Design pattern to handle an asynchronous response in Java - java

I read answers from similar Q&A
How do you create an asynchronous HTTP request in JAVA? |
Asynchronous programming design pattern |
AsyncTask Android - Design Pattern and Return Values
I see a lot of solutions , but none really satifies me.
Listener way
Once the results are caught, the processing is implemented in onResult method.
public interface GeolocationListener {
public void onResult(Address[] addresses);
public void onError(Exception e);
}
This solution doesn't quite satify me , because I want to handle the results in the main method. I hate this interface because when the response is returned, it is processed in onResult resulting in chains of processing and no way to go back to the "main" method.
The servlet way
public class SignGuestbookServlet extends HttpServlet {
public void doPost(HttpServletRequest req, HttpServletResponse resp)
throws IOException {
// ...
resp.sendRedirect("/guestbook.jsp");
}
}
There is no exposed Java code calling the servlet. All the configuration is done in the web.xml
The way I want
Wait for the response like this
Response a = getResponse();
// wait until the response is received, do not go further
// process
Response b = getResponse();
// wait until the response is received, do not go further
process(a,b);
Is there a design pattern to handle the async request and wait for the response like above ? Other way than the listener.
Please no library or framework.
EDIT
Thanks so far the responses. I didn't give you the full picture so I exposed the Geolocation class
I started the implementation . I don't know how to implement the method . Can someone shows "how to" ? He (or she) must also implement the listener to retrieve the results
private Address getFullAddress (String text, AddressListener listener, ... ){
// new Geolocation(text, listener, options).start()
// implements Geolocation.GeolocationListener
// how to return the Address from the onResult ?
}

First, you should not reject the first two methods you discuss. There are very good reasons people are using those techniques and you should try to learn them instead of creating new ones.
Otherwise, you should look at java.util.concurrent:
ExecutorService es = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(2);
...
Future<Response> responseA = es.submit(responseGetter);
Future<Response> responseB = es.submit(responseGetter);
process(responseA.get(), responseB.get());
where responseGetter is of type Callable<Response> (you must implement the method public Response call()).

Asynchronous code can always be made synchronous. The simplest/crudest way is to make the async call, then enter a while loop that just sleeps the current thread until the value comes back.
Edit: Code that turns an asynchronous callback into synchronous code--again, a crude implementation:
import java.util.concurrent.*;
public class MakeAsynchronousCodeSynchronous {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
final Listener listener = new Listener();
Runnable delayedTask = new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
try {
Thread.sleep(2000);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
throw new IllegalStateException("Shouldn't be interrupted", e);
}
listener.onResult(123);
}
};
System.out.println(System.currentTimeMillis() + ": Starting task");
Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor().submit(delayedTask);
System.out.println(System.currentTimeMillis() + ": Waiting for task to finish");
while (!listener.isDone()) {
Thread.sleep(100);
}
System.out.println(System.currentTimeMillis() + ": Task finished; result=" + listener.getResult());
}
private static class Listener {
private Integer result;
private boolean done;
public void onResult(Integer result) {
this.result = result;
this.done = true;
}
public boolean isDone() {
return done;
}
public Integer getResult() {
return result;
}
}
}
You could also use a CountDownLatch as recommended by hakon's answer. It will do basically the same thing. I would also suggest you get familiar with the java.util.concurrent package for a better way to manage threads. Finally, just because you can do this doesn't make it a good idea. If you're working with a framework that's based on asynchronous callbacks, you're probably much better off learning how to use the framework effectively than trying to subvert it.

Could CountDownLatch help you? In the main method, you call getResponse and then countDownLatch.await(). Pass a count down latch to the getResponse method and then count down once getResponse the result from getResponse is finished:
CountDownLatch latch = new CountDownLatch(1);
Response a = getResponse(latch);
latch.await();
latch = new CountDownLatch(1);
Response b = getResponse(latch);
latch.await();
process(a, b);
Your getResponse needs to call latch.countDown() once it's asynch parts return a result.
e.g.:
public Response getResponse(CountDownLatch latch) {
someAsychBloc(final CountDownLatch latch) {
do work
latch.countDown();
}
}

Essentially you need a "listener" of sorts no matter what. This is because you do not know WHEN your return message will come back, if at all (that is one of the downsides of asynchronous processing...what to do if you do not get a return message).
So you either need to implement a listener that waits for events (ie, it is nudged by the returning message to be processed).
Or you could do a hybrid on that by having a separate thread that "polls" (or pulls) a response area on your service to see if the return message exists.
So it really comes down to whether you want more of a "pull" or "push" method of retrieving messages.
The SCA (Service Component Architecture) framework might be something to consider, but depending on what you are doing, it could be overkill too. But something to consider.
EDIT:
I just found this in the Java SE 6 Javadocs that may be helpful. The
interface CompletionService which abstracts the very thing you care
about --> asynchronous work. I suggest you take a look.

If you want a page flow in a web application, you have to handle in the web way : storing some data either in the session, or cookies or hidden fields, etc.
The problem you're trying to tackle, as far as I understand it, doesn't come from asynchronousness but from the stateless http protocole.
Regards,
Stéphane

Related

How to stop repeating myself in Java

I use a method for more than one time in JavaScript by using callback method because JavaScript is an async language.
Example:
function missionOne () {
sumCalculation(1, 2, function (result) {
console.log(result) // writes 3
})
}
function sumCalculation (param1, param2, callback) {
let result = param1 + param2
// The things that take long time can be done here
callback(result)
}
I wonder if there is any way to stop myself in Java?
Edit: I remove several sentences that make more complex the question.
I may be reading too much into your question, but it seems that you're looking into how to handle asynchronous code in Android. There are a couple of native options (not considering any library). I'll focus on two, but keep in mind there are other options.
AsyncTasks
From the documentation
AsyncTask enables proper and easy use of the UI thread. This class allows you to perform background operations and publish results on the UI thread without having to manipulate threads and/or handlers.
Before writing one, you need to know which type of parameters it will receive, the type of progress it will publish during computation and what is its return type. These types are define via the AsyncTask generic Parameters AsyncTask<Params,Progress,Result>. If you don't need them any of them, set them to Void
Here's the basic gist of using an AsyncTask to compute the sum of two ints:
public void sumCalculation (int param1, int param2, Callback callback) {
new AsyncTask<Integer, Void, Integer>() {
#Override
public Integer doInBackground(Integer... params) {
int result = 0;
for (Integer param : params) {
result += param;
}
return result;
}
#Override
protected void onPostExecute(Integer integer) {
super.onPostExecute(integer);
callback.onDone(integer);
}
}.execute(param1, param2);
}
doInBackground, as the name says, will execute a certain piece of code in a background thread. Please note that every AsyncTask will run on a ThreadPool of size 1, so they actually get in the way of other AsyncTasks.
onPostExecute brings the result back to the main thread, so you can update any UI componente. If you try to update the UI from a background thread, an exception will be thrown.
The down side of this particular example is the creation of a new AsyncTask every time that function is called.
Also you should use AsyncTask only if the task won't run for a very long time, couple of seconds at most.
Thread and Handler
Another option suggested on the documentation is using a thread and a handler to communicate between the main thread and a background thread. Although this provides greater flexibility, it also requires more responsibility as you will be responsible for managing the communication yourself, picking the right time to kill your threads and how to recover when something goes bad.
As a rule of thumb, you should only go this way if you really need the extra flexibility.
The overall idea is to create your own Handler and override its handleMessage method.
public class MyHandler {
#Override
public void handleMessage(Message inputMessage) {
int messageType = inputMessage.what;
Object extraData = inputMessage.obj;
...
}
}
public class MyTask extends Thread {
public static public int COMPUTATION_DONE = 0;
private MyHandler handler;
public MyTask(MyHandler handler) {
this.handler = handler;
}
#Override
public void run() {
//do your computation
Message message = handler.obtainMessage(COMPUTATION_DONE, your_result);
handler.sendMessage(message);
}
}
As you can see, this requiring parsing inputMessage.what and deciding what to do with it. Additionally, you need to cast inputMessage.obj to the right type and so on.
These are just two examples, but depending on what you're trying to do, you might need to dig deeper into Services or take a look at some reactive approach, such as RxJava2. However I encourage you to start with the basic before diving into something way more complicated.
Yes it is easy in Java. To take your example above you can write it in Java like this:
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(sumCalc(1,2));
}
private int sumCalc(int first, int second) {
return first + second;
}

How to read Message in netty in other class

I want to read a message at a specific position in an class other than InboundHandler. I can't find a way to read it expect in the channelRead0 method, which is called from the netty framework.
For example:
context.writeMessage("message");
String msg = context.readMessage;
If this is not possible, how can I map a result, which I get in the channelRead0 method to a specific call I made in another class?
The Netty framework is designed to be asynchronously driven. Using this analogy, it can handle large amount of connections with minimal threading usage. I you are creating an api that uses the netty framework to dispatch calls to a remote location, you should use the same analogy for your calls.
Instead of making your api return the value direct, make it return a Future<?> or a Promise<?>. There are different ways of implementing this system in your application, the simplest way is creating a custom handler that maps the incoming requests to the Promises in a FIFO queue.
An example of this could be the following:
This is heavily based on this answer that I submitted in the past.
We start with out handler that maps the requests to requests in our pipeline:
public class MyLastHandler extends SimpleInboundHandler<String> {
private final SynchronousQueue<Promise<String>> queue;
public MyLastHandler (SynchronousQueue<Promise<String>> queue) {
super();
this.queue = queue;
}
// The following is called messageReceived(ChannelHandlerContext, String) in 5.0.
#Override
public void channelRead0(ChannelHandlerContext ctx, String msg) {
this.queue.remove().setSuccss(msg);
// Or setFailure(Throwable)
}
}
We then need to have a method of sending the commands to a remote server:
Channel channel = ....;
SynchronousQueue<Promise<String>> queue = ....;
public Future<String> sendCommandAsync(String command) {
return sendCommandAsync(command, new DefaultPromise<>());
}
public Future<String> sendCommandAsync(String command, Promise<String> promise) {
synchronized(channel) {
queue.offer(promise);
channel.write(command);
}
channel.flush();
}
After we have done our methods, we need a way to call it:
sendCommandAsync("USER anonymous",
new DefaultPromise<>().addListener(
(Future<String> f) -> {
String response = f.get();
if (response.startWidth("331")) {
// do something
}
// etc
}
)
);
If the called would like to use our a api as a blocking call, he can also do that:
String response = sendCommandAsync("USER anonymous").get();
if (response.startWidth("331")) {
// do something
}
// etc
Notice that Future.get() can throw an InterruptedException if the Thread state is interrupted, unlike a socket read operation, who can only be cancelled by some interaction on the socket. This exception should not be a problem in the FutureListener.

Rest method need long time

This is a design question and I am asking for some ideas.
I have a rest method and it will trigger long-time tasks (10~15 minutes)
As the function takes long time, I run it as a thread,
this can avoid method timeout, but how can I know if the thread went wrong?
Runnable loader = new Runnable() {
public void run() {
//tasks
}
};
(new Thread(loader)).start();
Update: the rest service like this
#path()
beginload(){
//let thread run and return info first
//how can i know if this thread went wrong?
(new Thread(loader)).start();
return "need 15 minutes";
}
Conceptually there has to be a way for the service to communicate a failure to the client. There are multiple ways you can do this. Here are three examples:
After the client calls the service, the service immediately returns a job ID. The client can use the job ID later to query the service for the status (including error). For example, when you launch instances at AWS EC2, it takes a while for EC2 to service the request, so the launch request returns a so-called "reservation ID" that you can use in subsequent operations (like querying for status, terminating the launch, etc.).
Pro: Usable in a wide variety of cases, and easy enough to implement.
Con: Requires polling. (I.e. more chatty.)
The client offers a callback URI that the service invokes upon job completion. The callback URI can either be configured into the service, or else passed along as a request parameter. (Don't hardcode the callback URI in the service since services shouldn't depend on their clients.)
Pro: Still pretty simple, and avoids polling.
Con: Client has to have URI for the service to call, which may not be convenient. (E.g. the client may be a desktop app rather than a service, firewall may prevent it, etc.)
The client pushes a notification into a message queue, and the client listens to that queue.
Pro: Avoids polling, and client doesn't need endpoints to call.
Con: More work to set up (requires messaging infrastructure).
There are other possibilities but those are typical approaches.
Do you need to differentiate between different requests? If several tasks to perform, you need an ID.
You can do something like the following:
private static final ExecutorService es = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(10);
private static final Map<Long, Future<Void>> map = new HashMap<>();
#GET
#Path("/submit")
public Response submitTask() {
long id = System.currentTimeMillis();
Future<Void> future = es.submit(new Callable<Void>() {
public Void call() throws Exception {
// long task
// you must throw exception for bad task
return null;
}
});
map.put(id, future);
return Response.ok(id, MediaType.TEXT_PLAIN).build();
}
#GET
#Path("/status/{id}")
public Response submitTask(#PathParam("id") long id) {
Future<Void> future = map.get(id);
if (future.isDone()) {
try {
future.get();
return Response.ok("Successful!", MediaType.TEXT_PLAIN).build();
} catch (InterruptedException | ExecutionException e) {
// log
return Response.ok("Bad task!", MediaType.TEXT_PLAIN).build();
}
}
return Response.ok("Wait a few seconds.", MediaType.TEXT_PLAIN).build();
}
This can give you an idea. Remember purge the map of old tasks.
If you want to get the return value of your thread and throw/catch possible exception, consider use Callable rather than Runnable, and it can be used along with ExecutorService which provide more functionality.
Callable : A task that returns a result and may throw an exception.
Implementors define a single method with no arguments called call.
public interface Callable<V> {
V call() throws Exception;
}

Handling blocking operations in Play 2.1

I am trying to create a way to handle blocking operations in a specific way in Play. First I have described what my aim is followed by what I have managed so far. Can you please tell me if I am on the right track - if so, could you help me understand how to complete the code? If it is not the right way to do it could you suggest a better alternative?
Thanks a lot for all your help
Aim:
Would like to have all blocking operations sent to one thread to a separate thread to be handled asynchronously. New requests that come in are not to take up more threads but instead place them in a queue (or anything similar) to be handled by the single thread. For each item that is processed asynchronously by the extra thread, some text must be gathered and returned to the browser.
So after reading docs and SO questions it appears that actors must be used. I like the concept of actors but have never used them before so am still learning. This is what I have:
package models;
import java.io.*;
import play.mvc.*;
import play.libs.*;
import play.libs.F.*;
import akka.actor.*;
public class ActorTest extends UntypedActor {
static BufferedReader reader = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(
System.in));
#Override
public void onReceive(Object message) throws Exception {
if (message instanceof String) {
getSender().tell(
"You sent me " + ((String) message)
+ " and the consol replied with "
+ reader.readLine(), getSelf());
} else
unhandled(message);
}
}
As you can see the blocking operation is readLine() - just an way of testing.
Is this how it should be done? If so, I had assumed that from the controller, I some how create an async result or something using promises. [ Handling asynchronous results ].
Couple issues, how do I send a message to the Actor and get the reply? I mean can I get the result from a tel() call?
How do I make sure that more threads don't get taken up and that all operations go into a queue - or is this already handled by the actor?
Could you please provide an example controller action that could do this?
Your help is greatly appreciated.
PS FYI I am really new to all this so just to get to this stage I have found these docs useful to read - the Akka actor pages, play of course and some wiki pages on actors.
[edit]
sorry I said single thread but it could be a thread pool - just as long as only the assigned thread / thread pool is used to handle the blocking io not any others.
You can send a message to the Akka actor using ask (instead of tell). It will return to you a Future, which then you can map to a Promise<Result>.
However, you don't really need to use Akka if you don't have to. You can simply use Futures/Promises to run your blocking operation in the background.
In either approach, you end up with a Future from which you can complete the request when the future finishes.
Example of Using Promise in Play 2.2.x
...
import play.libs.F.*;
public static Promise<Result> index() {
Promise<Integer> promiseOfInt = Promise.promise(
new Function0<Integer>() {
public Integer apply() {
// long-running operation (will run in separate thread)
return 42;
}
});
return promiseOfInt.map(
new Function<Integer, Result>() {
public Result apply(Integer i) {
// 'i' is the result after Promise is complete
return ok("Got result: " + i);
}
});
}
If you're using Akka, you need to convert the Future returned from ask to Play's Promise as follows:
public static Promise<Result> index() {
ActorRef myActor = Akka.system().actorFor("user/my-actor");
return Promise.wrap(ask(myActor, "hello", 1000)).map(
new Function<Object, Result>() {
public Result apply(Object response) {
return ok(response.toString());
}
});
}
Example of Using Promise in Play 2.1.x
...
import play.libs.F.*;
public static Result index() {
Promise<Integer> promiseOfInt = play.libs.Akka.future(
new Callable<Integer>() {
public Integer call() {
// long-running operation (will run in separate thread)
return 42;
}
});
return async(
promiseOfInt.map(
new Function<Integer,Result>() {
public Result apply(Integer i) {
// 'i' is the result after Promise is complete
return ok("Got result: " + i);
}
}));
}
If you're using Akka, you need to convert the Future returned from ask to Play's Promise as follows:
public static Result index() {
ActorRef myActor = Akka.system().actorFor("user/my-actor");
return async(
Akka.asPromise(ask(myActor,"hello", 1000)).map(
new Function<Object,Result>() {
public Result apply(Object response) {
return ok(response.toString());
}
}
)
);
}

Wrapping a series of asynchronous calls with a synchronous method with a return value

My current code uses series of asynchronous processes that culminate in results. I need to wrap each of these in such a way that each is accessed by a synchronous method with the result as a return value. I want to use executor services to do this, so as to allow many of these to happen at the same time. I have the feeling that Future might be pertinent to my implementation, but I can't figure out a good way to make this happen.
What I have now:
public class DoAJob {
ResultObject result;
public void stepOne() {
// Passes self in for a callback
otherComponent.doStepOne(this);
}
// Called back by otherComponent once it has completed doStepOne
public void stepTwo(IntermediateData d) {
otherComponent.doStepTwo(this, d);
}
// Called back by otherComponent once it has completed doStepTwo
public void stepThree(ResultObject resultFromOtherComponent) {
result = resultFromOtherComponent;
//Done with process
}
}
This has worked pretty well internally, but now I need to map my process into a synchronous method with a return value like:
public ResultObject getResult(){
// ??? What goes here ???
}
Does anyone have a good idea about how to implement this elegantly?
If you want to turn an asynchronous operation (which executes a callback when finished), into a synchronous/blocking one, you can use a blocking queue. You can wrap this up in a Future object if you wish.
Define a blocking queue which can hold just one element:
BlockingQueue<Result> blockingQueue = new ArrayBlockingQueue<Result>(1);
Start your asynchronous process (will run in the background), and write the callback such that when it's done, it adds its result to the blocking queue.
In your foreground/application thread, have it take() from the queue, which blocks until an element becomes available:
Result result = blockingQueue.take();
I wrote something similar before (foreground thread needs to block for an asynchronous response from a remote machine) using something like a Future, you can find example code here.
I've done something similar with the Guava library; these links might point you in the right direction:
Is it possible to chain async calls using Guava?
https://code.google.com/p/guava-libraries/wiki/ListenableFutureExplained
If you like to get your hands dirty, you can do this
ResultObject result;
public void stepOne()
otherComponent.doStepOne(this);
synchronized(this)
while(result==null) this.wait();
return result;
public void stepThree(ResultObject resultFromOtherComponent)
result = resultFromOtherComponent;
synchronized(this)
this.notify();
Or you can use higher level concurrency tools, like BlockingQueue, Semaphore, CountdownLatch, Phaser, etc etc.
Note that DoAJob is not thread safe - trouble ensured if two threads call stepOne at the same time.
I recommend using invokeAll(..). It will submit a set of tasks to the executor, and block until the last one completes (successfully/with exception). It then returns a list of completed Future objects, so you can loop on them and merge the results into a single ResultObject.
In you wish to run only a single task in a synchronous manner, you can use the following:
executor.invokeAll(Collections.singleton(task));
--edit--
Now I think I understand better your needs. I assume that you need a way to submit independent sequences of tasks. Please take a look at the code I posted in this answer.
Bumerang is my async only http request library which is constructed for Android http requests using Java -> https://github.com/hanilozmen/Bumerang . I needed to make synchronous calls without touching my library. Here is my complete code. npgall's answer inspired me, thanks! Similar approach would be applied to all kinds of async libraries.
public class TestActivity extends Activity {
MyAPI api = (MyAPI) Bumerang.get().initAPI(MyAPI.class);
BlockingQueue<Object> blockingQueue = new ArrayBlockingQueue<Object>(1);
static int indexForTesting;
#Override
protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
setContentView(R.layout.activity_test);
Thread t = new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
for(int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
getItems();
try {
Object response = blockingQueue.take(); // waits for the response
Log.i("TAG", "index " + indexForTesting + " finished. Response " + response.toString());
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
});
t.start();
}
void getItems() {
Log.i("TAG", "index " + ++indexForTesting + " started");
api.getItems(new ResponseListener<Response<List<ResponseModel>>>() {
#Override
public void onSuccess(Response<List<ResponseModel>> response) {
List<ResponseModel> respModel = response.getResponse();
try {
blockingQueue.put(response);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
#Override
public void onError(Response<List<ResponseModel>> response) {
Log.i("onError", response.toString());
try {
blockingQueue.put(response);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
});
}
}

Categories