I have a callable which starts a Thread(this Thread runs a ping process) I want to allow the user to cancel the tasks:
public class PingCallable implements Callable<PingResult> {
private ProcThread processThread;
public PingCallable(String ip) {
this.processThread = new ProcThread(ip);
}
#Override
public PingResult call() throws Exception {
log.trace("Checking if the ip " + ip + " is alive");
try {
processThread.start();
try {
processThread.join();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
log.error("The callable thread was interrupted for " + processThread.getName());
processThread.interrupt();
// Good practice to reset the interrupt flag.
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
}
} catch (Throwable e) {
System.out.println("Throwable ");
}
return new PingResult(ip, processThread.isPingAlive());
}
}
The ProcThread, looks something like:
#Override
public void run() {
try {
process = Runtime.getRuntime().exec("the long ping", null, workDirFile);
/* Get process input and error stream, not here to keep it short*/
// waitFor is InterruptedException sensitive
exitVal = process.waitFor();
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
log.error("interrupted " + getName(), ex);
process.destroy();
/* Stop the intput and error stream handlers, not here */
// Reset the status, good practice
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
} catch (IOException ex) {
log.error("Exception while execution", ex);
}
}
And the test:
#Test
public void test() throws ExecutionException, InterruptedException {
ExecutorService executorService = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(15);
List<Future<PingResult>> futures = new ArrayList<>();
for (int i= 0; i < 100; i++) {
PingCallable pingTask = new PingCallable("10.1.1.142");
futures.add(executorService.submit(pingTask));
}
Thread.sleep(10000);
executorService.shutdownNow();
// for (Future<PingResult> future : futures) {
// future.cancel(true);
// }
}
I monitor the ping processes using ProcessExplorer, I see 15, then the shutdownNow is executed, or future.cancel(true), only 4-5 max 8 processes are interrupted, the rest are left alive, I almost never see 15 messages saying "The callable thread was interrupted..", and the test does not finish until the processes end. Why is that?
I might not have a complete answer but there are two things to note:
shutdownNow signals a shutdown, to see if threads are actually stopped, use awaitTermination
process.destroy() also takes time to execute so the callable should wait for that to complete after interrupting the process-thread.
I modified the code a little and found that future.cancel(true) will actually prevent execution of anything in the catch InterruptedException-block of ProcThread, unless you use executor.shutdown() instead of executor.shutdownNow(). The unit-test does finish when "Executor terminated: true" is printed (using junit 4.11).
It looks like using future.cancel(true) and executor.shutdownNow() will double-interrupt a thread and that can cause the interrupted-blocks to be skipped.
Below the code I used for testing. Uncomment for (Future<PingResult> f : futures) f.cancel(true); together with shutdown(Now) to see the difference in output.
public class TestRunInterrupt {
static long sleepTime = 1000L;
static long killTime = 2000L;
#Test
public void testInterrupts() throws Exception {
ExecutorService executorService = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(3);
List<Future<PingResult>> futures = new ArrayList<Future<PingResult>>();
for (int i= 0; i < 100; i++) {
PingCallable pingTask = new PingCallable("10.1.1.142");
futures.add(executorService.submit(pingTask));
}
Thread.sleep(sleepTime + sleepTime / 2);
// for (Future<PingResult> f : futures) f.cancel(true);
// executorService.shutdown();
executorService.shutdownNow();
int i = 0;
while (!executorService.isTerminated()) {
System.out.println("Awaiting executor termination " + i);
executorService.awaitTermination(1000L, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS);
i++;
if (i > 5) {
break;
}
}
System.out.println("Executor terminated: " + executorService.isTerminated());
}
static class ProcThread extends Thread {
static AtomicInteger tcount = new AtomicInteger();
int id;
volatile boolean slept;
public ProcThread() {
super();
id = tcount.incrementAndGet();
}
#Override
public void run() {
try {
Thread.sleep(sleepTime);
slept = true;
} catch (InterruptedException ie) {
// Catching an interrupted-exception clears the interrupted flag.
System.out.println(id + " procThread interrupted");
try {
Thread.sleep(killTime);
System.out.println(id + " procThread kill time finished");
} catch (InterruptedException ie2) {
System.out.println(id + "procThread killing interrupted");
}
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
} catch (Throwable t) {
System.out.println(id + " procThread stopped: " + t);
}
}
}
static class PingCallable implements Callable<PingResult> {
ProcThread pthread;
public PingCallable(String s) {
pthread = new ProcThread();
}
#Override
public PingResult call() throws Exception {
System.out.println(pthread.id + " starting sleep");
pthread.start();
try {
System.out.println(pthread.id + " awaiting sleep");
pthread.join();
} catch (InterruptedException ie) {
System.out.println(pthread.id + " callable interrupted");
pthread.interrupt();
// wait for kill process to finish
pthread.join();
System.out.println(pthread.id + " callable interrupt done");
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
} catch (Throwable t) {
System.out.println(pthread.id + " callable stopped: " + t);
}
return new PingResult(pthread.id, pthread.slept);
}
}
static class PingResult {
int id;
boolean slept;
public PingResult(int id, boolean slept) {
this.id = id;
this.slept = slept;
System.out.println(id + " slept " + slept);
}
}
}
Output without future.cancel(true) or with future.cancel(true) and normal shutdown():
1 starting sleep
1 awaiting sleep
2 starting sleep
3 starting sleep
2 awaiting sleep
3 awaiting sleep
1 slept true
3 slept true
2 slept true
5 starting sleep
4 starting sleep
6 starting sleep
5 awaiting sleep
6 awaiting sleep
4 awaiting sleep
4 callable interrupted
Awaiting executor termination 0
6 callable interrupted
4 procThread interrupted
5 callable interrupted
6 procThread interrupted
5 procThread interrupted
Awaiting executor termination 1
6 procThread kill time finished
5 procThread kill time finished
4 procThread kill time finished
5 callable interrupt done
5 slept false
6 callable interrupt done
4 callable interrupt done
6 slept false
4 slept false
Executor terminated: true
Output with future.cancel(true) and shutdownNow():
1 starting sleep
2 starting sleep
1 awaiting sleep
2 awaiting sleep
3 starting sleep
3 awaiting sleep
3 slept true
2 slept true
1 slept true
4 starting sleep
6 starting sleep
5 starting sleep
4 awaiting sleep
5 awaiting sleep
6 awaiting sleep
5 callable interrupted
6 callable interrupted
4 callable interrupted
5 procThread interrupted
6 procThread interrupted
4 procThread interrupted
Executor terminated: true
Yesterday I ran a series of tests, one of the most fruitful involved:
Interrupting the threads which run the procces, checking that it was interrupted, and that the process nevertheless was still hanging on "waitFor",
I decided to investigate why was the process not detecting that the thread in which it was running was interrupted.
I found that it is crucial to handle the streams (output, input and error) correctly otherwise the external process will block on I/O buffer.
I noticed that my error handler was also blocking on reading (no error output), don't know if it's an issue, but I decided to follow the suggestion and redirect the err stream to out stream
Finally I discovered that there is a correct way to invoke and destroy processes in Java
New ProcThread (As #pauli suggests, it does not extend from THREAD anymore! Run's in a callable, I keep the name so the difference can be noticed) looks like:
try {
ProcessBuilder builder = new ProcessBuilder(cmd);
builder.directory(new File(workDir));
builder.redirectErrorStream(true);
process = builder.start();
// any output?
sht= new StreamHandlerThread(process.getInputStream(), outBuff);
sht.start();
// Wait for is InterruptedException sensitive, so when you want the job to stop, interrupt the thread.
exitVal = process.waitFor();
sht.join();
postProcessing();
log.info("exitValue: %d", exitVal);
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
log.error("interrupted " + Thread.currentThread().getName(), ex);
shutdownProcess();
The shutdown process:
private void shutdownProcess() {
postProcessing();
sht.interrupt();
sht.join();
}
The postProcessing:
private void postProcessing() {
if (process != null) {
closeTheStream(process.getErrorStream());
closeTheStream(process.getInputStream());
closeTheStream(process.getOutputStream());
process.destroy();
}
}
Related
I wrote a small peice of program to demonstrate the usage of CountDownLatch class in java.
But, it not working as expected. I created 5 threads and assigned task to each thread. Now, each thread would wait for the start signal. Once the start signal is on, all thread start its work and call countDown(). Now, my main thread wait for all the thread to finish its work till it receives the done signal. But the output is not expected. Please help if I am missing anything in the concept.
Below is the program.
class Task implements Runnable{
private CountDownLatch startSignal;
private CountDownLatch doneSignal;
private int id;
Task(int id, CountDownLatch startSignal, CountDownLatch doneSignal){
this.startSignal = startSignal;
this.doneSignal = doneSignal;
this.id = id;
}
#Override
public void run() {
try {
startSignal.await();
performTask();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
private void performTask() {
try {
System.out.println("Task started by thread : " + id);
Thread.sleep(5000);
doneSignal.countDown();
System.out.println("Task ended by thread : " + id);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
public class CountDownLatchExample {
public static void main(String[] args) {
CountDownLatch startSignal = new CountDownLatch(1);
CountDownLatch doneSignal = new CountDownLatch(5);
for(int i=0; i < 5; ++i) {
new Thread(new Task(i, startSignal, doneSignal)).start();
}
System.out.println("Press enter to start work");
new Scanner(System.in).nextLine();
startSignal.countDown();
try {
doneSignal.await();
System.out.println("All Tasks Completed");
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
Output
Press enter to start work
Task started by thread : 0
Task started by thread : 4
Task started by thread : 3
Task started by thread : 2
Task started by thread : 1
Task ended by thread : 4
Task ended by thread : 2
Task ended by thread : 1
All Tasks Completed
Task ended by thread : 0
Task ended by thread : 3
Expected output
Press enter to start work
Task started by thread : 0
Task started by thread : 4
Task started by thread : 3
Task started by thread : 2
Task started by thread : 1
Task ended by thread : 4
Task ended by thread : 2
Task ended by thread : 1
Task ended by thread : 0
Task ended by thread : 3
All Tasks Completed
In your Task class, you have:
doneSignal.countDown();
System.out.println("Task ended by thread : " + id);
In other words, you count down the latch before you print "task ended". That allows the main thread to wake up from its call to doneSignal.await() and print "All Tasks Completed" before all the "task ended" print statements complete. Though note the "wrong output" will not always happen; sometimes you'll get your expected output.
Simply switch those two lines of code around to guarantee the output you want:
System.out.println("Task ended by thread : " + id);
doneSignal.countDown();
This ensures the print statement happens-before the doneSignal.countDown() call, which itself happens-before the main thread returns from doneSignal.await(). Thus, now the above "task ended" print statement happens-before the main thread wakes up and prints the "All Tasks Completed" message.
My Java class is given below. It's a small exercise to test thread join (wait) and thread sleep (timed wait).
public class BasicThreadTest {
public static void main(String[] args) {
testThreadWait();
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " exiting");
}
private static void testThreadWait() {
Thread thread1 = new Thread(() -> {
String currentThread = Thread.currentThread().getName();
System.out.println(String.format("%s execution started", currentThread));
long waitMillis = 20000L;
try {
System.out.println(String.format("%s going for timed wait of %d millis", currentThread, waitMillis));
Thread.sleep(waitMillis);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
System.out.println(String.format("%s timed wait over after %d millis", currentThread, waitMillis));
}
System.out.println(String.format("%s execution ending", currentThread));
});
thread1.setName("Thread-1");
Thread thread2 = new Thread(() -> {
String currentThread = Thread.currentThread().getName();
System.out.println(String.format("%s execution started", currentThread));
try {
System.out.println(currentThread + " about to wait for " + thread1.getName());
thread1.join();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
System.out.println(String.format("%s wait over for %s", currentThread, thread1.getName()));
}
System.out.println(String.format("%s execution ending", currentThread));
});
thread2.setName("Thread-2");
thread2.start();
thread1.start();
}
}
No matter what order I start the two threads in I never get the two InterruptedException blocks executed in either sleep() or join(). Below is a sample output:
Thread-2 execution started
Thread-2 about to wait for Thread-1
main exiting
Thread-1 execution started
Thread-1 going for timed wait of 20000 millis
Thread-1 execution ending
Thread-2 execution ending
Any explanation on why this is happening?
You won't get an InterruptedException if you don't actually interrupt the threads.
You could try, for example:
thread2.start();
thread1.start();
Thread.sleep(1000);
thread1.interrupt();
thread2.interrupt();
Ideone demo
Output:
Thread-2 execution started
Thread-1 execution started
Thread-1 going for timed wait of 20000 millis
Thread-2 about to wait for Thread-1
Thread-1 timed wait over after 20000 millis
Thread-1 execution ending
Thread-2 wait over for Thread-1
Thread-2 execution ending
main exiting
wait() does not throw an InterruptedException when the block (or wait) finishes.
If you start a third thread that calls thread1.interrupt() then you will get the InterruptedException.
I'm using interrupt() in my code to signal from a thread to another to wake up from "endless" (Maximum time) sleep and verify a condition in a while.
I'm using also monitor (synchronized block, notify and wait) and synchronized method. I wrote my code in the way that some thread sleeps until they got an interrupt but some interrupt wake up thread when they should not be awaken (they must simulate they are doing other things sleeping). The problem is that I'm not able to find the thread that do interrupt() when it should not, how can I found it?
Is a good way to code using interrupt() in this way?
That's the code in which sleep get interrupted but should not
private void medicalVisit(int number) {
long sleepTime = (long) ((Math.random() * 2 + 0.5) * 1000); // 500 <= sleepTime (in msec) <= 2500
try {
Thread.sleep(sleepTime);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
System.out.println(this.getName()+" ERROR, interrupt from sleep, id: 2 (medicalVisit)");
e.printStackTrace();
}
System.out.println(this.getName()+" - "+number+"° medical visit ended");
}
This is an example of code that launch an interrupt
private void handlerYellowPatient() {
Iterator<Patient> patientIt = yellows.iterator();
while(patientIt.hasNext()) {
Patient p = patientIt.next();
p.itsTurn = true;
p.interrupt();
yellows.remove(p);
}
}
And this an example of code "consuming" interrupt properly
private void waitUntilItsTurn(int number) {
// simulating the period of time before entering in guard
long sleepTime = (long) ((Math.random() * 2 + 0.5) * 1000); // 500 <= sleepTime (in msec) <= 2500
try {
Thread.sleep(sleepTime);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// must not be awaken while here
System.out.println(this.getName()+" ERROR MAYBE, interrupt from sleep, id: 1");
e.printStackTrace();
}
WMan.addPatient(this, WMan);
while (!itsTurn) {
try {
Thread.sleep(Long.MAX_VALUE);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// WMan handlerRedPatient interrupt#1
System.out.println(this.getName()+" - the wait is over, it's my turn for the "+number+"° times");
}
}
itsTurn = false;
}
Hoping these code can help
I have a scheduled executor to reset a parameter to 0 and awake all active threads to continue processing. However after initial run of the thread it is not executing again.
ScheduledExecutorService exec = Executors.newScheduledThreadPool(4);
exec.scheduleAtFixedRate(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
logger.info("Setting hourly limit record count back to 0 to continue processing");
lines = 0;
executor.notifyAll();
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
return;
}
}, 0, 1, TimeUnit.MINUTES);
There is another Executor defined in the class which executes further processes and not sure if this influences it:
ExecutorService executor = Executors.newCachedThreadPool();
for (String processList : processFiles) {
String appName = processList.substring(0,processList.indexOf("-"));
String scope = processList.substring(processList.lastIndexOf("-") + 1);
logger.info("Starting execution of thread for app " + appName + " under scope: " + scope);
try {
File processedFile = new File(ConfigurationReader.processedDirectory + appName + "-" + scope + ".csv");
processedFile.createNewFile();
executor.execute(new APIInitialisation(appName,processedFile.length(),scope));
} catch (InterruptedException | IOException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
From the documentation for ScheduledExecutorService.scheduleAtFixedRate():
If any execution of the task encounters an exception, subsequent executions are suppressed.
So something in your task is throwing an exception. I would guess the call to executor.notifyAll() which is documented to throw an IllegalMonitorStateException:
if the current thread is not the owner of this object's monitor.
Your scheduled task will most probably end up in a uncaught Exception. Taken from the JavaDoc of ScheduledExecutorService.scheduleAtFixedRate
If any execution of the task encounters an exception, subsequent
executions are suppressed.
Because you are provoking a uncaught exception, all further executions are cancelled.
I have a task where while generating a random password for user the SMS should go after 4 MIN, but the welcome SMS should go immediately. Since password I am setting first and need to send after 4 MIN I am making that thread sleep (Cant use ExecutorServices), and welcome SMS thread start.
Here is the code:
String PasswordSMS="Dear User, Your password is "+'"'+"goody"+'"'+" Your FREE
recharge service is LIVE now!";
String welcomeSMS="Dear goody, Welcome to XYZ";
try {
Thread q=new Thread(new GupShupSMSUtill(PasswordSMS,MOB_NUM));
Thread.sleep(4 * 60 * 1000);
q.start();
GupShupSMSUtill sendWelcomesms2=new GupShupSMSUtill(welcomeSMS, MOB_NUM);
Thread Bal3=new Thread(sendWelcomesms2);
Bal3.start();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
</code>
So if I change the order the thread sendWelcomesms2 Immediately starts.I have to send welcome SMS then password sms (After 4 Min) how its achievable ??
NOTE: Both SMS come after 4 MIN
Thread.sleep(4 * 60 * 1000);
delays execution of your currently running thread, your q.start() is not executed until the wait time is over. This order doesn't make sense.
Your thread is only created when
Thread q=new Thread(new GupShupSMSUtill(PasswordSMS,MOB_NUM));
is executed. Your thread is started when
q.start();
is executed. So if you want to achieve running the q thread while the main thread sleep, you should write your lines in this order:
Thread q=new Thread(new GupShupSMSUtill(PasswordSMS,MOB_NUM)); // Create thread
q.start(); // start thread
Thread.sleep(4 * 60 * 1000); // suspend main thread for 4 sec
You can use join():
String PasswordSMS = "Dear User, Your password is " + "\"" + "goody" + "\"" + " Your FREE recharge service is LIVE now!";
String welcomeSMS = "Dear goody, Welcome to XYZ";
try
{
GupShupSMSUtill sendWelcomesms2 = new GupShupSMSUtill(welcomeSMS, MOB_NUM);
Thread Bal3 = new Thread(sendWelcomesms2);
Bal3.start();
Thread q = new Thread(new GupShupSMSUtill(PasswordSMS, MOB_NUM));
q.start();
q.join();
}
catch (InterruptedException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
Or latch:
private static java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch latch = new java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch(1);
And the code:
String PasswordSMS = "Dear User, Your password is " + "\"" + "goody" + "\"" + " Your FREE recharge service is LIVE now!";
String welcomeSMS = "Dear goody, Welcome to XYZ";
try
{
GupShupSMSUtill sendWelcomesms2 = new GupShupSMSUtill(welcomeSMS, MOB_NUM);
Thread Bal3 = new Thread(sendWelcomesms2);
Bal3.start();
Thread q = new Thread(new GupShupSMSUtill(PasswordSMS, MOB_NUM));
q.start();
latch.await(); // Wait
}
catch (InterruptedException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
At the end of the Thread "q":
latch.countDown(); // stop to wait
Hint - Don't use Thread.sleep(x) in this case.
You are sleeping the current thread, before you issue the startcommand for q.
You probably want to issue the sleep inside GupShupSMSUtill() (maybe change its signature to something like GupShupSMSUtill(PasswordSMS,MOB_NUM, sleeptime) to be able to control how long it sleeps).