}
Ok, so this is what I came up with (a solution with locks and Queues sounds a bit too complex for me - may be simpler but haven't tried)
public class ReportingTimer
{
public event EventHandler Elapsed;
private int _interval;
private BackgroundWorker _worker;
public ReportingTimer(int interval)
{
_interval = interval;
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
_worker.WorkerReportsProgress = true;
_worker.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
_worker.DoWork += _worker_DoWork;
_worker.ProgressChanged += _worker_ProgressChanged;
}
public void Start()
{
if (!_worker.IsBusy)
{
_worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
}
public void Stop()
{
if (_worker.IsBusy)
{
_worker.CancelAsync();
}
}
private void _worker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
while (!_worker.CancellationPending)
{
Thread.Sleep(_interval);
_worker.ReportProgress(1);
}
if (_worker.CancellationPending)
{
e.Cancel = true;
}
}
private void _worker_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
if (!_worker.CancellationPending)
{
if (Elapsed != null)
{
Elapsed(this, new EventArgs());
}
}
}
}
Please critique.
Edit: This serves my purpose and the interface is similar to the Timer class and is actually what I wanted from the stock Timer.
I have button call this code
private void but_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Thread My_Thread = new Thread(() => Send_File());
My_Thread.IsBackground = true;
My_Thread.Start();
}
I want a way to kill
My_Thread
from the function
Send_File()
please help me how to fix it ??? :(
Just declare your thread globally like any other variable (eg. int or string) you are using in different functions:
Thread My_Thread; //goes before your functions/main method
and then use it:
private void but_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
My_Thread = new Thread(Send_File);
My_Thread.IsBackground = true;
My_Thread.Start();
}
and kill it:
private void Send_File()
{
MyThread.Abort();
}
If you are talking about Send_File running in the thread, just exit it for example using break, stop all loops to complete it.
EDIT:
As Austin Salonen has stated in his comment this would overwrite the thread reference. My suggestion would be using a thread list.
public List<Thread> ThreadList=new List<Thread>(); //goes before your functions/main method (public for use in other classes)
and use it:
private void but_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Thread My_Thread = new Thread(Send_File);
My_Thread.IsBackground = true;
My_Thread.Start();
int ThreadIndex = ThreadList.Count; //remember index
ThreadList.Add(My_Thread);
}
You just need to remember the index of the list to create a reference to the thread again.
To abort a thread just use its index:
ThreadList[ThreadIndex].Abort();
ThreadList[ThreadIndex] = null;
or just let the thread return.
Define the Thread at the class level:
public class Whatever
{
Thread My_Thread;
private void but_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
My_Thread = new Thread(() => Send_File());
//...
}
private void Send_File()
{
My_Thread.Abort() //though I can never ever ever encourage doing this
//...
}
}
Or just return. When a Thread's work method returns, it is killed.
I'd highly recommend you not use Thread directly if you need to abort what it's doing. I'd recommend a Task and using CancellationTokenSource to communicate cancellation requests. If you need to communicate with the UI, e.g. progress, I'd recommend a BackgroundWorker. If you must use Thread, then you need to inform the user to abort. You can do this by using a shared boolean value that the thread periodically checks to see if it should continue. You should read/write the value in a thread-safe way. Maybe Interlocked.Exchange would do that for you or Thread.VolatileRead and Thread.VolatileWrite...
When you use Thread.Abort it simply stops the thread unless the thread tries to catch the ThreadAbortException. It's a bit iffy when you start using exceptions for normal logic flow; but, it's doable. There is a potential for deadlock with Thread.Abort in the context of try/catch/finally blocks. (and any other constrained region) But, Thread.Abort is not all that recommended: http://haacked.com/archive/2004/11/12/how-to-stop-a-thread.aspx
Thread.Abort() is the one you're looking for.
References & useful pages:
"Thread.Abort Method" [msdn.microsoft.com]
I have a program that makes some hefty calls to the database and then updates the UI. This is causing problems because for most of the time it means that the UI in not responsive. I therefore decided that I wanted to put the function calls that access the database and update the UI in a separate thread, so now I have something like this:
private delegate void CallAsyncDelegate();
private void CallGetDBValues()
{
// Call GetDatabaseValues in new thread
CallAsyncDelegate callGetDatabaseValues = new
CallAsyncDelegate(GetDatabaseValues);
BeginInvoke(callGetDatabaseValues);
}
private void GetDatabaseValues()
{
// Get lots of data here
// Update UI here
}
...
However, it seems to make no difference whatsoever to the UI. I read somewhere that if the code to be run in a separate thread needed to update the UI then this was how the call should be made - is this correct? Am I doing something wrong?
You may be better served using the BackgroundWorker that is built-in to the .NET framework.
BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
bw.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(bw_DoWork);
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(bw_RunWorkerCompleted);
bw.ProgressChanged += new ProgressChangedEventHandler(bw_ProgressChanged);
bw.WorkerReportsProgress = true;
void bw_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
// update UI with status
label1.Text = (string)e.UserState
}
void bw_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
//Check for cancel
if(e.Cancelled)
{
//Handle the cancellation.
{
//Check for error
if(e.Error)
{
//Handle the error.
}
// Update UI that data retrieval is complete
}
void bw_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
// Get data
//foreach to process data
//Report progress
bw.ReportProgress(n, message);
}
Here's a link to the MSDN article on how to use the BackgroundWorker for additional details. Thanks to Henk Holterman for the suggestion to include this:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc221403%28VS.95%29.aspx
In the "// Update UI here", make sure to use Control.Invoke to actually do the work -- it's imperative that the UI only be "touched" by the UI-thread, and this only happens when you use Control.Invoke.
BeginInvoke and Invoke means to run the code on the UI thread. In this case if you are calling CallGetDBValues() from the UI thread you are not going to gain anything.
Usually you will create a BackgroundWorker or background thread that will do the heavy lifting and it will Invoke back to the UI thread the values that need to be updated.
A BackgroundWorker will probably be the better solution (see Robaticus's answer), but here is a background thread version.
private delegate void CallAsyncDelegate();
private void button_Click( object sender, EventArgs e )
{
Thread thread = new Thread( GetDBValues );
thread.IsBackground = true;
thread.Start();
}
private void GetDBValues()
{
foreach( ... )
{
Invoke( new CallAsyncDelegate( UpdateUI ) );
}
}
private void UpdateUI()
{
/* Update the user interface */
}
I'm not sure of the syntax.. but the sytax I'm more familiar with is something like:
public delegate object myDelegate(object myParam);
Public class MyClass
{
public static void Main()
{
myDelegate d = new myDelegate(myMethod);
d.BeginInvoke ( new object() );
}
static void myMethod(object myParam)
{
// do some work!!
return new object);
}
}
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.