I am using my java program to control a motor via Arduino. I plan to introduce the delays in the software itself and not in Arduino. How can I accurately do that since introducing delays using thread.sleep() is very inaccurate? Additionally, I want to pause the delay and upon resume, I want the software to complete the rest of the delay. For example, if I kept a delay for 1000 milliseconds and pause at 700 milliseconds, I want to stop the motor; upon resume, I want to finish the rest of the 300 milliseconds. How efficient it would be if I use a while loop till the System.currentTimeMillis() reaches a specific amount of time?
Make use of ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor. ScheduledExecutorService is an executor service that allows you to schedule future and recurring asynchronous tasks in Java.
It has been observed that long/ recurring tasks executed using ScheduledExecutorService can result in Memory Leaks. Since Java 7, ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor exposed a new method setRemoveOnCancelPolicy. Make sure this flag is set, as a precautionary measure.
ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor executor = new ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor(1);
// Explicitly call setRemoveOnCancelPolicy on the instance
executor.setRemoveOnCancelPolicy(true);
As per javaDoc, setRemoveOnCancelPolicy sets the policy on whether cancelled tasks should be immediately
removed from the work queue at time of cancellation. This value is by
default false
Related
I have a client application, where a runnable has to run in a fix period. Therefore I use the java.util.concurrent.ScheduledExecutorService as follows:
ScheduledExecutorService scheduledExecutorService =
Executors.newScheduledThreadPool(10);
ScheduledFuture scheduledFuture =
scheduledExecutorService.scheduleAtFixedRate(runnableClass,
period,period,TimeUnit.SECONDS);
As long as the workload is low, the task is scheduled in the defined period, i.e if the client receives no messages from the server. But if the server shoots out messages at full throttle, the runnableClass.run() is not executed on time. I feel like the time between the execution increases exponentially. But the Computer still runs smooth.
All Exceptions are catched inside run() and if I decrease the messages send from the server, the task is scheduled more often.
Why does that happen?
EDIT: The task needs a lot of resources and it is using Rserve to get predictions computed in R. There are probably up to 5000 calls to R in one task.
I made some tests regarding the time of the task. The task was always done in under a second, while the period was between 3 and 20 seconds.
How many threads are you running and how many cores do you have? Can it happen that you serve every request from a different thread, and the context switchings make your app run slower and slower?
Take care not to have much more CPU-bound threads than cores.
(Just a guess, sorry if it's way off)
Also, do you need a scheduled thread pool executor wit core size of 10? Isn't a SingleThreadScheduledExecutor enough for the scheduled task?
In my application I am calling third part vendor web-service. I need to delay my thread processing to achieve required throughput supported by vendor webservice.
I have two options
1. Use Thread.Sleep
2. use ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor as mentioned in the post How to start a thread after specified time delay in java
Wanted to know which is better option as we are sending time critical information(Text Message) using Vendor webservice.
Any help is appreciated.
They're pretty much the same as ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.scheduleWithFixedDelay encapsulates the sleep call.
Since the delay is 100ms performance difference is kind of negligible. I'd go with ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.scheduleWithFixedDelay due to pooled threads. The amount of load put on the system would be manageable, you wouldn't have multiple threads waking up from sleep together to compete for resources.
Also from the doc
Thread pools address two different problems: they usually provide
improved performance when executing large numbers of asynchronous
tasks, due to reduced per-task invocation overhead, and they provide a
means of bounding and managing the resources, including threads,
consumed when executing a collection of tasks. Each ThreadPoolExecutor
also maintains some basic statistics, such as the number of completed
tasks.
use the scheduler method, you can select fixed-rate or fixed-delay.
look the source code:
/**
* Period in nanoseconds for repeating tasks. A positive
* value indicates fixed-rate execution. A negative value
* indicates fixed-delay execution. A value of 0 indicates a
* non-repeating task.
*/
private final long period;
I am working on a Java program and using Timer objects to run tasks every few minutes or hours. This works fine in normal operations, but I am running into a problem with "Sleep mode" on Mac (maybe on other OSes, but I haven't tried yet).
Consider this code sample:
//Setup the timer to fire the ping worker (every 3 minutes)
_PingTimer.scheduleAtFixedRate(new TimerTask(){
public void run(){
Program.PingThread = new PingWorker(Settings.Username, Settings.UserHash, true, true);
Program.PingThread.CheckOpenPort = true;
Program.SwingExecutor.execute(Program.PingThread);
}
}, 0, 180000);
In normal operation this would fire every 3 minutes with enough accuracy (I'm not concerned about the exact second or anything). The problem with this is after sleeping the computer for a few hours or so it seems to just BLAST the system with backlogged timer requests.
It seems to be running all of the missed timer hits during sleep at once trying to make up for lost time.
Is there a way i can prevent this? I tried using synchronized and some other thread techniques, but this only ensures that they aren't all running at the same time. They still continue to run one after another until the backlog is passed.
Thanks for any help you can provide!
Have you looked at the API? It clearly states the following:
In fixed-rate execution, each
execution is scheduled relative to the
scheduled execution time of the
initial execution. If an execution is
delayed for any reason (such as
garbage collection or other background
activity), two or more executions will
occur in rapid succession to "catch
up." In the long run, the frequency of
execution will be exactly the
reciprocal of the specified period
(assuming the system clock underlying
Object.wait(long) is accurate).
This is one reason why you should consider using a ScheduledExecutorService. This link may also prove useful.
Use schedule instead of scheduleAtFixedRate.
I have a sort of complex problem like below.
- we have a real time system with large number threads requirement. In order to optimize the performance, we are thinking of following design.
create a thread pool executor with max number of threads
each thread is used to create scheduled executor service.
now the tasks are being assigned to these executor services evenly based on load
BUT the biggest problem is, if one of the task in the queue contains a sleep (for few secs), it blocks the corresponding Schedule executor service thread for that duration and subsequently all the following tasks in that queue.
In this regard, please suggest me how to suspend the execution of the task with sleep OR overriding the sleep somehow and rejoin/schedule the task again to the queue.
Thanks in advance
Seshu
Assuming I understand your question, your Schedule Executor service threads have a deadline requirement, but the actual workers can sleep for an unknown length of time, possibly throwing off the timing of the Schedule Executors. From your description I'm guessing what you want is for a task that needs to sleep to actually stop, save progress information and then requeue itself for the remainder of the work to be rescheduled at some future time. You'd have to build this into your application architecture.
Alternatively, you could have the scheduler threads launch the worker tasks in their own separate threads, letting them sleep as necessary, with one scheduler thread collecting all the worker terminations.
To get a better answer you're going to have to provide more information about what you're trying to accomplish.
Tasks which sleep are inherently unfriendly for running in any kind of bounded thread pool. The sleep is explicitly telling the thread that it must do nothing for a period of time.
If possible, split the task into 2 (or more parts), eliminating the sleep completely. Get the first half-task to schedule the second task with an appropriate delay.
Failing that, you could consider increasing the size of your thread pool somewhat - either setting a much larger cap to its size, or possibly even eliminating the cap altogether (not recommended for a server than might end up with many clients).
Alternatively, move the tasks with sleep statements in them into their own Scheduled executor. Then, they'll delay each other, but better-behaved tasks, with no wait statements in them, will get preferential treatment.
I am having this problem, I have
private ScheduledExecutorService executor =
Executors.newSingleThreadScheduledExecutor();
and task which is created every 50 millliseconds:
executor.scheduleAtFixedRate(myTask, 0, 50, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS);
myTask sometimes take a while to complete (like 2-3 seconds or so), but newSingleThreadScheduledExecutor guarantees that next scheduled myTask will wait until the current one completes.
However, I get this error from time to time:
execute: java.util.concurrent.RejectedExecutionException
What should I do? Thanks
Consider what the executor is doing. It is running a single task every 50 milliseconds, as per your instructions. Assuming this task takes less than 50 milliseconds to run, then everything is fine. However, every so often it takes 2-3 seconds to run. When this happens, the executor still tries to execute every 50 milliseconds, but because it only has a single thread, it can't, and rejects those executions that are being triggered while your long-running task is still going. This causes the exception you see.
You have two choices to fix this (assuming you want to stick with a single thread):
Use scheduleWithFixedDelay rather than scheduleAtFixedRate. If you read the javadoc carefully, you'll see that scheduleWithFixedDelay will wait 50 milliseconds between the finishing of one task and the start of the next, so it will never "overlap", even if one of them takes a long time. In contrast, scheduleAtFixedRate will try to execute every 50 milliseconds, regardless of how long each one takes.
Change the way that the executor handles failures to execute. The default is to log an exception, but you can tell it to ignore it, for example. Take a look at the subclasses of of java.util.concurrent.RejectedExecutionHandler, for example DiscardPolicy, which just silently drops the task that can't be run. You can use these by directly constructing ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor and passing in the handler to the constructor, rather than using the Executors factory class.
I suspect option (1) is what you want.
This exception will be thrown when either:
You have shutdown the Executor
The Executor's bounds for its work queue or maximum threads have been exceeded.
I assume the latter is happening. When you execute your task and it takes a long time then subsequent scheduled tasks can not be run because there are not enough threads available in the pool.
Either:
Use use a larger pool size or use cachedThreadPool
Change the rejection policy to for example use ThreadPoolExecutor.CallerRunsPolicy
Create a separate Executor for running the long run tasks and run these from your scheduled task. In actual fact you can do this using the same Executor instance providing that you increase the pool size.
See also ThreadPoolExecutor javadoc
With Java 7 both of them will wait till the first execution is ready and then start the next!
check here:
http://download.java.net/jdk7/archive/b123/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.html
or here:
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.html