let say i have a for loop of 1000 and it do some stuff. I can inside a pause function with a button 'pause' and unpause with a button 'resume'.
Question do i need to implement a thread for such a case?
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
// Do stuff
pause();
}
If I understand you correctly, the answer is No, you don't need to implement an additional thread. If you follow the usual pattern for GUI programs, this thread will be running in a thread different from the main GUI thread anyway, and that is sufficient.
You will need to check in each iteration of the for loop that the user paused the system and wait for the resume. This can be done with a simple notify signal pattern. For instance
I think you need a thread because this loop you're showing has to be run in a worker thread, while the button and the code processing the button press event has to be run in the GUI thread. So from the GUI thread you want to pause your worker thread.
You may use boolean flag:
public volatile boolean paused = false;
public final int littleTime = 100; //ms
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; ++i) {
// Do stuff
pause();
}
public void pause() {
paused = true;
while (paused)
try {
Thread.sleep(littleTime);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {}
}
public void resume() {
paused = false;
}
Have a boolean to state if it is Paused
volatile boolean isPause = false;
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
// Do stuff if not passed
if(!isPause)
doStuff();
}
Note : Set the isPause flag to true when you hit Pause button. Reset the isPause flag to false when you hit Resume button. I have also marked boolean as volatile so that the variable is always read from main memory (no cache) since both read and write are atomic in this case
This implements a pauseable thread. See the comments at the top on how to use it. See examples of usage in the main method.
/**
* PauseableThread is a Thread with pause/resume and cancel methods.
*
* The meat of the process must implement `step`.
*
* You can either extend this and implement `step` or use the factory.
*
* I cannot extend Thread because my resume will clash.
*
*/
public abstract class PauseableThread implements Runnable {
// The lock.
private final ReadWriteLock pause = new ReentrantReadWriteLock();
private final Lock readLock = pause.readLock();
private final Lock writeLock = pause.writeLock();
// Flag to cancel the wholeprocess.
private volatile boolean cancelled = false;
// The exception that cause it to finish.
private Exception thrown = null;
// The thread that is me.
private Thread me = null;
#Override
// The core run mechanism.
public void run() {
// Track my current thread.
me = Thread.currentThread();
try {
while (!finished()) {
// Block here if we're paused.
blockIfPaused();
// Don't do any more work if we've been asked to stop.
if (!finished()) {
// Do my work.
step();
}
}
} catch (Exception ex) {
// Just fall out when exception is thrown.
thrown = ex;
}
}
// Have we finished yet?
private boolean finished() {
return cancelled || !me.isInterrupted();
}
// Block if pause has been called without a matching resume.
private void blockIfPaused() throws InterruptedException {
try {
// Grab a write lock. Will block if a read lock has been taken.
writeLock.lockInterruptibly();
} finally {
// Release the lock immediately to avoid blocking when pause is called.
writeLock.unlock();
}
}
// Pause the work. NB: MUST be balanced by a resume.
public void pause() {
// We can wait for a lock here.
readLock.lock();
}
// Resume the work. NB: MUST be balanced by a pause.
public void resume() {
// Release the lock.
readLock.unlock();
}
// Stop.
public void cancel() {
// Stop everything.
cancelled = true;
}
// Stop immediately (if param is true).
public void cancel(boolean interrupt) {
if (interrupt) {
// Interrupt me.
me.interrupt();
} else {
// Or cancel me.
cancel();
}
}
// Wait for completion.
public void await() throws InterruptedException {
// Wait 'till we've finished. NB: Will wait forever if you haven't instigated a cancel of some kind.
while (me.isAlive()) {
Thread.sleep(0);
}
}
// Start - like a thread.
public void start() {
// Wrap me in a thread and fire the sucker up!
new Thread(this).start();
}
// Get the exception that was thrown to stop the thread or null if the thread was cancelled.
public Exception getThrown() {
return thrown;
}
// Expose my Thread.
public Thread getThread() {
return me;
}
// Create this method to do stuff.
// Calls to this method will stop when pause is called.
// Any thrown exception stops the whole process.
public abstract void step() throws Exception;
// Factory to wrap a Stepper in a PauseableThread
public static PauseableThread make(Stepper stepper) {
StepperThread pauseableStepper = new StepperThread(stepper);
// That's the thread they can pause/resume.
return pauseableStepper;
}
// One of these must be used.
public interface Stepper {
// A Stepper has a step method.
// Any exception thrown causes the enclosing thread to stop.
public void step() throws Exception;
}
// Holder for a Stepper.
private static class StepperThread extends PauseableThread {
// The actual stepper I am proxying.
private final Stepper stepper;
StepperThread(Stepper stepper) {
this.stepper = stepper;
}
#Override
public void step() throws Exception {
stepper.step();
}
}
// !!!! Testing only below !!!!
// My test counter.
static int n = 0;
// Test/demo.
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
try {
// Simple stepper that just increments n.
Stepper s = new Stepper() {
#Override
public void step() throws Exception {
n += 1;
Thread.sleep(1);
}
};
PauseableThread pt = PauseableThread.make(s);
// Start it up.
pt.start();
Thread.sleep(1000);
pt.pause();
System.out.println("Paused: " + n);
Thread.sleep(1000);
System.out.println("Resuminng: " + n);
pt.resume();
Thread.sleep(1000);
pt.cancel();
System.out.println("Finished: " + n);
// Start again to test agressive cancelling.
pt.await();
n = 0;
pt = PauseableThread.make(s);
// Start it up.
pt.start();
Thread.sleep(1000);
pt.pause();
System.out.println("Paused: " + n);
Thread.sleep(1000);
System.out.println("Resuminng: " + n);
pt.resume();
Thread.sleep(1000);
// Cancel aggressively.
pt.cancel(true);
System.out.println("Finished: " + n);
System.out.println("thrown: " + pt.getThrown());
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
}
}
}
Related
I want to make a single thread which would contain 3 infinite tasks.
I want one task to run at a time and start/stop running task when required.
For example first I want task 1 to run, then I want task 2 to run but after stopping task 1 and again I want task 1 to run but after stopping of task 2 and so on.
Infinite task needs to check some condition and if that condition is satisfied perform some operations and if not satisfied sleep for few seconds and after wake up perform the above same operations again.
Infinite Runnable task looks some thing like this:
new Runnable(){
while(1){
if(TaskQueue.getInstance().size()<= 100){
TaskQueue.getInstance().push("add command to the end of queue");
}else{
try {
Thread.sleep(10000);
}catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
Any help would be appreciated?
Edit : I modified my question. I want a continuous single running thread(some thing like looper ) to monitor 3 infinite tasks and control this single continuous running thread tasks from outside.
Use this for start/stop thread in real-time:
class MyThread extends Thread {
private volatile boolean running = true; // Run unless told to pause
...
#Override
public void run() {
// Only keep painting while "running" is true
// This is a crude implementation of pausing the thread
while (true) {
if (Thread.currentThread().isInterrupted()) {
return;
}
if (running) {
//Your code
} else yield;
}
}
public void pauseThread() throws InterruptedException {
running = false;
}
public void resumeThread() {
running = true;
}
}
For pause thread use this:
myThread.pauseThread();
For resume thread use this:
myThread.resumeThread();
For stop thread use this (Not recommended):
myThread.stop();
For currently stop thread use this:
myThread.interrupt();
You must use a class like Thread that already implements Runnable.
new Thread(){....};
And the way it works it's:
Thread t = new Thread(){.....};
t.start();
t.stop();
You could also initialize a new thread, like:
Thread exampleThread = new thread();
After this you can start it at any point in your code by:
exampleThread.start();
you can use Semaphore,
to Manage the amount of signal.
private final static Semaphore semaphore = new Semaphore(0);
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
//入口
threadTest();
}
public static void thread1() {
try{
//…… some code
}
finally{
semaphore.release();
}
}
public static void thread2() {
semaphore.acquire(1);
}
The question is my first answer,thanks.
I finally made my task scheduler. The API of which looks something like this:
TaskScheduler taskScheduler = TaskScheduler.getInstance();
taskScheduler.startTaskOne();
taskScheduler.stopTaskOne();
taskScheduler.startTaskTwo();
taskScheduler.stopTaskTwo();
Runs one task at a time (because I used Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor()).
We can control the execution of the task from outside:
public class TaskScheduler {
private static ExecutorService mTaskRunningService;
private static TaskScheduler mInstance;
private Future mFirstTaskFuture = null;
private Future mSecondTaskFuture = null;
static {
configure();
}
private static void configure() {
mTaskRunningService = Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor();
}
public static TaskScheduler getInstance() {
if (mInstance == null) {
mInstance = new TaskScheduler();
}
return mInstance;
}
private Runnable mTaskOneRunnable = new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
try {
while (true) {
/** stop this single thread (i.e executing one task at time) service if this thread is interrupted
* from outside because documentation of {#link java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor#shutdownNow()}
* says we need to do this*/
if (Thread.currentThread().isInterrupted()) {
return;
}
// task one work.......
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
};
private Runnable mTaskTwoRunnable = new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
try {
while (true) {
/** stop this single thread (i.e executing one task at time) service if this thread is interrupted
* from outside because documentation of {#link java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor#shutdownNow()}
* says we need to do this*/
if (Thread.currentThread().isInterrupted()) {
return;
}
// task two work......
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
};
public synchronized void startTaskOne() {
if (mFirstTaskFuture == null) {
// start executing runnable
mFirstTaskFuture = mTaskRunningService.submit(mTaskOneRunnable);
}
}
public synchronized boolean stopTaskOne() {
if (mFirstTaskFuture != null) {
// stop general reading thread
mFirstTaskFuture.cancel(true);
// cancel status
boolean status = mFirstTaskFuture.isDone();
// assign null because startTaskOne() again be called
mGeneralFuture = null;
return status;
}
return true;
}
public synchronized void startTaskTwo() {
if (mSecondTaskFuture == null) {
// start executing runnable
mSecondTaskFuture = mTaskRunningService.submit(mTaskTwoRunnable);
}
}
public synchronized boolean stopTaskTwo() {
if (mSecondTaskFuture != null) {
// clear task queue
mTaskQueue.clearTaskQueue();
// stop 22 probes reading thread
mSecondTaskFuture.cancel(true);
// cancel status
boolean status = mSecondTaskFuture.isDone();
// assign null because startTaskTwo() again be called
mSecondTaskFuture = null;
return status;
}
return true;
}
}
I have folowwing situation:
I want to run 2 threads:
Thread A: a void function which runs 1 time
Thread B: a method which never ends
I want to run thread A, than Thread B, than Thread A again, B again,...
But the Thread B blocks Thread A because it's function never ends.
Can someone give me an example to solve this scheduling problem in Java?
What I want to achieve is
Let thread A run for 1 minute
Stop thread A
Let thread B run for 5 seconds
Stop thread B
Let thread A run for 1 minute
Stop thread A
...
I wrote this PauseableThread a while ago - it should do what you are looking for. It uses Locks to control pausing of a thread.
Instead of writing a Runnable you write a Stepper. This will call your Stepper.step() continuously so long as it has not been told to pause.
/**
* PauseableThread is a Thread with pause/resume and cancel methods.
*
* The meat of the process must implement `step`.
*
* You can either extend this and implement `step` or use the factory.
*
* I cannot extend Thread because my resume will clash.
*
*/
public abstract class PauseableThread implements Runnable {
// The lock.
private final ReadWriteLock pause = new ReentrantReadWriteLock();
private final Lock readLock = pause.readLock();
private final Lock writeLock = pause.writeLock();
// Flag to cancel the wholeprocess.
private volatile boolean cancelled = false;
// The exception that cause it to finish.
private Exception thrown = null;
// The thread that is me.
private Thread me = null;
#Override
// The core run mechanism.
public void run() {
// Track my current thread.
me = Thread.currentThread();
try {
while (!finished()) {
// Block here if we're paused.
blockIfPaused();
// Don't do any more work if we've been asked to stop.
if (!finished()) {
// Do my work.
step();
}
}
} catch (Exception ex) {
// Just fall out when exception is thrown.
thrown = ex;
}
}
// Have we finished yet?
private boolean finished() {
return cancelled || me.isInterrupted();
}
// Block if pause has been called without a matching resume.
private void blockIfPaused() throws InterruptedException {
try {
// Grab a write lock. Will block if a read lock has been taken - i.e. we've been paused.
writeLock.lockInterruptibly();
} finally {
// Release the lock immediately to avoid blocking when pause is called.
writeLock.unlock();
}
}
// Pause the work. NB: MUST be balanced by a resume.
public void pause() {
// We can wait for a lock here.
readLock.lock();
}
// Resume the work. NB: MUST be balanced by a pause.
public void resume() {
// Release the lock.
readLock.unlock();
}
// Stop.
public void cancel() {
// Stop everything.
cancelled = true;
}
// Stop immediately (if param is true).
public void cancel(boolean interrupt) {
if (interrupt) {
// Interrupt me.
me.interrupt();
} else {
// Or cancel me.
cancel();
}
}
// Wait for completion.
public void await() throws InterruptedException {
// Wait 'till we've finished. NB: Will wait forever if you haven't instigated a cancel of some kind.
while (me.isAlive()) {
Thread.sleep(0);
}
}
// Start - like a thread.
public void start() {
// Wrap me in a thread and fire the sucker up!
new Thread(this).start();
}
// Get the exception that was thrown to stop the thread or null if the thread was cancelled.
public Exception getThrown() {
return thrown;
}
// Expose my Thread.
public Thread getThread() {
return me;
}
// Create this method to do stuff.
// Calls to this method will stop when pause is called.
// Any thrown exception stops the whole process.
public abstract void step() throws Exception;
// Factory to wrap a Stepper in a PauseableThread
public static PauseableThread make(Stepper stepper) {
StepperThread pauseableStepper = new StepperThread(stepper);
// That's the thread they can pause/resume.
return pauseableStepper;
}
// One of these must be used.
public interface Stepper {
// A Stepper has a step method.
// Any exception thrown causes the enclosing thread to stop.
public void step() throws Exception;
}
// Holder for a Stepper.
private static class StepperThread extends PauseableThread {
// The actual stepper I am proxying.
private final Stepper stepper;
StepperThread(Stepper stepper) {
this.stepper = stepper;
}
#Override
public void step() throws Exception {
stepper.step();
}
}
// !!!! Testing only below !!!!
// My test counter.
static int n = 0;
// Test/demo.
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
try {
// Simple stepper that just increments n.
Stepper s = () -> {
n += 1;
Thread.sleep(1);
};
PauseableThread pt = PauseableThread.make(s);
// Start it up.
pt.start();
Thread.sleep(1000);
pt.pause();
System.out.println("Paused: " + n);
Thread.sleep(1000);
System.out.println("Resuminng: " + n);
pt.resume();
Thread.sleep(1000);
pt.cancel();
pt.await();
System.out.println("Finished: " + n);
// Start again to test agressive cancelling.
n = 0;
pt = PauseableThread.make(s);
// Start it up.
pt.start();
Thread.sleep(1000);
pt.pause();
System.out.println("Paused: " + n);
Thread.sleep(1000);
System.out.println("Resuminng: " + n);
pt.resume();
Thread.sleep(1000);
// Cancel aggressively.
pt.cancel(true);
System.out.println("Finished: " + n);
System.out.println("thrown: " + pt.getThrown());
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
}
}
}
I have a class which processes something. I'm trying to run a number of instances of this class in parallel.
However, I'm not sure if in TaskManager.startAll(), when I call r.go(), whether this would cause r to start running in its own thread, or within the main thread?
The total execution time that I'm getting seems to be very high, and despite my attempts at optimizing, nothing seems to be having any effect. Also, if I run a profiler on my project in Netbeans, it shows all the threads as sleeping. So I'd like to know if I'm doing something wrong?
This is the structure of the class:
public class TaskRunner implements Runnable {
private boolean isRunning = false;
public void run() {
while(true) {
while (! running) {
try {
Thread.sleep(1);
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
process();
}
}
public void go() {
isRunning = true;
}
public void stop() {
isRunning = false;
}
private void process() {
//Do some number crunching and processing here
}
}
Here's how these are being run / managed:
public class TaskManager {
private ArrayList<TaskRunner> runners = new ArrayList<>();
public TaskManager() {
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
TaskRunner r = new TaskRunner();
new Thread(r).start();
runners.add(r);
}
}
public void startAll() {
for (TaskRunner r : runners) {
r.go();
}
}
}
Indeed, you are not "doing it right." If you want to create a multi-threaded Java application, the place to start is with the java.util.concurrent package.
It appears from your code that you want to run ten tasks in parallel. I assume that after "number crunching and processing," you'll want to aggregate the results and do something with them in the main thread. For this, the invokeAll() method of ExecutorService works well.
First, implement Callable to do the work you show in your process() method.
final class YourTask implements Callable<YourResults> {
private final YourInput input;
YourTask(YourInput input) {
this.input = input;
}
#Override
public YourResults call()
throws Exception
{
/* Do some number crunching and processing here. */
return new YourResults(...);
}
}
Then create your tasks and run them. This would take the place of your main() method:
Collection<Callable<YourResults>> tasks = new List<>(inputs.size());
for (YourInput i : inputs)
tasks.add(new YourTask(i));
ExecutorService workers = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(10);
/* The next call blocks while the worker threads complete all tasks. */
List<Future<YourResult>> results = workers.invokeAll(tasks);
workers.shutdown();
for (Future<YourResult> f : results) {
YourResult r = f.get();
/* Do whatever it is you do with the results. */
...
}
However, I'm not sure if in TaskManager.startAll(), when I call r.go(), whether this would cause r to start running in its own thread, or within the main thread?
So my first comment is that you should make isRunning be volatile since it is being shared between threads. If the threads are not starting when it goes to true (or seem to be delayed in starting) then I suspect that's your problem. volatile provides memory synchronization between the threads so the thread that calls go() and makes a change to isRunning will be seen immediately by the thread waiting for the change.
Instead of spinning like this, I would use wait/notify:
// this synchronizes on the instance of `TaskRunner`
synchronized (this) {
// always do your wait in a while loop to protect against spurious wakeups
while (!isRunning && !Thread.currentThread().isInterrupted()) {
try {
// wait until the notify is called on this object
this.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
Then in the go() method you should do the following. stop() would be similar.
public void go() {
synchronized (this) {
isRunning = true;
this.notifyAll();
}
}
Notice that you should handle thread interrupts carefully. Test for isInterrupted() in the while running loop and re-interrupt a thread when InterruptedException is thrown is always a good pattern.
The total execution time that I'm getting seems to be very high, and despite my attempts at optimizing, nothing seems to be having any effect. Also, if I run a profiler on my project in Netbeans, it shows all the threads as sleeping.
So although the threads are mostly sleeping, they are still each looping 1000 times a second because of your Thread.sleep(1). If you increased the time sleeping (after making isRunning be volatile) they would loop less but the right mechanism is to use the wait/notify to signal the thread.
Awful solution, terrible. first I highly recommend you start reading some tutorial like [this]
Second, if threads should wait for a signal to go for some job, so why just don't you wait them!!!!!, something like this
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class TaskManager
{
//////////////////////
public volatile static Signal wait=new Signal();
//////////////////////
private ArrayList<TaskRunner> runners = new ArrayList<>();
public TaskManager()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
TaskRunner r = new TaskRunner();
new Thread(r).start();
runners.add(r);
}
try {
Thread.sleep(1000);
startAll();
Thread.sleep(1000);
pauseAll();
Thread.sleep(1000);
startAll();
Thread.sleep(1000);
haltAll();System.out.println("DONE!");
}catch(Exception ex){}
}
public void startAll()
{
synchronized(wait){
wait.setRun(true);;
wait.notifyAll();
}
}
public void pauseAll(){
wait.setRun(false);
}
public void haltAll(){
for(TaskRunner tx:runners){tx.halt();}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
new TaskManager();
}
}
class TaskRunner implements Runnable
{
private Thread thisThread;
private volatile boolean run=true;
public void run()
{
thisThread=Thread.currentThread();
while(run){
if(!TaskManager.wait.isRun()){
synchronized(TaskManager.wait)
{
if(!TaskManager.wait.isRun()){
System.out.println("Wait!...");
try
{
TaskManager.wait.wait();
}
catch (Exception e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
break;
}
}
}}
process();
}
}
private double r=Math.random();
private void process(){System.out.println(r);try {
Thread.sleep(10);
} catch (Exception e) {
// TODO: handle exception
}}
public void halt(){run=false;thisThread.interrupt();}
}
class Signal{
private boolean run=false;
public boolean isRun() {
return run;
}
public void setRun(boolean run) {
this.run = run;
}
}
in above sample, all runners works till the Signal run boolean is true, and simple TaskManager class set tit as false for every time it needs to pause the threads. and about the halt, it just set the shutdown(run) flag to false, and also interrupt the thread because of if thread is in wait state.
I hope I could prove your solution is like dream-on story, and also could explained enough about my solution.
have a good parallel application :)
Is it possible to rewrite this code for better working with processor?
I have a class, which does some tasks with fixed periodicy in a separate thread. Sometimes this process can be paused and resumed. Currently I am using a flag for pausing, it works fine, but loop in this way still loads processor when process is paused. Is it possible to fix this?
private boolean mIsCanceled = false;
private boolean mIsPaused = true; // TODO more efficient for processor way of pausing is required
private final Thread mTimerThread = new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
while(!mIsCanceled){
try {
Thread.sleep(UPDATE_PERIOD);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
if (!mIsPaused){
doStep();
}
}
}
});
public MyClass(){
mTimerThread.start();
}
private void pause(){
mIsPaused = true;
}
private void resume(){
mIsPaused = false;
}
private void doStep(){
// Some code
}
Please just provide alternative implementation of my code.
P.S. The environment is Android OS 2.2+
The tools available are:
wait/notify - we are all trying to get away from this archaic system.
Semaphores - once your thread has grabbed it you hold it until release so grabbing it again does not block. This means you cannot pause from within your own thread.
CyclicBarrier - Must be created anew each time it is used.
ReadWriteLock - My favorite. You can have as many threads pausing you as you like and you will only resume when all of them have called resume. You can even pause yourself if you wish.
import java.util.concurrent.locks.ReadWriteLock;
import java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantReadWriteLock;
/**
* PauseableThread is a Thread with pause/resume and cancel methods.
*
* The meat of the process must implement `step`.
*
* You can either extend this and implement `step` or use the factory.
*
* Note that I cannot extend Thread because my resume will clash with Thread's deprecated one.
*
* Usage: Either write a `Stepper` and run it in a `PausableThread` or extend `PausableThread` and call `blockIfPaused()` at appropriate points.
*/
public abstract class PauseableThread implements Runnable {
// The lock.
// We'll hold a read lock on it to pause the thread.
// The thread will momentarily grab a write lock on it to pause.
// This way you can have multiple pausers using normal locks.
private final ReadWriteLock pause = new ReentrantReadWriteLock();
// Flag to cancel the wholeprocess.
private volatile boolean cancelled = false;
// The exception that caused it to finish.
private Exception thrown = null;
#Override
// The core run mechanism.
public void run() {
try {
while (!cancelled) {
// Block here if we're paused.
blockIfPaused();
// Do my work.
step();
}
} catch (Exception ex) {
// Just fall out when exception is thrown.
thrown = ex;
}
}
// Block if pause has been called without a matching resume.
private void blockIfPaused() throws InterruptedException {
try {
// Grab a write lock. Will block if a read lock has been taken.
pause.writeLock().lockInterruptibly();
} finally {
// Release the lock immediately to avoid blocking when pause is called.
pause.writeLock().unlock();
}
}
// Pause the work. NB: MUST be balanced by a resume.
public void pause() {
// We can wait for a lock here.
pause.readLock().lock();
}
// Resume the work. NB: MUST be balanced by a pause.
public void resume() {
// Release the lock.
pause.readLock().unlock();
}
// Stop.
public void cancel() {
// Stop everything.
cancelled = true;
}
// start - like a thread.
public void start() {
// Wrap it in a thread.
new Thread(this).start();
}
// Get the exceptuion that was thrown to stop the thread or null if the thread was cancelled.
public Exception getThrown() {
return thrown;
}
// Create this method to do stuff.
// Calls to this method will stop when pause is called.
// Any thrown exception stops the whole process.
public abstract void step() throws Exception;
// Factory to wrap a Stepper in a PauseableThread
public static PauseableThread make(Stepper stepper) {
StepperThread pauseableStepper = new StepperThread(stepper);
// That's the thread they can pause/resume.
return pauseableStepper;
}
// One of these must be used.
public interface Stepper {
// A Stepper has a step method.
// Any exception thrown causes the enclosing thread to stop.
public void step() throws Exception;
}
// Holder for a Stepper.
private static class StepperThread extends PauseableThread {
private final Stepper stepper;
StepperThread(Stepper stepper) {
this.stepper = stepper;
}
#Override
public void step() throws Exception {
stepper.step();
}
}
// My test counter.
static int n = 0;
// Test/demo.
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
try {
// Simple stepper that just increments n.
Stepper s = new Stepper() {
#Override
public void step() throws Exception {
n += 1;
Thread.sleep(10);
}
};
PauseableThread t = PauseableThread.make(s);
// Start it up.
t.start();
Thread.sleep(1000);
t.pause();
System.out.println("Paused: " + n);
Thread.sleep(1000);
System.out.println("Resuminng: " + n);
t.resume();
Thread.sleep(1000);
t.cancel();
} catch (Exception e) {
}
}
}
Edit: Code modified to be of more general use.
Your best options are to either use wait()/notify() or to simply switch to ScheduledExecutorService
Proper wait()/notify() usage can be tricky. I highly recommend "Java Concurrency in Practice" to learn more about threading.
I believe the best way here would be to use Thread.wait for the waiting thread instead of sleeping, and use Thread.notify in the thread you are waiting for.
More info here:
http://www.javamex.com/tutorials/synchronization_wait_notify.shtml
You can improve efficiency drastic by using a monitor instead of sleeping the thread. You just make blocks in your code with a keyword synchronized. And an final Object that's acts the monitor. Look uP more in the API on monitors.
We require a piece of code to control a thread. For example, use three buttons like start, stop and pause, press one of them and perform the action against it. Like press start then start the thread, press stop actually stops thread and pause perform pause action respectively.
Starting a thread is simple with Thread.start(). Stopping a thread can be as simple as setting a flag that is checked asychronously in the run method, but may need to include a call to Thread.interrupt(). Pausing a thread is more problematic, but could also be done using a flag that cauases the run method to yield instead of process. Here is some (untested) code:
class MyThread extends Thread {
private final static int STATE_RUN = 0, STATE_PAUSE = 2, STATE_STOP = 3;
private int _state;
MyThread() {
_state = STATE_RUN;
}
public void run() {
int stateTemp;
synchronized(this) {
stateTemp = _state;
}
while (stateTemp != STATE_STOP) {
switch (stateTemp) {
case STATE_RUN:
// perform processing
break;
case STATE_PAUSE:
yield();
break;
}
synchronized(this) {
stateTemp = _state;
}
}
// cleanup
}
public synchronized void stop() {
_state = STATE_STOP;
// may need to call interrupt() if the processing calls blocking methods.
}
public synchronized void pause() {
_state = STATE_PAUSE;
// may need to call interrupt() if the processing calls blocking methods.
// perhaps set priority very low with setPriority(MIN_PRIORITY);
}
public synchronized void unpause() {
_state = STATE_RUN;
// perhaps restore priority with setPriority(somePriority);
// may need to re-establish any blocked calls interrupted by pause()
}
}
As you can see it can quite quickly get complex depending on what you are doing in the thread.
I would like to add on Richard's answer to address a few issues:
Needless cycles when paused
Needless extra cycle when state changed
yield() used where wait() needed
Single instance
Stopping the thread waits for the thread to finish
This is my altered code:
class MyThread extends Thread {
private final static int STATE_RUN = 0, STATE_PAUSE = 2, STATE_STOP = 3;
private int _state;
private static MyThread thread;
public static MyThread getInstance() {
if (thread == null || !thread.isAlive()) {
thread = new MyThread();
}
return thread;
}
private MyThread() {
_state = STATE_RUN;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
MyThread t = MyThread.getInstance();
try {
t.start();
Thread.sleep(500);
t.pause();
Thread.sleep(500);
t.unpause();
Thread.sleep(500);
t.end();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// ignore; this is just an example
}
}
public void run() {
int i = 0;
while (_state != STATE_STOP) {
if (_state == STATE_PAUSE) {
System.out.println(this + " paused");
synchronized (this) {
try {
this.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
}
}
}
if (_state == STATE_STOP) {
break;
}
// this is where the actual processing happens
try {
// slow output down for this example
Thread.sleep(100);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// state change handled next cycle
}
System.out.println(this + " cycle " + i);
i++;
}
System.out.println(this + " finished");
// cleanup
}
public synchronized void end() {
_state = STATE_STOP;
try {
this.interrupt();
this.join();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
public synchronized void pause() {
_state = STATE_PAUSE;
}
public synchronized void unpause() {
_state = STATE_RUN;
synchronized (this) {
this.notify();
}
}
}