I am trying to learn threads in java, and got this idea of implementing a coin phone functionality using threads.
I am able to write down the basic tasks. My Flow chart is as below.
I have tried writing a class for checking hook status.
public class Hook {
static Logger log = Logger.getLogger(Hook.class.getName());
OffTheHook offTheHook= new OffTheHook();
void checkHook(Boolean hookStatus, String keyPressed){
log.debug("Hook Status "+hookStatus);
if(hookStatus==true){
offTheHook.beforeDroppingCoin(hookStatus);
}else{
if(keyPressed!=null){
DisplayMessages.displayMessage("FollowInstruction");
}else{
displayReadyMessage();
}
}
}
public static void displayReadyMessage(){
DisplayMessages.displayMessage("ready");
}
}
Another timer class..
public class TimerClass extends Thread{
int timeInMilli;
boolean status=false;
public TimerClass(int timeInMilli){
this.timeInMilli=timeInMilli;
}
#Override
public void run() {
timer();
}
private void timer(){
try {
Thread.currentThread().sleep(timeInMilli);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
How do I make these classes communicate with each other(small example will be enough). Moreover my requirement is if the headset is back on the hook the call must get cut.. How should I write the code to monitor that status? based on that status I need to make decision. At the same time I need to have another Thread that shall input status of hooks.
A small snippet of code will be that does the similar functionality, will be of great help.
Related
I've been using Java for a few years, but my thread knowledge is rubbish. I've Googled pretty heavily and found some good information about general use of ProgressMonitorDialog but nothing like my exact circumstances.
I'm currently using a ProgressMonitorDialog as a wrapper around an instance of IRunnableWithProgress, which in turn is a wrapper around a Thread. This works fine but now I'm trying to make the cancel button trigger an interrupt on the running thread, which I can handle to gracefully terminate the operation.
One important thing to note is that I have two plugins; "Data" and "UI". The data plugin contains all of the real work, and must be independent from the UI or any Eclipse plugins. The UI plugin should be as thin as possible.
Here's a distilled version of the code I've got so far.
Data:
public class Data {
public static Thread createThread() {
return new Thread() {
#Override
public void run() {
Thing t = new Thing();
t.operationA();
t.operationB();
t.operationC();
}
}
}
}
UI:
public class UI {
public void doOperation() {
try {
new ProgressMonitorDialog(getShell()).run(true, true, new MyOperation());
}
catch (Exception e) {
e.printStatckTrace();
}
}
public class MyOperation implements IRunnableWithProgress {
#Override
public void run(IProgressMonitor monitor) throws InterruptedException, InvocationTargetException {
monitor.beginTask("Task", 2);
try {
Thread myThread = Data.createThread();
myThread.start();
monitor.worked(1);
while (myThread.isAlive() && !monitor.isCanceled()) {}
if (monitor.isCanceled()) {
myThread.interrupt();
}
monitor.worked(1);
}
finally {
monitor.done();
}
}
}
}
So when the cancel button is clicked, myThread.interrupt() is called. Now the thread needs to respond to the interrupt. Data.createThread() now looks something like this:
public static Thread createThread() {
return new Thread() {
#Override
public void run() {
Thing t = new Thing();
t.operationA();
if (Thread.currentThread.isInterrupted()) {
// Tidy up
return;
}
t.operationB();
if (Thread.currentThread.isInterrupted()) {
// Tidy up
return;
}
t.operationC();
if (Thread.currentThread.isInterrupted()) {
// Tidy up
return;
}
}
}
}
It might be rather verbose polling the interrupted state like this, but I can't see this causing any problems.
But, what if Thing.operationA() wasn't atomic, and could be interrupted within that function:
public class Thing {
public void operationA() {
atomic1();
// How would I detect and handle a change to the interrupted state here?
atomic2();
}
public void operationB() {
// One atomic operation
}
public void operationC() {
// One atomic operation
}
}
How would I detect and handle a change to the interrupted state between atomic1() and atomic2()? Is it as simple as polling Thread.currentThread.isInterrupted() again? Or will I need to pass around some volatile object to track the interrupted state? Should I be throwing InterruptedException somewhere?
My second question is about tracking and reporting progress. I understand how IProgressMonitor.worked() should be used. As already seen, my Data thread contains 3 operations. Is it possible to pass that information up to the UI so I can track the progress in the ProgressMonitorDialog?
Ideally, something like this:
public static Thread createThread() {
return new Thread() {
#Override
public void run(IProgressMonitor monitor) {
Thing t = new Thing();
t.operationA();
monitor.worked(1);
if (Thread.currentThread.isInterrupted()) {
// Tidy up
return;
}
t.operationB();
monitor.worked(1);
if (Thread.currentThread.isInterrupted()) {
// Tidy up
return;
}
t.operationC();
monitor.worked(1);
if (Thread.currentThread.isInterrupted()) {
// Tidy up
return;
}
}
}
}
However as stated, Data cannot depend on Eclipse and therefore passing the IProgressMonitor doesn't work in this case.
Could I have a variable tracking progress in my thread, and then call something like myThread.getProgress() asynchronously from the UI thread to update the progress bar with new work? I'm not sure how feasible this is (it popped into my head as I was writing this question) so I'll try that next.
Lots of information and question marks in here, sorry if my style is a bit scattered. I could elaborate more if needs be but this is already a wall of text. Any information, advice or ideas appreciated.
Between atomic1() and atomic2() you do need to check for Thread.currentThread.isInterrupted() to cleanup in case of canceling. No need to throw an exception if you handle what is needed.
As for progress tracking, you can create your own listener object in the Data plugin and allow passing it to the thread. the UI will instantiate it and pass it to the thread. this way the Data can pass progress events to the UI without dependencies.
I need advice on the following:
I have a #Scheduled service method which has a fixedDelay of a couple of seconds in which it does scanning of a work queue and processing of apropriate work if it finds any. In the same service I have a method which puts work in the work queue and I would like this method to imediately trigger scanning of the queue after it's done (since I'm sure that there will now be some work to do for the scanner) in order to avoid the delay befor the scheduled kicks in (since this can be seconds, and time is somewhat critical).
An "trigger now" feature of the Task Execution and Scheaduling subsystem would be ideal, one that would also reset the fixedDelay after execution was initiated maually (since I dont want my manual execution to collide with the scheduled one). Note: work in the queue can come from external source, thus the requirement to do periodic scanning.
Any advice is welcome
Edit:
The queue is stored in a document-based db so local queue-based solutions are not appropriate.
A solution I am not quite happy with (don't really like the usage of raw threads) would go something like this:
#Service
public class MyProcessingService implements ProcessingService {
Thread worker;
#PostCreate
public void init() {
worker = new Thread() {
boolean ready = false;
private boolean sleep() {
synchronized(this) {
if (ready) {
ready = false;
} else {
try {
wait(2000);
} catch(InterruptedException) {
return false;
}
}
}
return true;
}
public void tickle() {
synchronized(this) {
ready = true;
notify();
}
}
public void run() {
while(!interrupted()) {
if(!sleep()) continue;
scan();
}
}
}
worker.start();
}
#PreDestroy
public void uninit() {
worker.interrup();
}
public void addWork(Work work) {
db.store(work);
worker.tickle();
}
public void scan() {
List<Work> work = db.getMyWork();
for (Work w : work) {
process();
}
}
public void process(Work work) {
// work processing here
}
}
Since the #Scheduled method wouldn't have any work to do if there are no items in the work-queue, that is, if no one put any work in the queue between the execution cycles. On the same note, if some work-item was inserted into the work-queue (by an external source probably) immediately after the scheduled-execution was complete, the work won't be attended to until the next execution.
In this scenario, what you need is a consumer-producer queue. A queue in which one or more producers put in work-items and a consumer takes items off the queue and processes them. What you want here is a BlockingQueue. They can be used for solving the consumer-producer problem in a thread-safe manner.
You can have one Runnable that performs the tasks performed by your current #Scheduled method.
public class SomeClass {
private final BlockingQueue<Work> workQueue = new LinkedBlockingQueue<Work>();
public BlockingQueue<Work> getWorkQueue() {
return workQueue;
}
private final class WorkExecutor implements Runnable {
#Override
public void run() {
while (true) {
try {
// The call to take() retrieves and removes the head of this
// queue,
// waiting if necessary until an element becomes available.
Work work = workQueue.take();
// do processing
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
continue;
}
}
}
}
// The work-producer may be anything, even a #Scheduled method
#Scheduled
public void createWork() {
Work work = new Work();
workQueue.offer(work);
}
}
And some other Runnable or another class might put in items as following:
public class WorkCreator {
#Autowired
private SomeClass workerClass;
#Override
public void run() {
// produce work
Work work = new Work();
workerClass.getWorkQueue().offer(work);
}
}
I guess that's the right way to solve the problem you have at hand. There are several variations/configurations that you can have, just look at the java.util.concurrent package.
Update after question edited
Even if the external source is a db, it is still a producer-consumer problem. You can probably call the scan() method whenever you store data in the db, and the scan() method can put the data retrieved from the db into the BlockingQueue.
To address the actual thing about resetting the fixedDelay
That is not actually possible, wither with Java, or with Spring, unless you handle the scheduling part yourself. There is no trigger-now functionality as well. If you have access to the Runnable that's doing the task, you can probably call the run() method yourself. But that would be the same as calling the processing method yourself from anywhere and you don't really need the Runnable.
Another possible workaround
private Lock queueLock = new ReentrantLock();
#Scheduled
public void findNewWorkAndProcess() {
if(!queueLock.tryLock()) {
return;
}
try {
doWork();
} finally {
queueLock.unlock();
}
}
void doWork() {
List<Work> work = getWorkFromDb();
// process work
}
// To be called when new data is inserted into the db.
public void newDataInserted() {
queueLock.lock();
try {
doWork();
} finally {
queueLock.unlock();
}
}
the newDataInserted() is called when you insert any new data. If the scheduled execution is in progress, it will wait until it is finished and then do the work. The call to lock() here is blocking since we know that there is some work in the database and the scheduled-call might have been called before the work was inserted. The call to acquire lock in findNewWorkAndProcess() in non-blocking as, if the lock has been acquired by the newDataInserted method, it would mean that the scheduled method shouldn't be executed.
Well, you can fine tune as you like.
I want to make a thread, which runs, computes something with the data i give it, and returns a few values, or an object. The thread is a part of a Swing GUI.
My question: How can I make a method that runs when I make the thread, and returns an object (or whatever I want it to return)?
My code:
private void nextTurn () {
// do something
if (turn == white) {
try {
Engine e = new Engine(); // Engine is implemented by runnable
e.start();
Move m = e.getBestMove (board);
// thread should work, next code should be excecuted immediately
}
catch (Exception e) {}
}
// end of Main class
}
This is the first time I am working with Threads, and I know you should avoid them if possible, but I need it this time for my GUI.
The info on the Oracle site on Threads did not help me out. I am able to make a program with multiple Threads that runs indefinately, but I can't make it work with functions.
Since this is with a Swing GUI, consider using a SwingWorker object which creates a background thread (all the code run in the doInBackground method), and then can return a final result and/or interim results. Information on how to use this is well documented in the tutorials here:
Concurrency in Swing
SwingWorkers have property change support and thus will allow listeners to observe its state (as a SwingWorker.StateValue) via a PropertyChangeListener. This is one way your program can determine that the thread has completed its processing, get the returned result and go from there.
On an unrelated note, this isn't in your production code is it?:
catch (Exception e) {}
If so, you will likely want to fix this as ignored exceptions can bite you in the tail big time.
e.g.,
if (turn == white) {
try {
final SwingWorker<Move, Void> mySwingWorker = new SwingWorker<Move, Void>() {
#Override
protected Move doInBackground() throws Exception {
Engine e = new Engine(); // Engine is implemented by runnable
e.start();
Move m = e.getBestMove(board);
return m;
}
};
mySwingWorker.addPropertyChangeListener(new PropertyChangeListener() {
public void propertyChange(PropertyChangeEvent evt) {
if (StateValue.DONE == mySwingWorker.getState()) {
try {
Move m = mySwingWorker.get();
// TODO: insert code to run on the EDT after move determined
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
} catch (ExecutionException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
});
mySwingWorker.execute();
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
I suggest you use an ExecutorService. It allows you to create a thread pool, you can pass tasks to it and get the results later.
http://download.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/ExecutorService.html
I have a problem with java threads:
public class MyClass{
public void Core(){
runTools(); //here I would like to call runTools() method
}
public void runTools(){
final String run_tool ="cmd.exe /C sources.exe";
Runnable doRun = new Runnable() {
public void run() {
try {
Process tool_proc = Runtime.getRuntime().exec(run_tool);
}
catch (IOException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
};
Thread th = new Thread(doRun);
th.start();
}
}
If I do this, then I don't know why, but the thread doesn't work. Please give me some ideas to create a thread. I have already been seen lots of examples, but I should some code such as my example here. Thanks!
At first, if you just want to execute an external command and do not bother about its output*, then using a dedicated thread is unnecessary, since the process itself will already run in parallel to your application, so the exec() call will not really hang your programm.
Nevertheless your code looks correct to me. You should check the working directory of your application (maybe cmd.exe cannot find your sources.exe) and evaluate the output the process you start gives you, by directing the streams of tool_proc.getErrorStream() and tool_proc.getInputStream() to System.out or logging them.
EDIT:
* The Java documentation states you always should read the InputStreams of your processes as failing to do so might result in filling up a system buffer, which will eventually hang the process.
problem 1 You create object for Runnable Interface,that is never possible.
Runnable *obj=new Runnable(); // this is not correct
problem 2 You write definition for Run() method with in the another method runTools()
we can create object for a class that implements The Runnable interface.
Due to these your code is not working.
Try the fallowing way
public class MyClassName1 implements Runnable
{
public void start()
{
//here you can call your method:runTools()
runTool();
}
}
public void runTools()
{
final String run_tool ="cmd.exe /C sources.exe";
try
{
Process tool_proc = Runtime.getRuntime().exec(run_tool);
}
catch (IOException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
here is my main class of the programe
public class MyClassName2
{
public static void main(String[] ars)
{
Runnable *obj1=new MyClassName1();
Thread t=new Thread(obj);
t.start()
}
I hope this helps to you
I have an application that every 15 minutes or so does a replication from a remote database. It just keeps the two repositories in sync. Once this replication is going it is not possible to do it again. I have setup the following structure but I'm not sure if it is the correct approach.
public class ReplicatorRunner {
private static Lock lock = new ReentrantLock();
public replicate() {
if (lock.tryLock()) {
try {
// long running process
} catch (Exception e) {
} finally {
lock.unlock();
}
} else {
throw new IllegalStateException("already replicating");
}
}
}
public class ReplicatorRunnerInvocator {
public void someMethod() {
try {
ReplicatorRunner replicator = new ReplicatorRunner();
replicator.replicate();
} catch (IllegalStateException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
The ReplicatorRunner is the class owning the method replicate which can only be run one at a time.
Edit.
I need the next call to fail (not block) if the method is already running on any instance.
This looks good. ReentrantLock.tryLock() will only give the lock to one thread, so synchronized is not necessary. It also prevents the blocking inherent in synchronization that you say is a requirement. ReentrantLock is Serializable, so should work across your cluster.
Go for it.
Change public replicate() to public synchronized replicate()
That way replicate will only ever allow access to one thread at a time. You'll also be able to delete the ReentrantLock and all associated code.
I ended up using the following:
public class ReplicatorRunner {
private static Semaphore lock = new Semaphore(1);
public replicate() {
if (lock.tryAcquire()) {
try {
// basic setup
Thread t = new Thread(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
try {
// long running process
} catch Exception (e) {
// handle the exceptions
} finally {
lock.release();
}
}
})
t.start();
} catch (Exception e) {
// in case something goes wrong
// before the thread starts
lock.release();
}
} else {
throw new IllegalStateException("already replicating");
}
}
}
public class ReplicatorRunnerInvocator {
public void someMethod() {
try {
ReplicatorRunner replicator = new ReplicatorRunner();
replicator.replicate();
} catch (IllegalStateException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
Without looking at the specifics of the ReentrantLock, it occurs to me that this prevention of multiple simultaneous replication routines will be limited to a single JVM instance.
If another instance of the class is kicked off in a separate JVM, then you might be in trouble.
Why not put a lock mechanism on the database? i.e. A row in a control table that is set to a value depicting whether or not the replication is busy running, and reset the value when the replication is finished.
take a look at the Semaphore class here or mark the method as synchronized
the thread executing the method at any given time owns a lock on it avoiding other threads to call the method until its execution ends.
Edit: if you want the other threads to fail, you could use a Lock, and test if the lock is avaible by the tryLock method.