I need to perform a task repeatedly that affects both GUI-related and non GUI-related objects. One caveat is that no action should performed if the previous task had not completed when the next timer event is fired.
My initial thoughts are to use a SwingTimer in conjunction with a javax.swing.SwingWorker object. The general setup would look like this.
class
{
timer = new Timer(speed, this);
timer.start();
public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e)
{
SwingWorker worker = new SwingWorker() {
#Override
public ImageIcon[] doInBackground() {
// potential long running task
}
#Override
public void done() {
// update GUI on event dispatch thread when complete
}
}
}
Some potential issues I see with this approach are:
1) Multiple SwingWorkers will be active if a worker has not completed before the next ActionEvent is fired by the timer.
2) A SwingWorker is only designed to be executed once, so holding a reference to the worker and reusing (is not?) a viable option.
Is there a better way to achieve this?
For (1), the scheduleAtFixedRate() method on ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor might be useful. From the javadocs:
If any execution of this task takes longer than its period, then subsequent executions may start late, but will not concurrently execute.
For (2), it looks like you could define a subclass of SwingWorker and construct new instances of the subclass for each iteration, instead of instantiating an anonymous subclass.
Have you looked at using a simple Java Timer, and a ReadWriteLock to determine if a task is running when the timer triggers again ? In this situation you could simply bail out of that particular iteration and wait for the next.
Why do you use a Timer? It would be simpler to keep the 'worker' running all the time, pausing via sleep() whenever the task took too little time to complete. You can still update things in the event dispatch thread using something like the following:
Thread background = new Thread(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
while ( ! stopRequested ) {
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
// do task
long elapsed = start - System.currentTimeMillis();
SwingUtilities.invokeLater(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
// update UI
}
});
if (elapsed < tickTime) {
Thread.sleep(tickTime - elapsed);
}
}
}
}.start();
Related
How do I run a specific set of instructions inside the TimerTask continuously without delay for a set amount of time ? Below are the codes I am attempting to implement the above.
Timer timer = new Timer();
timer.schedule(new TimerTask() {
public void run() {
System.out.println("Test started at: " + new Date());
// Do something continuously without delay
System.out.println("Test finished at: " + new Date());
}
}, 0);
The second parameter to the schedule method is the time to begin the timer task (or delay relative to now), not the length of time that the timer will execute for.
It's not completely clear from your question but I'm assuming you want the task to start and stop at particular times (or delays relative to now) in the future. If so, the way I would approach this is to create a Thread that does the task you need. Since a TimerTask is a Runnable that is executed as a Thread once the Timer starts it, you can just use an instance of that TimerTask. Ensure that Runnable contains a settable field like running. In that Thread, run your task in a while loop like this:
public void run() {
while(running) { /* do my task */ }
}
Then, use one Timer to schedule the Runnable to start at the time you need. Use another Timer to set the running parameter of the same Thread to false at the time you want it to stop. The running parameter should be volatile to ensure that changes to it from the second timer Thread are seen by the first timer Thread immediately. So it would look something like this (not tested):
class StoppableTimerTask extends TimerTask {
private volatile boolean running = true;
public void stopRunning() { this.running = false; }
public void run() {
while(running) { /* do my task */ }
}
}
final StoppableTimerTask task = new StoppableTimerTask();
timer.schedule(task, startTime);
timer.schedule(new TimerTask() {
public void run() {
task.stopRunning();
}
}, stopTime);
Depending on what your "something" is, you may also want to look into Thread interrupts. For example, if it is doing blocking IO, your code won't loop and check the running value until the blocking IO completes. Interrupting the thread (may) cause that to happen. See http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/lang/Thread.html#interrupt--. This may or may not work, and it can be tricky to get right, so if you need this Thread to exit as close to the desired time as possible, prefer running blocking I/O and similar operations with smaller timeouts so that the thread can check whether it should continue to run more often.
UPDATE: As per the comment indicating that the task should start right away, it becomes even simpler. The initial task doesn't even need to extend TimerTask -- it can just be a regular Thread that is started immediately. The timer is only needed to stop it at the specified future time.
Hey i just need a question answered...
How would i make the following code not freeze my whole JFrame?
try {
Thread.sleep(Integer.parseInt(delayField.getText()) * 1000);
System.out.println("Hello!");
} catch(InterruptedException ex) {
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
}
use a different thread to perform this task. If you do this in the main UI thread then it will freeze.. For example you can do following
new Thread() {
#Override
public void run() {
try {
Thread.sleep(Integer.parseInt(delayField.getText()) * 1000);
System.out.println("Hello!");
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
}
}
}.start();
UPDATE
AFter wise suggestions of Robin and Marko I am updating the answer with a better solution.
ActionListener taskPerformer = new ActionListener() {
public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent evt) {
System.out.println("Hello!");
}
};
javax.swing.Timer t = new javax.swing.Timer(Integer.parseInt(delayField.getText()) * 1000, taskPerformer);
t.setRepeats(false);
t.start();
Whenever you are about to use Thread.sleep in your GUI code, stop yourself and think of Swing Timer, which is the right tool for the job. Schedule the task you need to perform with a delay.
Using another thread for this is not the best advice: it wastes a heavy system resource (a thread) to do absolutely nothing but wait.
This is not the correct way to use threads in java . You should use swingutilities.invokelater
swing utils invoke later
You don't want to execute this on the UI (or event dispatch thread) thread. Rather in a separate thread. Otherwise (as you've seen) you'll block the UI.
It's a good practice to perform time-consuming operations on a separate thread, and make use of SwingUtilities.invokeLater() if those threads need to perform some subsequent UI action (e.g. in the above display "Hello" in the UI)
I am learning multi-threading concepts now. I can run a single thread with the help of handler and Runnable(). I want my code to run two threads, say Thread1 runs method1() and thread2 runs method2(). Thread1 should run for 2seconds and then sleep for 1second. In the mean time, thread2 should wakeup and run for 1second. Again, thread1 should run for 2seconds. This process should be done continuously. I am doing this in Android.
The question might look straight forward, but I have no other way, other than posting a question here, as I have gone through many tutorials and questions in this website. No post suits my context. Any suggestions will be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
You can do this by using ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor, with which you can achieve parallel execution of your tasks. A small sample example to schedule the tasks:
//creates a thread pool of size 2
int poolSize = 2;
// creates ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor object with number of thread 2
ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor exec = new ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor(poolSize);
//starts executing after 1 second
ScheduledFuture<Callable-Type> sf = stpe.schedule(new TaskOne(), 1,TimeUnit.SECONDS);
//starts executing after 2 seconds
ScheduledFuture<Callable-Type> sf1 = stpe.schedule(new TaskTwo(), 2,TimeUnit.SECONDS);
And you can define your tasks as below:
class TaskOne implements Callable<Callable-Type> {
#Override
public Callable-Type call() throws Exception {
//DO YOUR WORK HERE
return callable-type;
}
}
class TaskTwo implements Callable<Callable-Type> {
#Override
public Callable-Type call() throws Exception {
//DO YOUR WORK HERE
return callable-type;
}
}
The advantages of using ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor over Timer are :
A Timer creates only a single thread for executing timer tasks. Scheduled
thread pools address this limitation by letting you provide multiple threads for executing deferred and periodic tasks.
Another problem with Timer is that it behaves poorly if a TimerTask throws an unchecked exception. The Timer thread doesn't catch the exception, so an unchecked exception thrown from a TimerTask terminates the timer thread.
Ref: Java Concurrency in Practice
Sample
Timer timer = new Timer();
timer.schedule(new TimerTask() {
#Override
public void run() {
runOnUiThread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
//your code
}
});
}
}, 2000, 1000); // 2000 is delay and 1000 is call period
There is also another schedule() methods that you can use to map your criteria.
I develop a simple application and I use timer, but if I run the timer several times the timer drops this exception: Exception in thread "AWT-EventQueue-0" java.lang.IllegalStateException: Timer already cancelled.
Here is my code:
public class Main {
...
private static void createAndShowUI() {
...
//a listener of a radio button
ActionListener on_action = new ActionListener() {
public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e) {
Timer.timer.schedule(Timer.task,0,2000); //I call the timer here
}
};
...
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
java.awt.EventQueue.invokeLater(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
createAndShowUI();
}
});
}
}
//and the class of timer:
public class Timer {
public static java.util.Timer timer = new java.util.Timer();
public static java.util.TimerTask task = new java.util.TimerTask() {
public void run() {
//some tasks
}
};
}
My question is that where I use the thread? Thanks!
The problem is not using the Event-Queue thread, it is that you are re-using a cancelled Timer.
I'm guessing you are using the Timer to do some animation or something in response to a button push (as you schedule things at a fixed rate). I'm guessing also that in code you don't show us, the timer gets cancelled by a separate event. If you ever call Timer.cancel() can you show us that code?
From the exception what is happening is that you are trying to use the same Timer that you have already cancelled. Once a Timer has been cancelled, it can't be used again.
Two suggestions - use a different Timer every time. Also, if you are doing things for UI purposes, you might want to consider using a Swing timer instead.
As far as the Thread goes, all GUI events happen on the AWT Thread, but I repeat, this is almost certainly not the problem. Read this for more details.
A timer goes into cancelled state if either the cancel() method has been invoked or the if the timer task has terminated unexpectedly:
If the timer's task execution thread terminates unexpectedly, for example, because its stop method is invoked, any further attempt to schedule a task on the timer will result in an IllegalStateException, as if the timer's cancel method had been invoked.
So in your case, it may not be a problem of where you put/call/use your time, but more a problem of what you're actually doing with your timer.
Here you have your thread:
Corresponding to each Timer object is a single background thread that is used to execute all of the timer's tasks, sequentially
so if you try to access your GUI from the Timer task you should put it into the EventQueue thread.
And look here
If the timer's task execution thread terminates unexpectedly, for example, because its stop method is invoked, any further attempt to schedule a task on the timer will result in an IllegalStateException, as if the timer's cancel method had been invoked.
Do you let the Timer schedule any more tasks after it has been cancelled?
I have an object with a method named StartDownload(), that starts three threads.
How do I get a notification when each thread has finished executing?
Is there a way to know if one (or all) of the thread is finished or is still executing?
There are a number of ways you can do this:
Use Thread.join() in your main thread to wait in a blocking fashion for each Thread to complete, or
Check Thread.isAlive() in a polling fashion -- generally discouraged -- to wait until each Thread has completed, or
Unorthodox, for each Thread in question, call setUncaughtExceptionHandler to call a method in your object, and program each Thread to throw an uncaught Exception when it completes, or
Use locks or synchronizers or mechanisms from java.util.concurrent, or
More orthodox, create a listener in your main Thread, and then program each of your Threads to tell the listener that they have completed.
How to implement Idea #5? Well, one way is to first create an interface:
public interface ThreadCompleteListener {
void notifyOfThreadComplete(final Thread thread);
}
then create the following class:
public abstract class NotifyingThread extends Thread {
private final Set<ThreadCompleteListener> listeners
= new CopyOnWriteArraySet<ThreadCompleteListener>();
public final void addListener(final ThreadCompleteListener listener) {
listeners.add(listener);
}
public final void removeListener(final ThreadCompleteListener listener) {
listeners.remove(listener);
}
private final void notifyListeners() {
for (ThreadCompleteListener listener : listeners) {
listener.notifyOfThreadComplete(this);
}
}
#Override
public final void run() {
try {
doRun();
} finally {
notifyListeners();
}
}
public abstract void doRun();
}
and then each of your Threads will extend NotifyingThread and instead of implementing run() it will implement doRun(). Thus when they complete, they will automatically notify anyone waiting for notification.
Finally, in your main class -- the one that starts all the Threads (or at least the object waiting for notification) -- modify that class to implement ThreadCompleteListener and immediately after creating each Thread add itself to the list of listeners:
NotifyingThread thread1 = new OneOfYourThreads();
thread1.addListener(this); // add ourselves as a listener
thread1.start(); // Start the Thread
then, as each Thread exits, your notifyOfThreadComplete method will be invoked with the Thread instance that just completed (or crashed).
Note that better would be to implements Runnable rather than extends Thread for NotifyingThread as extending Thread is usually discouraged in new code. But I'm coding to your question. If you change the NotifyingThread class to implement Runnable then you have to change some of your code that manages Threads, which is pretty straightforward to do.
Solution using CyclicBarrier
public class Downloader {
private CyclicBarrier barrier;
private final static int NUMBER_OF_DOWNLOADING_THREADS;
private DownloadingThread extends Thread {
private final String url;
public DownloadingThread(String url) {
super();
this.url = url;
}
#Override
public void run() {
barrier.await(); // label1
download(url);
barrier.await(); // label2
}
}
public void startDownload() {
// plus one for the main thread of execution
barrier = new CyclicBarrier(NUMBER_OF_DOWNLOADING_THREADS + 1); // label0
for (int i = 0; i < NUMBER_OF_DOWNLOADING_THREADS; i++) {
new DownloadingThread("http://www.flickr.com/someUser/pic" + i + ".jpg").start();
}
barrier.await(); // label3
displayMessage("Please wait...");
barrier.await(); // label4
displayMessage("Finished");
}
}
label0 - cyclic barrier is created with number of parties equal to the number of executing threads plus one for the main thread of execution (in which startDownload() is being executed)
label 1 - n-th DownloadingThread enters the waiting room
label 3 - NUMBER_OF_DOWNLOADING_THREADS have entered the waiting room. Main thread of execution releases them to start doing their downloading jobs in more or less the same time
label 4 - main thread of execution enters the waiting room. This is the 'trickiest' part of the code to understand. It doesn't matter which thread will enter the waiting room for the second time. It is important that whatever thread enters the room last ensures that all the other downloading threads have finished their downloading jobs.
label 2 - n-th DownloadingThread has finished its downloading job and enters the waiting room. If it is the last one i.e. already NUMBER_OF_DOWNLOADING_THREADS have entered it, including the main thread of execution, main thread will continue its execution only when all the other threads have finished downloading.
You should really prefer a solution that uses java.util.concurrent. Find and read Josh Bloch and/or Brian Goetz on the topic.
If you are not using java.util.concurrent.* and are taking responsibility for using Threads directly, then you should probably use join() to know when a thread is done. Here is a super simple Callback mechanism. First extend the Runnable interface to have a callback:
public interface CallbackRunnable extends Runnable {
public void callback();
}
Then make an Executor that will execute your runnable and call you back when it is done.
public class CallbackExecutor implements Executor {
#Override
public void execute(final Runnable r) {
final Thread runner = new Thread(r);
runner.start();
if ( r instanceof CallbackRunnable ) {
// create a thread to perform the callback
Thread callerbacker = new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
try {
// block until the running thread is done
runner.join();
((CallbackRunnable)r).callback();
}
catch ( InterruptedException e ) {
// someone doesn't want us running. ok, maybe we give up.
}
}
});
callerbacker.start();
}
}
}
The other sort-of obvious thing to add to your CallbackRunnable interface is a means to handle any exceptions, so maybe put a public void uncaughtException(Throwable e); line in there and in your executor, install a Thread.UncaughtExceptionHandler to send you to that interface method.
But doing all that really starts to smell like java.util.concurrent.Callable. You should really look at using java.util.concurrent if your project permits it.
Many things have been changed in last 6 years on multi-threading front.
Instead of using join() and lock API, you can use
1.ExecutorService invokeAll() API
Executes the given tasks, returning a list of Futures holding their status and results when all complete.
2.CountDownLatch
A synchronization aid that allows one or more threads to wait until a set of operations being performed in other threads completes.
A CountDownLatch is initialized with a given count. The await methods block until the current count reaches zero due to invocations of the countDown() method, after which all waiting threads are released and any subsequent invocations of await return immediately. This is a one-shot phenomenon -- the count cannot be reset. If you need a version that resets the count, consider using a CyclicBarrier.
3.ForkJoinPool or newWorkStealingPool() in Executors is other way
4.Iterate through all Future tasks from submit on ExecutorService and check the status with blocking call get() on Future object
Have a look at related SE questions:
How to wait for a thread that spawns it's own thread?
Executors: How to synchronously wait until all tasks have finished if tasks are created recursively?
Do you want to wait for them to finish? If so, use the Join method.
There is also the isAlive property if you just want to check it.
You can interrogate the thread instance with getState() which returns an instance of Thread.State enumeration with one of the following values:
* NEW
A thread that has not yet started is in this state.
* RUNNABLE
A thread executing in the Java virtual machine is in this state.
* BLOCKED
A thread that is blocked waiting for a monitor lock is in this state.
* WAITING
A thread that is waiting indefinitely for another thread to perform a particular action is in this state.
* TIMED_WAITING
A thread that is waiting for another thread to perform an action for up to a specified waiting time is in this state.
* TERMINATED
A thread that has exited is in this state.
However I think it would be a better design to have a master thread which waits for the 3 children to finish, the master would then continue execution when the other 3 have finished.
You could also use the Executors object to create an ExecutorService thread pool. Then use the invokeAll method to run each of your threads and retrieve Futures. This will block until all have finished execution. Your other option would be to execute each one using the pool and then call awaitTermination to block until the pool is finished executing. Just be sure to call shutdown() when you're done adding tasks.
I would suggest looking at the javadoc for Thread class.
You have multiple mechanisms for thread manipulation.
Your main thread could join() the three threads serially, and would then not proceed until all three are done.
Poll the thread state of the spawned threads at intervals.
Put all of the spawned threads into a separate ThreadGroup and poll the activeCount() on the ThreadGroup and wait for it to get to 0.
Setup a custom callback or listener type of interface for inter-thread communication.
I'm sure there are plenty of other ways I'm still missing.
I guess the easiest way is to use ThreadPoolExecutor class.
It has a queue and you can set how many threads should be working in parallel.
It has nice callback methods:
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.
which is exactly what we need. We will override afterExecute() to get callbacks after each thread is done and will override terminated() to know when all threads are done.
So here is what you should do
Create an executor:
private ThreadPoolExecutor executor;
private int NUMBER_OF_CORES = Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors();
private void initExecutor() {
executor = new ThreadPoolExecutor(
NUMBER_OF_CORES * 2, //core pool size
NUMBER_OF_CORES * 2, //max pool size
60L, //keep aive time
TimeUnit.SECONDS,
new LinkedBlockingQueue<Runnable>()
) {
#Override
protected void afterExecute(Runnable r, Throwable t) {
super.afterExecute(r, t);
//Yet another thread is finished:
informUiAboutProgress(executor.getCompletedTaskCount(), listOfUrisToProcess.size());
}
}
};
#Override
protected void terminated() {
super.terminated();
informUiThatWeAreDone();
}
}
And start your threads:
private void startTheWork(){
for (Uri uri : listOfUrisToProcess) {
executor.execute(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
doSomeHeavyWork(uri);
}
});
}
executor.shutdown(); //call it when you won't add jobs anymore
}
Inside method informUiThatWeAreDone(); do whatever you need to do when all threads are done, for example, update UI.
NOTE: Don't forget about using synchronized methods since you do your work in parallel and BE VERY CAUTIOUS if you decide to call synchronized method from another synchronized method! This often leads to deadlocks
Hope this helps!
Here's a solution that is simple, short, easy to understand, and works perfectly for me. I needed to draw to the screen when another thread ends; but couldn't because the main thread has control of the screen. So:
(1) I created the global variable: boolean end1 = false; The thread sets it to true when ending. That is picked up in the mainthread by "postDelayed" loop, where it is responded to.
(2) My thread contains:
void myThread() {
end1 = false;
new CountDownTimer(((60000, 1000) { // milliseconds for onFinish, onTick
public void onFinish()
{
// do stuff here once at end of time.
end1 = true; // signal that the thread has ended.
}
public void onTick(long millisUntilFinished)
{
// do stuff here repeatedly.
}
}.start();
}
(3) Fortunately, "postDelayed" runs in the main thread, so that's where in check the other thread once each second. When the other thread ends, this can begin whatever we want to do next.
Handler h1 = new Handler();
private void checkThread() {
h1.postDelayed(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
if (end1)
// resond to the second thread ending here.
else
h1.postDelayed(this, 1000);
}
}, 1000);
}
(4) Finally, start the whole thing running somewhere in your code by calling:
void startThread()
{
myThread();
checkThread();
}
You could also use SwingWorker, which has built-in property change support. See addPropertyChangeListener() or the get() method for a state change listener example.
Look at the Java documentation for the Thread class. You can check the thread's state. If you put the three threads in member variables, then all three threads can read each other's states.
You have to be a bit careful, though, because you can cause race conditions between the threads. Just try to avoid complicated logic based on the state of the other threads. Definitely avoid multiple threads writing to the same variables.