Thread Runnable vs AsyncTask Life Cycle - java

I would like to better understand what happens to a Thread or a AsyncTask when activity is destroyed.
So in this scenario, a Thread or AsyncTask would be started from activity, and user hits home button and onDestroy gets called triggering GC before either Thread of AsyncTask had a chance to finish.
Which one is more likely to run till completion in this scenario Thread/Runnable or an AsyncTask ?
Thanks.

Both will run
But the problem is if you have a reference to the killed activity on Thread of AsyncTask it will leak, and that is a problem you need to solve to make long running tasks synchronized with UI
If you've got a bigger task, I'd suggest you to spin up a Service, which are more easy to handle in Android context

AsyncTask based on thread so there is no huge difference in it's behaviour both will run after onDestroy. To avoid this behaviour you could use Loaders or manually stop execution of AsyncTasks/Threads in onDestroy method.

Related

Android: How to stop Thread.sleep in an IntentService from the MainActivity

I am developing an Android App. I have a MainActivity class where I launch an IntentService.
In the IntentService class, I use Thread.sleep in the method onHandleIntent to handle a necessary pause.
Everything works fine.
What I would like to do is have a button in the MainActivity UI which can interrupt the Thread.sleep in the IntentService.
Is this possible? Thank you.
No, it's not possible. You cannot handle non UI related threads from the main UI thread. A thread is an independent entity when it's executed. If you want to be able to cancel a task that is already running, you should consider using AsyncTask and implement the doInBackground() method. Thereafter, it's possible to cancel this task from the UI if it's still executing.
Try to consider using a Service instead of the IntentService. The first one doesn't stop automatically, meaning it will listen to your commands you could send to it (I would go with EventBus) unless it is destroyed by the system to reclaim resources. Still you should definitely stop it on your own after you don't need it.
Anyways, I would better implement start/pause feature to control your flow rather than rely on thread interruptions.

What can be happen if I use AsyncTask in IntentService?

I want to know. What can be happen, when I use AsyncTask in IntentService.
Once onHandleIntent() returns, the service will be destroyed if there is no more outstanding work to be done. If the AsyncTask is still running, you will have leaked that thread. There is no guarantee that your process will remain running long enough for the AsyncTask to complete its work.
Since IntentService already gives you a background thread -- the one that onHandleIntent() runs on -- there is no need for another background thread. Just put your doInBackground() logic in onHandleIntent() of the IntentService.
Also, in general, using an AsyncTask from any service is unnecessary, as the service has no need to do anything on the main application thread.
You can use aynchronous task inside intent service and it will run perfectly.Since , intentService is to run the background task without Ui interaction but it is better for one work not to use asychronous task inside intentService.It will be helpful when You are using more than one long operations in the intentService otherwise that will struck the device
I think it is a completely bad idea to execute AsyncTask inside IntentService. I have an experience of AsyncTask inside JobIntentService which is different from IntentService but it causes crash. Just put codes inside doInBackground() in onHandleIntent().

killing fragment or activity kill background threads?

I started doing some disk I/O in an asynctask within a fragment.
Does opening a new activity/fragment (on top of the previous fragment) kill the background thread? I think not for this action, but if I kill the fragment a different way or finish() an activity does it kill the background thread?
I am contemplating putting the I/O in a service with broadcast receivers but it may not be necessary depending on the answers here.
According to the official documentation :
AsyncTasks should ideally be used for short operations (a few seconds at the most.) If you need to keep threads running for long periods of time, it is highly recommended you use the various APIs provided by the java.util.concurrent pacakge such as Executor, ThreadPoolExecutor and FutureTask.
I am pretty sure the background thread isn't destroyed but is useless at that point. Say an activity started a Async task and updates the text of a button in postExecute. The problem is if the user does something unexpected like rotating his phone the activity is recreated and the context for the Async task is invalid. So it won't update the button text.
Have a look at the link below for better understanding and workarounds:
http://blogactivity.wordpress.com/2011/09/01/proper-use-of-asynctask/

Service or Thread or AsyncTask

Pardon my questions, as I'm still very new to programming so I don't fully understand the concepts of mainthreads, and async tasks, and services, and threads. I'm reading the documentation about Services for Android because I want to perform some tasks off the main thread. It says:
If you need to perform work outside your main thread, but only while
the user is interacting with your application, then you should
probably instead create a new thread and not a service.
1.Are they saying that a "thread" stops immediately after you leave the app (i.e: Home button)?
For example, if you want to play some music, but only while your
activity is running, you might create a thread in onCreate(), start
running it in onStart(), then stop it in onStop(). Also consider using
AsyncTask or HandlerThread, instead of the traditional Thread class.
See the Processes and Threading document for more information about
threads.
2.If threads are baked into Java, why does android have AsyncTasks?
Remember that if you do use a service, it still runs in your
application's main thread by default, so you should still create a new
thread within the service if it performs intensive or blocking
operations.
3.Does this basically mean, that almost every service is basically going to have a thread created inside it?
4.Would it be bad to start an AsyncTask inside of a service?
1.Are they saying that a "thread" stops immediately after you leave the app (i.e: Home button)?
A Thread should be destroyed when the Thread that started it is destroyed. So, if you start a Thread in an Activity then it should be destroyed when that Activity is destroyed or transferred to a Service. For instance, you can start music in a Thread and update the songs there but if you want it to keep playing when the Activity is destroyed then it should be moved to a Service
2.If threads are baked into Java, why does android have AsyncTasks?
An AsyncTask allows you to perform background work and easily update the UI before, during, and after the background work is done by utilizing any of its built-in methods except for doInBackground() because it is the only one that doesn't run on the UI Thread
3.Does this basically mean, that almost every service is basically going to have a thread created inside it?
Not necessarily but you could create a Thread inside of it
4.Would it be bad to start an AsyncTask inside of a service?
No. You could do this.
AsyncTask is a great way to do background work. Its methods make it very easy to update the UI. But you need to read through the documentation carefully (maybe even a few times) to make sure you completely understand how to use them. Also, remember that these are for short-lived operations so they can be good for downloading network data but shouldn't be used for things that last more than a few seconds (According to the docs)
A thread doesn't stop immediately when you leave the app. The suggestion to use a separate thread is only so you don't block your app's GUI.
AsyncTasks actually use a ThreadPool behind the scenes as creating a thread is an expensive process. If you have many short lived tasks, using AsyncTask is just a quick, easy, but efficient way to execute them without blocking your application's GUI.
Yes, essentially. A service is more heavy weight than a thread though. Using a service in place of a thread is not a good idea. Also services can actually be made to execute on a whole other process. Just FYI.
No. It would be a good idea, if you've many short lived tasks to execute.
If you are only trying to execute tasks off the main thread, you don't need a service. Just create another thread.
AsyncTask behind the scenes just submits your task to a thread pool for execution. If you have many short lived tasks, like parsing networking traffic, AsyncTask is great.
However, if you are handling a huge amount of requests, you might want more control over the thread pool executing your tasks.
No
Because a main thread controls the UI while asynctasks can make heavier tasks while keeping the UI lag-free.
No, but if you want your service to make heavy lifting like loading stuff from internet then it should use an asynctask. Most services are used to load data from internet so most of them have asynctasks. Note that for the service to be kept alive after the activity dies, you must specify it. Services by default die along with the activity unless configured properly
No
You might be confusing by thread and task and process.Task is small kind of process.An process
is a pro-gramme that running in your system example when start your task-manager it is showing all the process running like Internet-explorer but thread is small lightweight process means you can say sub-process that in execution for performing some task but asynchronous in android is just similar to thread but it may-be long.Take a example in android you are playing temple-run in android-phone ,and some-one is calling you so that high priority task will performed and current thread is paused there and so many method are there
like onCreate() ,onPause(),you can understand it.

Android - Thread.sleep and Handler.postDelayed() freezes animated UI elements

In my activity, my app downloads a list of something from a website via an Http Connection. Before this list of things is displayed on the screen, I have a Loading... TextView with a little spinning ProgressBar to indicate that the data is currnetly being downloaded.
I noticed, that if I do any type of Thread.sleep() during the process of fetching the data from the web, it freezes the spinning ProgressBar.
Even if I put the method in it's own Handler Runnable so that it's on it's own thread, the animation freezing still occurs.
Is there anything I can do about this?
Yes, use AsyncTask.
A Handler is usually attached to the UI thread. Posting Runnables to it doesn't change the fact that they will run on the UI thread.
Any application should do long running tasks on a seperate thread to the UI thread as any blocking calls will not allow the UI to update.
As the other poster said, using Runnables alone do not mean the code will be executed on a seperate thread. In this case the run() method will execute on whatever thread your Handler object was created on. Either subclass Thread or pass your runnabe to new thread object with public Thread (Runnable runnable).
Using AsyncTasks, Loaders or Threads will help.
Also read Designing for Responsiveness and Multithreading For Performance. Following the above approaches will help you avoid ANRs
The reason for such a behaviour is that:
When you do thread.sleep() inside a runnable, it is the UI thread which executes that runnable rather than the respective other thread which you created. Basically what happens is that when you post any runnable through the handler of the UI thread, UI thread will poll from its queue and execute the runnable; in this case the runnable will do sleep.
Hence no change in progress bar

Categories