We Keep Coding

Queue print jobs in a separate single Thread for JavaFX

currently I am experimenting with Concurrency in Java/JavaFX. Printing must run in a different thread otherwise it will make the JavaFX main thread freeze for a couple seconds. Right now my printing is done with this simplified example.
public void print(PrintContent pt) {
setPrintContent(pt);
Thread thread = new Thread(this);
thread.start();
}
#Override
public void run() {
// send content to printer
}
With this code I am sending many print jobs parallel to my printer. Therefore I get the error telling me that my printer can only handle 1 print job at a time. Since I know that Threads cannot be reused, I would like to know if there is a possibility to queue up Threads, so that my printer only handles one print job at a time.
Thank you very much for your effort and your time.

Use a single threaded executor to execute the print jobs. It will create one (and only one) background thread and queue the jobs:
// it might be better not to make this static; but you need to ensure there is
// only one instance of this executor:
private static final Executor PRINT_QUEUE = Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor();
// ...
public void print(PrintContent pt) {
PRINT_QUEUE.execute(() -> {
// send content to printer
});
}

~~> WAY 1
You can implement your own BlockingQueue read this is very useful or use a default implementation from Java libraries tutorial
So after reading the above links,you add a method in your class like
public void addJob(Object job){
queue.put(job);
}
Secondly you implement a Thread that is running into an infinite while loop.Inside it you call the method
queue.take();
When the queue is empty this Thread is blocked waiting until a new Object is added,so you dont have to worry about spending cpu time.
Finally you can set some upper bounds so for example queue can contain .. 27 items.
Mention that in case of Thread failure you have to recreate it manually.
~~>WAY 2 Better Approach
You can use an Executors Interface:
ExecutorService executorService1 = Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor();
From documentation:
Creates an Executor that uses a single worker thread operating off an
unbounded queue. (Note however that if this single thread terminates
due to a failure during execution prior to shutdown, a new one will
take its place if needed to execute subsequent tasks.) Tasks are
guaranteed to execute sequentially, and no more than one task will be
active at any given time.
With the method below you retrieve a result if the job has successfully done.
Future future = executorService.submit(new Callable(){ public Object call() throws Exception { System.out.println("Asynchronous Callable"); return "Callable Result"; } });
System.out.println("future.get() = " + future.get());
If future.get() returns null, the job has been done successfully.
Remember to call
executorService.shutdown(); because the active threads inside this ExecutorService may prevent the JVM from shutting down.
Full tutorial here

How can I ensure an ExecutorService pool has completed, without shutting it down?

Currently, I'm making sure my tasks have finished before moving on like so:
ExecutorService pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(5);
public Set<Future> EnqueueWork(StreamWrapper stream) {
Set<Future> futureObjs = new HashSet<>();
util.setData(stream);
Callable callable = util;
Future future = pool.submit(callable);
futureObjs.add(future);
pool.shutdown();
try {
pool.awaitTermination(Long.MAX_VALUE, TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
Node.sendTCP(Node.getNodeByHostname(StorageTopology.getNextPeer()), Coordinator.prepareForTransport(stream));
return futureObjs;
}
However, because of some other threading on my socket, it's possible that multiple calls are made to EnqueueWork - I'd like to make sure the calls to .submit have completed in the current thread, without shutting down the pool for subsequent threads coming in.
Is this possible?

You can check by invoking isDone() method on all the Future objects in futureObjs. You need to make sure isDone is called in a loop. calling get() method on Future object is another option, since get() is a blocking call, it will return only after task is completed and result is ready. But do you really want to keep the pool open after all the tasks are done?

I agree with one of the comments, it seems odd that your executor can be used by different threads. Usually and executor is private to an instance of some class, but anyhow.
What you can do, from the docs, is to check:
getActiveCount() - Returns the approximate number of threads that are >actively executing tasks.
NOTE: This is a blocking method, it will take out a lock on the workers of your threadpool and block until it has counted everything
And also check:
getQueue() - Returns the task queue used by this executor. Access to the
task queue is intended primarily for debugging and monitoring.
This queue may be in active use. Retrieving the task queue
does not prevent queued tasks from executing.
If your queue is empty and the activeCount is 0, all your tasks should have finished. I say should because getActiveCount says "approximate". Looking at the impl, this is most likely because the worker internally has a flag indicating that it is locked (in use). There is in theory a slight race between executing and the worker being done and marking itself so.
A better approach would in fact be to track the features. You would have to check the Queue and that all futures are done.
However I think what you really need is to reverse your logic. Instead of the current thread trying to work out if another thread has submitted work in the meantime, you should have the other thread call isShutdown() and simply not submit a new task in that case.

You are approaching this issue from the wrong direction. If you need to know whether or not your tasks are finished, that means you have a dependency of A->B. The executor is the wrong place to ensure that dependency, as much as you don't ask the engine of your car "are we there yet?".
Java offers several features to ensure that a certain state has been reached before starting a new execution path. One of them is the invokeAll method of the ExecutorService, that returns only when all tasks that have been submitted are completed.
pool.invokeAll(listOfAllMyCallables);
// if you reach this point all callables are completed

You have already added Future to the set. Just add below code block to get the status of each Future task by calling get() with time out period.
In my example, time out is 60 seconds. You can change it as per your requirement.
Sample code:
try{
for(Future future : futureObjs){
System.out.println("future.status = " + future.get(60000, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS));
}
}catch(Exception err){
err.printStackTrace();
}
Other useful posts:
How to forcefully shutdown java ExecutorService
How to wait for completion of multiple tasks in Java?

Capture a event when all the threads are executed in Executor framework

Im using Java Executor framework to execute multiple threads at a same time. I would like to do some operations after all the threads are executed. Do we have any listeners or event capture mechanism in executor framework

The API docks for ThreadPoolExecutor describe some hooks that might be useful for this:
Hook methods
This class provides protected overridable beforeExecute(java.lang.Thread, java.lang.Runnable) and
afterExecute(java.lang.Runnable, java.lang.Throwable) methods that are
called before and after execution of each task. These can be used to
manipulate the execution environment; for example, reinitializing
ThreadLocals, gathering statistics, or adding log entries.
Additionally, method terminated() can be overridden to perform any
special processing that needs to be done once the Executor has fully
terminated.
If hook or callback methods throw exceptions, internal worker threads may in turn fail and abruptly terminate.
See https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/ThreadPoolExecutor.html

You might consider moving from a ThreadPoolExecutor to a ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor. The difference is, that for all the tasks you enqueue, you'll get a Future<T>.
This allows you to check for .isDone() of tasks you submitted and act accordingly. Especially interesting if you need to use results of what you submitted, because you can cleanly perform a .get() then, without blocking the calling thread until the execution is finished.
Another alternative might be to implement a ThreadFactory, which spawns an additional listener thread to join() the main thread and notify you upon completion.

A a = new A();
B b= new B();
FutureTask fa = new FutureTask (a);
FutureTask fb = new FutureTask (b);
ExecutorService es = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(2);
es.submit (fa);
es.submit(fb);
String getName = (String)a.get();
String getSurName = (String)b.get();
es.shutdown ();
***//Here all threads are executed and
//you can write any code which you want to execute after
//finishing all the threads.***
Or the other work around .
....
you can write daemon class by using LocalThrad class and spawn the thread and it will act as listener for you.
Whatever you want to achieve in this case you can achieve by using above daemon class.

Simple asynchronous I/O: many threads, one file

I have a scientific application which I usually run in parallel with xargs, but this scheme incurs repeated JVM start costs and neglects cached file I/O and the JIT compiler. I've already adapted the code to use a thread pool, but I'm stuck on how to save my output.
The program (i.e. one thread of the new program) reads two files, does some processing and then prints the result to standard output. Currently, I've dealt with output by having each thread add its result string to a BlockingQueue. Another thread takes from the queue and writes to a file, as long as a Boolean flag is true. Then I awaitTermination and set the flag to false, triggering the file to close and the program to exit.
My solution seems a little kludgey; what is the simplest and best way to accomplish this?
How should I write primary result data from many threads to a single file?
The answer doesn't need to be Java-specific if it is, for example, a broadly applicable method.
Update
I'm using "STOP" as the poison pill.
while (true) {
String line = queue.take();
if (line.equals("STOP")) {
break;
} else {
output.write(line);
}
}
output.close();
I manually start the queue-consuming thread, then add the jobs to the thread pool, wait for the jobs to finish and finally poison the queue and join the consumer thread.

That's really the way you want to do it, have the threads put their output to the queue and then have the writer exhaust it.
The only thing you might want to do to make things a little cleaner is rather than checking a flag, simply put an "all done" token on to the queue that the writer can use to know that it's finished. That way there's no out of band signaling necessary.
That's trivial to do, you can use an well known string, an enum, or simply a shared object.

You could use an ExecutorService.
Submit a Callable that would perform the task and return the string after completion.
When Submitting the Callable you get hold of a Future, store these references e.g. in a List.
Then simply iterate through the Futures and get the Strings by calling Future#get.
This will block until the task is completed if it not yet is, otherwise return the value immediately.
Example:
ExecutorService exec = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(10);
List<Future<String>> tasks = new ArrayList<Future<String>>();
tasks.add(exec.submit(new Callable<String> {
public String call() {
//do stuff
return <yourString>;
}
}));
//and so on for the other tasks
for (Future<String> task : tasks) {
String result = task.get();
//write to output
}

Many threads processing, one thread writing and a message queue between them is a good strategy. The issue that just needs to be solved, is knowing when all work is finished. One way to do that is to count how many worker threads you started, and then after that count how many responses you got. Something like this pseudo code:
int workers = 0
for each work item {
workers++
start the item's worker in a separate thread
}
while workers > 0 {
take worker's response from a queue
write response to file
workers--
}
This approach also works if the workers can find more work items while they are executing. Just include any additional not-yet-processed work in the worker responses, and then increment the workers count and start workers threads as usual.
If each of the workers returns just one message, you can use Java's ExecutorService to execute Callable instances which return the result. ExecutorService's methods give access to Future instances from which you can get the result when the Callable has finished its work.
So you would first submit all the tasks to the ExecutorService and then loop over all the Futures and get their responses. That way you would write the responses in the order in which you check the futures, which can be different from the order in which they finish their work. If latency is not important, that shouldn't be a problem. Otherwise, a message queue (as mentioned above) might be more suitable.

It's not clear if your output file has some defined order or if you just dump your data there. I assume it has no order.
I don't see why you need an extra thread for writing to output. Just synchronized the method that writes to file and call it at the end of each thread.

If you have many threads writing to the same file the simplest thing to do is to write to that file in the task.
final PrintWriter out =
ExecutorService es =
for(int i=0;i<tasks;i++)
es.submit(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
performCalculations();
// so only one thread can write to the file at a time.
synchornized(out) {
writeResults(out);
}
}
});
es.shutdown();
es.awaitTermination(1, TimeUnit.HOUR);
out.close();

Java Wait for thread to finish

I have a thread downloading data and I want to wait until the download is finished before I load the data. Is there a standard way of doing this?
More Info:
I have a Download class that gets data from a URL (Serialized POJOs). Download is Runnable and Observable. It keeps track of the bytes downloaded and download size. I have a progress bar that displays the progress to the User. The GUI observes Download to update the progress bar.
When the POJO is downloaded I want to get it and move to the next step. Each step has to wait for the previous to finish. The problem is I cant think of a way to pause my application to wait for the download thread. Once the download is finished I want to call download.getObject() which will return the data as an object. I can then cast it and get on with the next download.
I have a helper class that manages the URLs for download and makes all of the calls to Download. This call will call getObject and do the casting. The Gui calls helper.getUser(). helper starts the thread running and I want it to 'know' when it is finished so it can return the casted object.
Any suggestions/examples? I am in the beginning stages of this design so I am willing to change it.
Update:
I followed http://download.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/javax/swing/SwingWorker.html#get and used modal to block until the thread finished. The code was very messy and I don't like this approach. I will keep trying to find a 'clean' way to handle the workflow of the download processes.

Thread has a method that does that for you join which will block until the thread has finished executing.

You could use a CountDownLatch from the java.util.concurrent package. It is very useful when waiting for one or more threads to complete before continuing execution in the awaiting thread.
For example, waiting for three tasks to complete:
CountDownLatch latch = new CountDownLatch(3);
...
latch.await(); // Wait for countdown
The other thread(s) then each call latch.countDown() when complete with the their tasks. Once the countdown is complete, three in this example, the execution will continue.

Better alternatives to join() method have been evolved over a period of time.
ExecutorService.html#invokeAll is one alternative.
Executes the given tasks, returning a list of Futures holding their status and results when all complete. Future.isDone() is true for each element of the returned list.
Note that a completed task could have terminated either normally or by throwing an exception. The results of this method are undefined if the given collection is modified while this operation is in progress.
ForkJoinPool or Executors.html#newWorkStealingPool provides other alternatives to achieve the same purpose.
Example code snippet:
import java.util.concurrent.*;
import java.util.*;
public class InvokeAllDemo{
public InvokeAllDemo(){
System.out.println("creating service");
ExecutorService service = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors());
List<MyCallable> futureList = new ArrayList<MyCallable>();
for ( int i=0; i<10; i++){
MyCallable myCallable = new MyCallable((long)i);
futureList.add(myCallable);
}
System.out.println("Start");
try{
List<Future<Long>> futures = service.invokeAll(futureList);
}catch(Exception err){
err.printStackTrace();
}
System.out.println("Completed");
service.shutdown();
}
public static void main(String args[]){
InvokeAllDemo demo = new InvokeAllDemo();
}
class MyCallable implements Callable<Long>{
Long id = 0L;
public MyCallable(Long val){
this.id = val;
}
public Long call(){
// Add your business logic
return id;
}
}
}

You can use join() to wait for all threads to finish. Like below:
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
Thread T1 = new Thread(new ThreadTest(i));
T1.start();
try {
T1.join();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}

SwingWorker has doInBackground() which you can use to perform a task. You have the option to invoke get() and wait for the download to complete or you can override the done() method which will be invoked on the event dispatch thread once the SwingWorker completes.
The Swingworker has advantages to your current approach in that it has many of the features you are looking for so there is no need to reinvent the wheel. You are able to use the getProgress() and setProgress() methods as an alternative to an observer on the runnable for download progress. The done() method as I stated above is called after the worker finishes executing and is performed on the EDT, this allows you load the data after the download has completed.

I imagine that you're calling your download in a background thread such as provided by a SwingWorker. If so, then simply call your next code sequentially in the same SwingWorker's doInBackground method.

Generally, when you want to wait for a thread to finish, you should call join() on it.

Any suggestions/examples? I followed SwingWorker... The code was very messy and I don't like this approach.
Instead of get(), which waits for completion, use process() and setProgress() to show intermediate results, as suggested in this simple example or this related example.

The join() method allows one thread to wait for the completion of another.However, as with sleep, join is dependent on the OS for timing, so you should not assume that join will wait exactly as long as you specify.