Develop Reference

UI not updating when TableAdapter.Fill is called from another Thread

I'm developing an MDI application in C# with .NET 4.0.
Each MDI child will be a form with tabs that contains GroupBoxes with a DataGridView.
I implemented a class that is used to manage Threads.
This is the StartNewThread method in my ThreadManager class
public string StartNewThread(ThreadStart threadMethod, string threadName)
{
try
{
Thread thread = new Thread(() => threadMethod());
thread.Name = threadName + " (" + _threadCount++.ToString("D4") + ")";
thread.Start();
_threadList.Add(thread.Name, thread);
return thread.Name;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
//Log and manage exceptions
}
return null;
}
To create the DataGridViews I used some Wizard component from Oracle Developer Tools for VS library. So, after creating the DataSource and so the DataSet, then I used drag&drop from DataSource tree to drag tables and automatically create DataGridViews.
This is the actual working code, behind the child form, automatically created.
public partial class ScuoleNauticheForm : Form
{
public ScuoleNauticheForm()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void ScuoleNauticheForm_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// TODO: This line of code loads data into the 'dEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.PERSONALE' table. You can move, or remove it, as needed.
this.PersonaleTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.PERSONALE);
// TODO: This line of code loads data into the 'dEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.NATANTI' table. You can move, or remove it, as needed.
this.NatantiTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.NATANTI);
// TODO: This line of code loads data into the 'dEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.SCUOLE' table. You can move, or remove it, as needed.
this.ScuoleTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.SCUOLE);
}
}
What I want to do now is manage all the load/query/insert/update/delete operations on separated threads. For now I tried to create a new Thread to load the data.
This i what I tried.
public partial class ScuoleNauticheForm : Form
{
private readonly ThreadManager _threadManager;
public ScuoleNauticheForm()
{
InitializeComponent();
_threadManager = ThreadManager.GetInstance();
}
private void ScuoleNauticheForm_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
_threadManager.StartNewThread(LoadData, "LoadData");
}
#region DataBind
private void LoadData()
{
// TODO: This line of code loads data into the 'dEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.PERSONALE' table. You can move, or remove it, as needed.
this.PersonaleTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.PERSONALE);
// TODO: This line of code loads data into the 'dEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.NATANTI' table. You can move, or remove it, as needed.
this.NatantiTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.NATANTI);
// TODO: This line of code loads data into the 'dEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.SCUOLE' table. You can move, or remove it, as needed.
this.ScuoleTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.SCUOLE);
}
#endregion
}
It works only for half... There's no errors or exceptions, but if I load data that way, using a different Thread, the DataGridviews doesn't update and I don't see any data when opening the form, even if I move or resize it. Otherwise, using the automatically generated code, the DataGridViews are populated correctly.
But, since the wizard also add a navigation bar to the form to navigate through records, I noticed that it works, because it counts the correct number of records and I can use the arrows (first, previous, next, last) to move across records.
Here is an image showing my form.
See the navigation bar that is showing the correct number of total records (14) and allows me to navigate through them.
Do I need to use delegates? If so, I think it would be a mess... how many delegates should I create and for those methods? Or is there another solution?
-- UPDATE 1 --
I know that UI threads are automatically managed by .NET and so the programmer don't need to manage them with code. So, should it be a problem of synchronization with the .NET UI thread built in management? Maybe my thread launched by Form.Load() interferes with the UI thread managed by the .NET?
-- UPDATE 2 --
I tried to implement the solution proposed by faby. I replaced my Thread logic with Task logic. The behaviour of the application is the same, so everything that was working with Thread is now working also with Task. But the problem still remains. Since I'm on .NET 4.0 and not .NET 4.5, I could not use async and await. So I don't know if with that approach the UI will work correctly or not.
Any other suggestion valid for .NET 4.0?

do you consider the option of BackgroundWorker Class ?
implementing DoWork and ProgressChanged you can do in DoWork what you are doing in background thread and in ProgressChanged you can update the UI
private void backgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker worker = sender as BackgroundWorker;
//long running task
}
private void backgroundWorker1_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
//update the UI components
}
update 1
another solution could be something like this
public Task LoadDataAsync()
{
return Task.Factory.StartNew( () =>
{
//code to fill your datagridview
});
}
then
public async Task ChangeUIComponents()
{
await LoadDataAsync();
// now here you can refresh your UI elements
}
update 2
to use async/await with framework 4.0 try with this NugetPackage (Microsoft.Bcl.Async)

I finally found a solution without using async/await and other libraries.
The problem was that I was executing the Fill() method of TableAdapter inside a new Task and so I needed to use InvokeRequired to set the binding source data source to the DataTable within the right thread.
So I used delegates. I changed the method called on the new Task and make it call 3 other methods (one for each DataGridView to fill) that call Fill() implementing the InvokeRequired check.
Now I see the creation of the UI and then, after a couple of seconds, the asynchronous filling of the DataGridViews.
This article was useful: Load data from TableAdapter async
Thanks to #faby for the suggestion to use Task instead of Thread. It was not the solution but it is a better way to do Threading.
Here's the final working code.
public partial class ScuoleNauticheForm : Form
{
private readonly TaskManager _taskManager;
public ScuoleNauticheForm()
{
InitializeComponent();
_taskManager = TaskManager.GetInstance();
}
private void ScuoleNauticheForm_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
_taskManager.StartNewTask(LoadData);
}
#region Delegates
public delegate void FillPersonaleCallBack();
public delegate void FillNatantiCallBack();
public delegate void FillScuoleCallBack();
#endregion
#region DataBind
private void LoadData()
{
FillPersonale();
FillNatanti();
FillScuole();
}
public void FillPersonale()
{
if (PersonaleDataGridView.InvokeRequired)
{
FillPersonaleCallBack d = new FillPersonaleCallBack(FillPersonale);
Invoke(d);
}
else
{
this.PersonaleTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.PERSONALE);
}
}
public void FillNatanti()
{
if (NatantiDataGridView.InvokeRequired)
{
FillNatantiCallBack d = new FillNatantiCallBack(FillNatanti);
Invoke(d);
}
else
{
this.NatantiTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.NATANTI);
}
}
public void FillScuole()
{
if (ScuoleDataGridView.InvokeRequired)
{
FillScuoleCallBack d = new FillScuoleCallBack(FillScuole);
Invoke(d);
}
else
{
this.ScuoleTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.SCUOLE);
}
}
#endregion
}
-- Update 1 --
If the methods to call by the new Task are void and without any parameters, you can simplify a bit the above code by using Invoke((MethodInvoker) MethodName). The behaviour of the application is the same.
Here's the simplified version of the code.
public partial class ScuoleNauticheForm : Form
{
private readonly TaskManager _taskManager;
public ScuoleNauticheForm()
{
InitializeComponent();
_taskManager = TaskManager.GetInstance();
}
private void ScuoleNauticheForm_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
_taskManager.StartNewTask(LoadData);
}
#region DataBind
private void LoadData()
{
// Since Fill Methods are void and without parameters,
// you can use the Invoke method without the need to specify delegates.
Invoke((MethodInvoker)FillPersonale);
Invoke((MethodInvoker)FillNatanti);
Invoke((MethodInvoker)FillScuole);
}
public void FillPersonale()
{
this.PersonaleTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.PERSONALE);
}
public void FillNatanti()
{
this.NatantiTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.NATANTI);
}
public void FillScuole()
{
this.ScuoleTableAdapter.Fill(this.DEVRAC_NauticheDataSet.SCUOLE);
}
#endregion
}

How does UI thread know about data on another thread?

I came across a situation which puzzled me at work today which I have simplified in the following code. This code builds and throws no exceptions during debug.
Suppose I have a WinForms app. In my main UI thread I spin off another thread which instantiates an object which in turn holds reference to a control (label1 in my example). I then call a method on my object (SetLabelText) which passes it's execution back onto the UI thread if required.
What stumped me was how, when we are back in the UI thread and executing SetLabelText, is .net CLR able to access the labelText variable when we are executing on a thread (ie the UI thread) which did not create the instance of Thing.
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
delegate void DoSomethingDelegate();
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var t = new Thread(DoSomethingWithThing);
t.Start();
}
private void DoSomethingWithThing()
{
var thing = new Thing(this.label1);
thing.SetLabelText();
}
}
public class Thing
{
private Label label;
private string labelText = "new value";
delegate void SetLabelTextDelegate();
public Thing(Label label)
{
this.label = label;
}
public void SetLabelText()
{
if (this.label.InvokeRequired)
{
var setLabelDel = new SetLabelTextDelegate(SetLabelText);
this.label.Invoke(setLabelDel);
}
else
{
this.label.Text = this.labelText;
}
}
}

References to objects are available on any thread.
Threads are not sand-boxed from each other. They share resources unless you explicitly create non-shared resources.
Threads are execution contexts. Think of your application as a kitchen and each thread as a chef. They can work at the same time but if two of them try to use the same knife at the same time, things get messy. This is why c# has the lock keyword and other synchronization mechanisms.
WinForms has restrictions on access to controls because of the way WinForms renders.

Thread contained inside class

I'm writing a simple Windows forms application to get me into the swing of things with Threads. So far what I have is working, but what I would like to do is contain it all in a seperate class rather than directly in my forms code.
I have a background thread that starts and retrieves data from a database. I then display that data in to a listbox.
private delegate void UpdateListValues(List<ListBoxItem> itemList);
private void form_main_Shown(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// Set the loading text.
list_selection.Items.Add(ListHelpers.LoadingItem());
// Start the data access on a seperate thread.
Thread worker = new Thread(GetInvoicingData);
worker.IsBackground = true;
worker.Start();
}
private void GetInvoicingData()
{
// Query database
List<ListBoxItem> values = DAC.GetInvoicingAccounts();
// Display results
BeginInvoke(new UpdateListValues(DisplayList), new object[] { values });
}
private void DisplayList(List<ListBoxItem> itemList)
{
// Display each result
list_selection.Items.Clear();
for (int i = 0; i < itemList.Count; i++)
{
list_selection.Items.Add(itemList[i]);
}
}
The problem is that in the DisplayList method, I won't be able to access the list box (list_selection) because it's part of the form class. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I can do this.
Also, I'm new to threading so feel free to tell me I'm doing it absolutely wrong. I just used the example from http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/23517/How-to-Properly-Handle-Cross-thread-Events-and-Upd to get me to where I am now.
Thanks

How about something like this:
// Added the form's class declaration to highlight separation of thread code into a separate class, but may not be exactly the same as yours depending on naming
public class Form1 : Form
{
private readonly DataRetriever _dataRetriever;
private void form_main_Shown(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// Set the loading text.
list_selection.Items.Add(ListHelpers.LoadingItem());
// Create the DataRetriever, and provide it with a delegate to DisplayList for returning data
_dataRetriever = new DataRetriever(DisplayList);
// Start retrieving data on a separate thread...
_dataRetriever.GetData();
}
private void DisplayList(List<ListBoxItem> itemList)
{
if (InvokeRequired)
{
// Ensure the update occurs on the UI thread
Invoke((Action)(() => DisplayList(itemList)));
return;
}
// Display each result
list_selection.Items.Clear();
foreach (var item in itemList)
{
list_selection.Items.Add(item);
}
}
}
// Separate class to hold thread code
public class DataRetriever
{
public delegate void UpdateCallbackDelegate(List<ListBoxItem> itemList);
private readonly UpdateCallbackDelegate _updateCallback;
public DataRetriever(UpdateCallbackDelegate updateCallback)
{
_updateCallback = updateCallback;
}
public void GetData()
{
var thread = new Thread(GetInvoicingData)
{
IsBackground = true
};
thread.Start();
}
private void GetInvoicingData()
{
// Not sure whether "DAC" is a static class, if it needs to be constructed
// in the DataRetriever's constructor, or passed to it as a parameter
_updateCallback(DAC.GetInvoicingAccounts());
}
}
As you can see, all the thread code is now in a separate class DataRetriever, and a delegate provided when constructing it to enable the retrieved data to be passed back to the form once the retrieval is complete. The method that handles the callback ensures that the call is marshalled to the UI thread to prevent cross-thread exceptions.
I would like to point out that this is not presented as the "best" way to do this, but merely as an answer to the question (how to separating threading code into a separate class). As others have mentioned, there are already mechanisms in place to do this sort of thing (e.g. BackgroundWorker). Some complexity has been omitted for clarity. For example, in the implementation presented here, if you were to call GetData() multiple times (with each call occurring before the previous ones have returned their data), you would have multiple queries occurring simultaneously, and as they are running asynchronously, may return their data in an arbitrary order. This may or may not be an issue in your case.

Timer within Thread within Windows Service

I cant figure out how to proceed the best way with this problem.
Right now I have a windows service which only task is to gather data from a database with a specific DSN and then send out an email if the data is valid. The service contains a timer which ticks every 5 minuts and performs the tasks above.
Now I need to re-write the windows service to be able to run on more than 1 DSN.
I was thinking of making several threads inside the windows service and then again have a seperat timer inside each thread.
Is this a good idea and how can this be done? I want to avoid having a windows service for each DSN.
Ill try to draw it if I dont make any sense
Windows Service
Thread1(DSN1)-----------------------------Thread2(DSN2)----------------------Thread3(DSN3)
Timer(ticks every X minuts)-----------------Timer(same)-------------------------Timer(same)
Logic()---------------------------------------------Logic---------------------------------Logic()
Hope my problem makes sense :)

As far as I Know each timer represents a thread on its own. Knowing this, I would try to dynamically create timer objects for each given dsn.
public partial class Service1 : ServiceBase
{
public Service1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private List<GetDataFromDSN> list = null;
protected override void OnStart(string[] args)
{
list = new List<GetDataFromDSN>();
// assume args contains your given dsn values
foreach (string dsn in args)
{
GetDataFromDSN newObj = new GetDataFromDSN();
newObj.DSN = dsn;
list.Add(newObj);
newObj.Start();
}
}
}
public class GetDataFromDSN
{
public string DSN { get; set; }
private Timer timer = null;
private double interval = 1000*60*5; // 5 minutes interval
public GetDataFromDSN()
{
// init your object
timer = new Timer(interval);
timer.Elapsed +=new ElapsedEventHandler(timer_Elapsed);
}
private void timer_Elapsed(object sender, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
// do what ever you want
}
public void Start() // or even make timer public
{
timer.Start();
}
public void Stop()
{
timer.Stop();
}
}

Do each of the DSNs need to be on a separate Thread?
If you were to encapsulate the Email retrieval and validation logic within some sort of service that the Thread invoked, the fact that there were multiple DSNs could be hidden from the scheduling thread. For instance, an IEmailService might have the following contract:
public interface IEmailService
{
void SendEmailsToValidAddresses();
}
and the implementation might look something like this:
public class MultipleSourcesEmailService : IEmailService
{
private IEnumerable<IDatabaseSource> databases;
public EmailService(params IDatabaseSource[] sources)
{
databases = new List<IDatabaseSource>(sources);
}
public void SendEmailsToValidAddresses()
{
foreach(var database in databases)
{
var emailAddresses = database.SelectAllEmailAddresses();
ValidateAndSendEmailsTo(emailAddresses);
}
}
public void ValidateAndSendEmailsTo(IEnumerable<string> emailAddresses)
{
// Perform appropriate logic
...
}
}
In this way, your timer logic can remain the same and on a single Thread whilst the concern of sending emails is separated into the IEmailService. This also means that you could implement a SingleSourceEmailService and a MultipleSourceEmailService and swap the multiple sources in when you're code complete and the consumer of the service need never know.
Of course, the EmailService as implemented above will SendEmails from multiple sources sequentially - if you need it to run in parallel you could change the EmailService to kick off a new Thread for each of the DSNs that you have, you could even call it the: MultiThreadedMultipleSourceEmailService but as a consumer of the IEmailService your scheduling will never know the difference.

Use a backgroundworker.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.backgroundworker.aspx
Just start one for each DSN, very smooth and easy to use.

Try using System.Threading.Timer
Here is sample code from my project, Hope this helps
public void StartDSNTimers()
{
_tmr1 = new Timer(CheckMessages, dsn1, 0, 60000);
_tmr2 = new Timer(CheckMessages, dsn2, 0, 60000);
_tmr3 = new Timer(CheckMessages, dsn3, 0, 60000);
}
private void CheckMessages(object obj)
{
//Logic
}

combining methods

In my app I have a lot of copy and paste code that is exactly the same and performs exactly the same function (button click events and the like). These redundant code live in the code-behind of many of my pages. So I decided to reduce the code duplication and to move these methods into a class file and only make a call to them from the code-behind pages.
Here is an example of a button click event in my code behind calling the methods from a class file:
#region DELETE selected users - button
protected void btnDeleteSelected_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
try
{
UserGvUtil.DeleteSelectedUsersAndProfiles(GridView1, Msg);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
UserGvUtil.ExceptionErrorMessage(Msg, ex);
}
finally
{
UserGvUtil.RefreshGridView(GridView1);
}
}
#endregion
Can I combine this try/catch block into yet another method and move it to the same class file? So, the only thing I have in the click event is a single line of code.
Does it make sense to do this? Not sure why, but I would like to have my code behind files as clean and simple as possible so I can make all the edits in a single place.
Sorry if I make no sense. I'm just learning about classes and methods and it floods my head with lots of ideas.

You can move the stuff inside the try block into an anonymous delegate that you pass to a shared method that has a try/catch. You really don't need to put the refresh into the finally, though. In fact, I would think you would only want to run it if the try block succeeds.

You can wire the event handlers manually.
btnDeleteSelected1.Click += Events.BtnDeleteSelected_Click;
btnDeleteSelected2.Click += Events.BtnDeleteSelected_Click;
...
btnDeleteSelected3.Click += Events.BtnDeleteSelected_Click;
public static class Events
{
public static BtnDeleteSelected_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
...
}
}
Edit (for downvoters: ???)
The code will give you a one liner and you won't have to worry about writing custom events when they are all the same.
Also, if the utility methods have the same signature you could have a generic method:
public void ExecuteGvMethod(Action<GridView, string> gvMethod, GridView gv, string msg)
{
try
{
gvMethod(gv, msg);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
UserGvUtil.ExceptionErrorMessage(msg, ex);
}
finally
{
UserGvUtil.RefreshGridView(GridView1);
}
}
And in code:
public static class Events
{
public static BtnDeleteSelected_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
ExecuteGvMethod(UserGvUtil.DeleteSelectedUsersAndProfiles, (GridView)sender, "hi of whatever");
}
}

I'm risking a downvote, but here are my 2 cents:
Instead of using a try/catch, use a method that returns a status code.
For instance (just an idea, instead of using enum you can use a more complex class):
public enum StatusCode
{
Success = 1,
Error =2
}
public class UserGvUtil
{
public StatusCode getStatusAfterDelete(GridView GridView1, string Msg)
{
try
{
DeleteSelectedUsersAndProfiles(GridView1, Msg);
Return StatusCode.Success;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
UserGvUtil.ExceptionErrorMessage(Msg, ex);
Return StatusCode.Error;
}
}
//your other methods here
}
Then in code behind:
protected void btnDeleteSelected_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
StatusCode sc = UserGvUtil.getStatusAfterDelete(GridView1, Msg);
//then do something with the status code if you have to:
if (sc==StatusCode.Error) throw new Exception("Error deleting users and profiles");
else UserGvUtil.RefreshGridView(GridView1);
}
That way you can change your try/catch later if you think it affects performance etc...
Hope it helps.

I have a lot of copy and paste code
that is exactly the same ... (button
click events and the like)
Just move all of that code that's duplicated behind multiple click handlers into a method in a separate class and pass whatever's needed (in this case the GridView and whatever that MSG object is) as parameters. If its saving significant duplication then it would make sense to do so. DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) is a valid principle.