We Keep Coding

Backgroundworker blocks UI

I try to perform an easy task in an other backgroundthread, so the UI doesn't get blocked, but it still gets blocked. Did I forget anything?
public partial class backgroundWorkerForm : Form
{
public backgroundWorkerForm()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void doWorkButton_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (backgroundWorker.IsBusy != true)
{
// Start the asynchronous operation.
backgroundWorker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
}
private void backgroundWorker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
//BackgroundWorker worker = sender as BackgroundWorker;
if (textBoxOutput.InvokeRequired)
{
textBoxOutput.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate
{
for (int i = 0; i < 10000; i++)
{
textBoxOutput.AppendText(i + Environment.NewLine);
}
}));
}
}
}
While the textBox gets filled, the UI is blocked:

Your app wants to repeatedly send updates from the background thread to the UI. There is a built-in mechanism for this: the ProgressChanged event for the background worker. A ReportProgress call is triggered in the background, but executes on the UI thread.
I do change one thing, however. Performance can degrade with too many cross-thread calls. So instead of sending an update every iteration, I instead will batch them into 100.
private void backgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
const int maxIterations = 10000;
var progressLimit = 100;
var staging = new List<int>();
for (int i = 0; i < maxIterations; i++)
{
staging.Add(i);
if (staging.Count % progressLimit == 0)
{
// Only send a COPY of the staging list because we
// may continue to modify staging inside this loop.
// There are many ways to do this. Below is just one way.
backgroundWorker1.ReportProgress(staging.Count, staging.ToArray());
staging.Clear();
}
}
// Flush last bit in staging.
if (staging.Count > 0)
{
// We are done with staging here so we can pass it as is.
backgroundWorker1.ReportProgress(staging.Count, staging);
}
}
// The ProgressChanged event is triggered in the background thread
// but actually executes in the UI thread.
private void backgroundWorker1_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
if (e.ProgressPercentage == 0) return;
// We don't care if an array or a list was passed.
var updatedIndices = e.UserState as IEnumerable<int>;
var sb = new StringBuilder();
foreach (var index in updatedIndices)
{
sb.Append(index.ToString() + Environment.NewLine);
}
textBoxOutput.Text += sb.ToString();
}
EDIT:
This requires you set the background worker's WorkerReportsProgress property to true.
It's not important that you pass a count with the ReportProgress call. I do so just to have something and to quickly check if I can return.
One really should keep in mind about how many events are being invoked and queued up. Your original app had 10,000 cross thread invocations and 10,000 changed text events for textBoxOutput. My example uses 100 cross thread calls since I use a page size of 100. I could still have generated 10,000 changed text events for the textbox, but instead use a StringBuilder object to hold a full page of changes and then update the textbox once for that page. That way the textbox only has 100 update events.
EDIT 2
Whether or not your app needs paging is not the main deal. The biggest take away should be that the background worker really should use ReportProgress when trying to communicate info back to the UI. See this MSDN Link. Of particular note is this:
You must be careful not to manipulate any user-interface objects in
your DoWork event handler. Instead, communicate to the user interface
through the ProgressChanged and RunWorkerCompleted events.

Your invocation code should be outside the loop. Everything in the invoked codeblock, will be executed on the UI thread, thus blocking it.
private void backgroundWorker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
//BackgroundWorker worker = sender as BackgroundWorker;
for (int i = 0; i < 10000; i++)
{
// do long-running task
//if (textBoxOutput.InvokeRequired)
//{
textBoxOutput.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate
{
textBoxOutput.AppendText(i + Environment.NewLine);
}));
//}
}
}

an easier way would be to do completely create your output text, and then paste the full output into the TextBox, then you only need one invocation
protected delegate void SetTextDelegate(TextBox tb, string Text);
protected void SetText(TextBox tb, string Text)
{
if (tb.InvokeRequired) {
tb.Invoke(new SetTextDelegate(SetText), tb, Text);
return;
}
tb.Text = Text;
}
and then inside your dowork
private void backgroundWorker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
//BackgroundWorker worker = sender as BackgroundWorker;
for (int i = 0; i < 10000; i++)
{
sb.AppendLine(i.ToString());
}
SetText(textBoxOutput, sb.ToString());
}

For-loop multi-threading passes upper bound

We are learning multi-threadding today in class and we came across a very curious error. When doing a for loop in our new thread the upper bound of the for loop keeps getting passed. The thread is being killed but then another value will appear and end another thread.
For the purpose of debugging the error I changed the upper bound to 90 to avoid the OutOfRange Exception on the progressbar.
While outputting the counter to the progressing bar and updating the progress bar I got this in my output window.
If i commented out the updating on the progress bar (pbLoad.Value = i;) I got this in my output window
I have tried changing the loop to i<101 and also tried moving where the i++ was but it made no difference
EDIT: This is coming from the BeginInvoke. When i switched it to Invoke it worked but then I will get a deadlock when trying to use the cancel button.
Here is the code:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
Thread backgroundThread;
bool stopExecution = false;
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void btnStart_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
stopExecution = false;
btnStart.Enabled = false;
backgroundThread = new Thread(DoDomethingThatTakesAWhile);
backgroundThread.Start();
}
private void DoDomethingThatTakesAWhile()
{
for (int i = 0; i <= 100; i++)
{
if (!stopExecution)
{
Thread.Sleep(100);
if (pbLoad.InvokeRequired)
{
MethodInvoker myMethod
= new MethodInvoker(
delegate
{
if (!stopExecution)
{
pbLoad.Value = i;
Debug.WriteLine(i); //i to output window
}
});
pbLoad.BeginInvoke(myMethod);
}
else
{
pbLoad.Value = i;
}
}
else
{
break;
}
}
}
private void btnCancel_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
//backgroundThread.Abort();
stopExecution = true;
backgroundThread.Join();
pbLoad.Value = 0;
btnStart.Enabled = true;
}
}

When you call MethodInvoke it will not occurs at that moment, but some time later.
In your scenario you have a chance of following to occurs:
invoked code is finally executed;
the loop is already finished (and i become 101)
you are accessing i directly and you read 101.
And to fix it you can make a copy of i (by passing it as a parameter to invoked method):
pbLoad.BeginInvoke(new Action<int>(a =>
{
if (!stopExecution)
{
pbLoad.Value = a;
Debug.WriteLine(a); //a to output window
}
}), new object[] { i });
P.S: you don't need to check for InvokeRequired, unless you plan to call DoDomethingThatTakesAWhile method directly, which I assume is not the case.

You're using BeginInvoke which explicitly opens the possibility for races. I recommend synchronous invoking.
Furthermore, you are capturing i, not its value. This is racy and only works by accident because you're sleeping.
Either of the changes will fix the problem. Do both of them.
If you can, abolish this low-level use of synchronization and use async/await.

How do I make a repeating button with a thread in c#?

I've looked at some guides and none of them have gotten me all the way there. I've never made a thread, discussed a thread, or seen a thread at the grocery store, so this may be a problem. Currently. I'm trying:
private void btnHUp_MouseDown(object sender, MouseEventArgs e)
{
{
ThreadStart HUp = new ThreadStart(dothis);
t = new Thread(HUp);
t.Start();
}
}
public void dothis()
{
if (intHour < 23)
intHour = intHour += intStep;
lblTimerHour.Text = intHour.ToString("00");
}
private void btnHUp_MouseUp(object sender, MouseEventArgs e)
{
t.Abort();
}
}
That gets me InvalidOperationException was unhandled on the
lblTimerHour.Text = intHour.ToString("00");
line. I read what that means and... it might as well be in Mandarin, I kind of get the general concept-ish of what's going wrong, but it's painfully fuzzy. If you asked me the first step in fixing it I'd look at you like a deer in the headlights. We just haven't gotten that far in my class yet.

The problem here is that the label you are trying to update is owned by the main thread (i.e. what the UI runs on), and that means that only that thread can access/update it. So, since you are in a different thread, you need to tell the UI thread to update the label for you.
Something like this would work:
Action updateLabel = () => lblTimerHour.Text = intHour.ToString("00");
lblTimerHour.BeginInvoke(updateLabel);
What this does is tell the lblTimerHour to invoke the action you define above (updateLabel).

See this post: How to update the GUI from another thread in C#?
lblTimerHour.Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate {
//Do what you need to do with the label
lblTimerHour.Text = intHour.ToString("00");
});
Edit
This should do the trick:
public void dothis()
{
do
{
if (intHour < 23)
intHour = intHour += intStep;
lblTimerHour.Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate {
//Update the label from the GUI thread
lblTimerHour.Text = intHour.ToString("00");
});
//Pause 1 sec. Won't freeze the gui since it's in another thread
System.Thread.Sleep(1000);
}while(true); //Thread is killed on mouse up
}

Well, let's take a look and see what you already have.
First, I see you did this.
private void btnHUp_MouseDown(object sender, MouseEventArgs e)
{
ThreadStart HUp = new ThreadStart(dothis);
t = new Thread(HUp);
t.Start();
}
While this certainly is not the freshest stuff around it will still work. If you wanted some fresher ingredients then you might go with this instead.
private void btnHUp_MouseDown(object sender, MouseEventArgs e)
{
Task.Factory.StartNew(dothis);
}
Second, I see this.
public void dothis()
{
if (intHour < 23) intHour = intHour += intStep;
lblTimerHour.Text = intHour.ToString("00");
}
The problem here is that you are attempting to update a UI control from a thread other than the main UI thread. You see UI controls have what is called thread affinity. They can only ever be accessed from the thread that created them. What you have will lead to all kinds of unpredictable problems up to and including tearing a whole in spacetime.
A better option would be to do this.
public void dothis()
{
while (intHour < 23)
{
intHour = intHour += intStep;
lblTimerHour.Invoke((Action)(
() =>
{
lblTimerHour.Text = intHour.ToString("00");
}));
}
}
I assumed that you were missing the loop so I added it. While I cannot say that I personally have a taste for this kind of thing it is much easier to swallow. The real problem here is that the worker thread really does not do a whole lot of useful work. And then to top it off we have to use an awkward marshaling operation to transfer the result back to the UI thread. It is not pretty, but it will work.
And finally that brings me to this.
private void btnHUp_MouseUp(object sender, MouseEventArgs e)
{
t.Abort();
}
You are attempting to abort a thread which is highly inadvisable. The problem is that it yanks control from the thread at unpredictable times. That thread might be in the middle of a write to data structure which would corrupt it. This is actually a pretty bad problem because any data structure in the process of being manipulated from any one of the frames on the call stack could be in an inconsistent state. This includes code you did not write. That is why it is hard to say what you may or may not be corrupting by doing this.
What you need to consider instead is using the cooperative cancellation mechanisms. This includes the use of CancellationTokenSource and CancellationToken. Here is how it might look once we put everything together.
private CancellationTokenSource cts = null;
private void btnHUp_MouseDown(object sender, MouseEventArgs e)
{
cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
Task.Factory.StartNew(() => dothis(cts.Token));
}
private void btnHUp_MouseUp(object sender, MouseEventArgs e)
{
cts.Cancel();
}
public void dothis(CancellationToken token)
{
while (!token.IsCancellationRequested)
{
intHour += intStep;
lblTimerHour.Invoke((Action)(
() =>
{
lblTimerHour.Text = intHour.ToString("00");
}));
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
}
What this does is signal that the worker thread should gracefully shutdown on its own. This gives the worker thread a chance to tidy things up before eventually terminating itself.

If you want to update the UI every X period of time then there are already existing tools for this; a Timer will do exactly what you want, and it will be much more efficient and easier to code than creating a new thread that just spends most of its time napping. Additionally, aborting threads is a very bad sign to see. Avoid it at all costs.
First create the timer and configure it in the constructor:
private System.Windows.Forms.Timer timer = new System.Windows.Forms.Timer();
private int hour = 0;
private int step = 0;
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
timer.Tick += timer_Tick;
timer.Interval = 1000;
}
Have the Tick event do whatever should be done whenever it ticks.
private void timer_Tick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (hour < 23)
{
hour += step;
lblTimerHour.Text = hour.ToString("00");
}
}
Then just start the timer when you want it to start ticking and stop the timer when you want it to stop:
private void btnHUp_MouseDown(object sender, MouseEventArgs e)
{
timer.Start();
}
private void btnHUp_MouseUp(object sender, MouseEventArgs e)
{
timer.Stop();
}
The timer will automatically ensure that the Tick event handler runs in the UI thread, and it won't block the UI thread (or any other thread) when its waiting for the next event to happen, it will just do nothing.

C# Threading using invoke, freezing the form

I'm trying to use threads and prevent the program from freezing while the thread is busy. It should show the progress (writing of 0's / 1's) and not just show the result after its done, freezing the form in the meanwhile.
In the current program I'm trying to write to a textbox, and actually see constant progress, and the form can't be affected by the tasks of the other thread.
What I have now is I can write to a textbox with a thread using invoke, but It only shows the result (Form freezes while thread is busy), and the form freezes.
Form image:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.ComponentModel;
using System.Data;
using System.Drawing;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
using System.Windows.Forms;
using System.Threading;
namespace MultiThreading
{
public partial class MultiThreading : Form
{
public MultiThreading()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
Thread writeOne, writeTwo;
private void writeText(TextBox textBox, string text)
{
if (textBox.InvokeRequired)
{
textBox.BeginInvoke((MethodInvoker)delegate()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 500; i++)
{
textBox.Text += text;
}
});
}
else
{
for (int i = 0; i < 500; i++)
{
textBox.Text += text;
}
}
}
private void btnWrite1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
writeOne = new Thread(() => writeText(txtOutput1, "0"));
writeOne.Start();
}
private void btnWrite2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
writeTwo = new Thread(() => writeText(txtOutput2, "1"));
writeTwo.Start();
}
private void btnClear1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
txtOutput1.Clear();
}
private void btnClear2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
txtOutput2.Clear();
}
private void btnWriteBoth_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
writeOne = new Thread(() => writeText(txtOutput1, "0"));
writeTwo = new Thread(() => writeText(txtOutput2, "1"));
writeOne.Start();
writeTwo.Start();
}
private void btnClearBoth_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
txtOutput1.Clear();
txtOutput2.Clear();
}
}
}
EDIT:
Btw for anyone wondering, I'm new to multithreading and I'm just trying to write a small program to understand the best way to do this.
I understand that my previous invoke didn't realy help because I still wasn't giving the form a chance to update, so its getting there.
Ok so running 1 thread like this works, but still running multiple threads together, won't update the form till after the thread is done.
I've added a thread.sleep() so I can try and clear while writing, to see if I can still use the form.
When writing to 1 textbox I can still clear the screen while writing.
But once I use 2 threads, I can't use the form anymore till the thread completes, and gives the output.
private void writeText(TextBox textBox, string text)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 500; i++)
{
Invoke(new MethodInvoker(() =>
{
textBox.Text += text;
Thread.Sleep(2);
}));
}
}
(If I'm totally wrong on this I don't mind having to read through some examples/threads, I'm still trying to see what is the best way to do this, besides a backgroundworker)
EDIT 2:
I've reduced the number of invokes by reducing the amount to write, but to increase delay giving the same effect of constant writing, just reducing the load.
private void writeText(TextBox textBox, string text)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 500; i++)
{
Invoke(new MethodInvoker(() =>
{
textBox.Text += text;
Thread.Sleep(2);
}));
}
}
EDIT 3:
Sumeet's example works using
Application.DoEvents();
(notice the s, .DoEvent doesn't work, typo probably :P), writing multiple strings simultaneously & having them show the progress and not just the result.
So Code update again :)
*Using a new button to create 5 threads that write a random number to both textboxes
private void writeText(TextBox textBox, string text)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 57; i++)
{
Invoke(new MethodInvoker(() =>
{
textBox.Text += text;
Thread.Sleep(5);
Application.DoEvents();
}));
}
}
private void btnNewThread_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Random random = new Random();
int[] randomNumber = new int[5];
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
randomNumber[i] = random.Next(2, 9);
new Thread(() => writeText(txtOutput1, randomNumber[i-1].ToString())).Start();
new Thread(() => writeText(txtOutput2, randomNumber[i-1].ToString())).Start();
}
}

This solution works ! Have checked it.
The problem is you keep telling the UI thread to change the Text, but never letting it have time to show you the updated text.
To make your UI show the changed text, add the Application.DoEvents line like this :
textBox.Text += text;
Application.DoEvents();
p.s. : Remove the else block of your If / Else loop, it is redundant, and also as pointed by others there is not any use of creating those 2 Threads as all they are doing is post the message on the UI Thread itself.

You're still performing a single-threaded task, just re-launching it on the UI thread if needed.
for (int i = 0; i < 500; i++){
string text = ""+i;
textBox.BeginInvoke((MethodInvoker)delegate()
{
textBox.Text += text;
});
}

The problem is that you're starting a new thread, and then that new thread is doing nothing except adding one new task for the UI thread to process that does a lot of work. To keep your form responsive you need to have time where the UI thread is doing nothing, or at least not spending a significant amount of time doing any one task.
To keep the form responsive we need to have lots of little BeginInvoke (or Invoke) calls.
private void writeText(TextBox textBox, string text)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 500; i++)
{
Invoke(new MethodInvoker(() =>
{
textBox.Text += text;
}));
}
}
By having lots of little invoke calls it allows things like paint events, mouse move/click events, etc. to be handled in the middle of your operations. Also note that I removed the InvokeRequired call. We know that this method will be called from a non-UI thread, so there's no need for it.

You're defeating the purpose of using threads.
All your thread does is tell the UI thread to execute some code using BeginInvoke().
All of the actual work happens on the UI thread.

Either you're doing data processing or you're just trying to animate the UI.
For data processing you should do all the heavy lifting on a background thread and only update the UI occasionally. In your example a TextBox is particularly troublesome in this regard, as you're adding data to the underlying data model several hundred times and the UI element (a TextBox) takes longer to render each time. You must be careful about how often to update the UI so that processing for UI updates does not overwhelm data model updates. TextBoxes are nasty like that.
In the example below, a flag set during the paint event ensures that additional UI updates aren't queued until the TextBox has finished painting the last update:
string str = string.Empty;
public void DoStuff()
{
System.Threading.ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(WorkerThread);
}
void WorkerThread(object unused)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++)
{
str += "0";
if (updatedUI)
{
updatedUI = false;
BeginInvoke(new Action<string>(UpdateUI), str);
}
}
BeginInvoke(new Action<string>(UpdateUI), str);
}
private volatile bool updatedUI = true;
void textbox1_Paint(object sender, PaintEventArgs e) // event hooked up in Form constructor
{
updatedUI = true;
}
void UpdateUI(string str)
{
textBox1.Text = str;
}
On the other hand if UI animation is your goal then you probably ought to be using something other than a TextBox. It's just not designed to handle updates so frequently. There might be some optimizations to text rendering you could make for your specific use case.

You must never use a string in high volume applications. UI or not. Multi-threading or not.
You should use StringBuilder to accumulate the string. and then assign
tb.Text = sb.ToString();

how to create a thread

when I click button1 should print A s but when I click button2 need to stop thread1 and need to start thread2, what is the wrong in here please help me
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (thread2.IsAlive)
{
thread2.Suspend();
}
thread1 = new Thread(threadOne);
thread1.Start();
}
private void button2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (thread1.IsAlive)
{
thread1.Suspend();
}
thread2 = new Thread(threadTwo);
thread2.Start();
}
private void threadOne() {
for (int i=0; i < 20; i++ )
{
Console.Write("A");
Thread.Sleep(500);
}
}
private void threadTwo()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 20; i++)
{
Console.Write("B");
Thread.Sleep(500);
}
}

There's quite a lot wrong, as the other posters have correctly pointed out. I would add this:
1) Most threads in commercial-grade software never terminate during the lifetime of the application - they are written as infinite loops with blocking calls that wait for some sort of signaling from other threads or I/O operations.
2) Continual create/terminate/destroy of thread objects is expensive, difficult to control, awkward-to-debug, unreliable and generally causes pain.
3) If your multithread code contains any of the following:
Suspend()
Resume(), (except in some thread ctors)
Join()
Abort()
IsAlive()
You should probably think again :)
I know you're only learning, but sometimes it's better to patch up holes before they get any bigger :)

You are creating instance of Thread's in the Button Click events, so the if statement that checks threadX.IsAlive will throw error reporting null reference exception
So please create the instance of thread1 & 2 on load

Check for null also.
Use Abort() method instead of Suspend() as you are anyway creating a new thread each time.
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (thread2!=null && thread2.IsAlive)
{
thread2.Abort();
}
thread1 = new Thread(threadOne);
thread1.Start();
}
private void button2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (thread1!=null && thread1.IsAlive)
{
thread1.Abort();
}
thread2 = new Thread(threadTwo);
thread2.Start();
}