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());
}

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();

c# - Pass information to BackgroundWorker From UI during execution

I have a c# application that uses a background worker thread, and quite successfully updates the UI from the running thread. The application involves shortest path routing on a network, and I display the network and the shortest path, on the UI, as the background worker proceeds. I would like to allow the user to slow down the display through use of a slider, while the application is running.
I found this as a suggestion, but it is in vb.net, I am not clear on how to get it to work in c#.
How can the BackgroundWorker get values from the UI thread while it is running?
I can pass the value of the slider to the backgroundworker as follows:
// Start the asynchronous operation.
delay = this.trackBar1.Value;
backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerAsync(delay);
and use it within the backgroundworker thread, but it only uses the initially-sent value. I am not clear on how to pick up the value from inside the backgroundworker when I move the slider on the UI.
I have previously used multiple threads and delegates, but if it is possible to utilize the background worker, I would prefer it for its simplicity.
5/10/2012
Thanks to all for your responses. I am still having problems, most likely because of how I have structured things. The heavy duty calculations for network routing are done in the TransportationDelayModel class. BackgroundWorker_DoWork creates an instance of this class, and then kicks it off. The delay is handled in TransportationDelayModel.
The skeleton of code is as follows:
In UI:
private void runToolStripMenuItem1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (sqliteFileName.Equals("Not Set"))
{
MessageBox.Show("Database Name Not Set");
this.chooseDatabaseToolStripMenuItem_Click(sender, e);
}
if (backgroundWorker1.IsBusy != true)
{
// Start the asynchronous operation.
delay = this.trackBar1.Value;
// pass the initial value of delay
backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerAsync(delay);
// preclude multiple runs
runToolStripMenuItem1.Enabled = false;
toolStripButton2.Enabled = false;
}
}
private void backgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker worker = sender as BackgroundWorker;
if (!backgroundWorkerLaunched)
{
// instantiate the object that does all the heavy work
TransportationDelayModel TDM = new TransportationDelayModel(worker, e);
// kick it off
TDM.Run(sqliteFileName, worker, e);
backgroundWorkerLaunched = true;
}
}
The TransportationDelayModel constructor is:
public TransportationDelayModel(BackgroundWorker worker, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
listCentroids = new List<RoadNode>();
listCentroidIDs = new List<int>();
listNodes = new List<RoadNode>();
listNodeIDs = new List<int>();
listRoadLink = new List<RoadLink>();
roadGraph = new AdjacencyGraph<int, RoadLink>(true); // note parallel edges allowed
tdmWorker = worker;
tdmEvent = e;
networkForm = new NetworkForm();
}
so I have the tdmWorker, which allows me to pass information back to the UI.
In the internal calculations in TransportationDelayModel, I sleep for the delay period
if (delay2 > 0)
{
tdmWorker.ReportProgress(-12, zzz);
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(delay2);
}
so the problem seems to be how to pass an updated slider value from the UI back to the object that is executing in the background worker. I have tried a number of combinations, sort of thrashing around, to no avail, either nothing happens or I get a message about not being allowed to access what is happening on the other thread. I realize that if I were doing all the work in the DoWork event handler, then I should be able to do things as you suggest, but there is too much complexity for that to happen.
Again, thank you for your suggestions and help.
6/2/2012
I have resolved this problem by two methods, but I have some questions. Per my comment to R. Harvey, I have built a simple application. It consists of a form with a run button, a slider, and a rich text box. The run button launches a background worker thread that instantiates an object of class "Model" that does all the work (a simplified surrogate for my TransportationModel). The Model class simply writes 100 lines to the text box, incrementing the number of dots in each line by 1, with a delay between each line based on the setting of the slider, and the slider value at the end of the line, something like this:
....................58
.....................58
......................58
.......................51
........................44
.........................44
The objective of this exercise is to be able to move the slider on the form while the "Model" is running, and get the delay to change (as in above).
My first solution involves the creation of a Globals class, to hold the value of the slider:
class Globals
{
public static int globalDelay;
}
then, in the form, I update this value whenever the trackbar is scrolled:
private void trackBar1_Scroll(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Globals.globalDelay = this.trackBar1.Value;
}
and in the Model, I just pick up the value of the global:
public void Run(BackgroundWorker worker, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
for (int i = 1; i < 100; i++)
{
delay = Globals.globalDelay; // revise delay based on static global set on UI
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(delay);
worker.ReportProgress(i);
string reportString = ".";
for (int k = 0; k < i; k++)
{
reportString += ".";
}
reportString += delay.ToString();
worker.ReportProgress(-1, reportString);
}
}
}
This works just fine.
My question: are there any drawbacks to this approach, which seems very simple to implement and quite general.
The second approach, based on suggestions by R. Harvey, makes use of delegates and invoke.
I create a class for delegates:
public class MyDelegates
{
public delegate int DelegateCheckTrackBarValue(); // create the delegate here
}
in the form, I create:
public int CheckTrackBarValue()
{
return this.trackBar1.Value;
}
and the Model class now has a member m_CheckTrackBarValue
public class Model
{
#region Members
Form1 passedForm;
public static MyDelegates.DelegateCheckTrackBarValue m_CheckTrackBarValue=null;
#endregion Members
#region Constructor
public Model(BackgroundWorker worker, DoWorkEventArgs e, Form1 form)
{
passedForm = form;
}
When the background thread is launched by the run button, the calling form is passed
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (backgroundWorker1.IsBusy != true)
{
backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerAsync();
}
}
private void backgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker worker = sender as BackgroundWorker;
if (!backgroundWorkerLaunched)
{
// instantiate the object that does all the heavy work
Model myModel= new Model(worker, e, this);
Model.m_CheckTrackBarValue = new MyDelegates.DelegateCheckTrackBarValue(this.CheckTrackBarValue);
// kick it off
myModel.Run(worker, e);
backgroundWorkerLaunched = true;
}
}
Finally, in the Model, the Invoke method is called on the passed form to get the value of the trackbar.
public void Run(BackgroundWorker worker, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
for (int i = 1; i < 100; i++)
{
int delay = (int)passedForm.Invoke(m_CheckTrackBarValue,null); // invoke the method, note need the cast here
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(delay);
worker.ReportProgress(i);
string reportString = ".";
for (int k = 0; k < i; k++)
{
reportString += ".";
}
reportString += delay.ToString();
worker.ReportProgress(-1, reportString);
}
}
This works as well. I kept getting an error until I made the member variable static, e.g.
public static MyDelegates.DelegateCheckTrackBarValue m_CheckTrackBarValue=null;
My questions on this solution: Are there advantages to this solution as regards to the previous version? Am I making things too complicated in the way I have implemented this? Why does m_CheckTrackBarValue need to be static.
I apologize for the length of this edit, but I thought that the problem and solutions might be of interest to others.

You have to pass the TrackBar object to the BackgroundWorker, not delay. delay doesn't change once you set it.
To simplify the needed Invoke(), you can use a helper method, such as this one:
Async.UI(delegate { textBox1.Text = "This is way easier!"; }, textBox1, true);

I will assume that you are already familiarized with cross-thread invocation to update the UI. So, the solution is very simple: in your worker thread, after each iteration, invoke the UI to get the slider thumb position.

To use a backgroundworker, you add a method to the DoWork property, like this:
this.backgroundWorker1.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
this.backgroundWorker1.DoWork += new System.ComponentModel.DoWorkEventHandler(this.backgroundWorker1_DoWork);
this.backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerCompleted += new System.ComponentModel.RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(this.backgroundWorker1_RunWorkerCompleted);
In the DoWork method, you need to check the variable where the updated delay is set.
This could be an integer field that is available on the containing Form or UI control, or it could be the TrackBar itself.

How can a new Form be run on a different thread in C#?

I'm just trying to run a new thread each time a button click even occurs which should create a new form. I tried this in the button click event in the MainForm:
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
worker1 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(thread1));
worker2 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(thread2));
worker1.Start();
worker2.Start();
}
private void thread1()
{
SubForm s = new SubForm();
s.Show();
}
private void thread2()
{
SubForm s = new SubForm();
s.Show();
}
The code in the Subform button click event goes like this:
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
int max;
try
{
max = Convert.ToInt32(textBox1.Text);
}
catch
{
MessageBox.Show("Enter numbers", "ERROR");
return;
}
progressBar1.Maximum = max;
for ( long i = 0; i < max; i++)
{
progressBar1.Value = Convert.ToInt32(i);
}
}
Is this the right way? Because I'm trying to open two independent forms, operations in one thread should not affect the other thread.
Or is BackGroundworker the solution to implement this? If yes, can anyone please help me with that?

You do not need to run forms in separate threads. You can just call s.Show() on multiple forms normally. They will not block each other.
Of course, if you’re doing something else, like some sort of calculation or other task that takes a long while, then you should run that in a separate thread, but not the form.
Here is a bit of code that will let you create a progress bar that shows progress for a long process. Notice that every time to access the form from inside the thread, you have to use .Invoke(), which actually schedules that invocation to run on the GUI thread when it’s ready.
public void StartLongProcess()
{
// Create and show the form with the progress bar
var progressForm = new Subform();
progressForm.Show();
bool interrupt = false;
// Run the calculation in a separate thread
var thread = new Thread(() =>
{
// Do some calculation, presumably in some sort of loop...
while ( ... )
{
// Every time you want to update the progress bar:
progressForm.Invoke(new Action(
() => { progressForm.ProgressBar.Value = ...; }));
// If you’re ready to cancel the calculation:
if (interrupt)
break;
}
// The calculation is finished — close the progress form
progressForm.Invoke(new Action(() => { progressForm.Close(); }));
});
thread.Start();
// Allow the user to cancel the calculation with a Cancel button
progressForm.CancelButton.Click += (s, e) => { interrupt = true; };
}

Although I'm not 100% aware of anything that says running completely seperate forms doing completely isolated operations in their own threads is dangerous in any way, running all UI operations on a single thread is generally regarded as good practice.
You can support this simply by having your Subform class use BackgroundWorker. When the form is shown, kick off the BackgroundWorker so that it processes whatever you need it to.
Then you can simply create new instances of your Subform on your GUI thread and show them. The form will show and start its operation on another thread.
This way the UI will be running on the GUI thread, but the operations the forms are running will be running on ThreadPool threads.
Update
Here's an example of what your background worker handlers might look like - note that (as usual) this is just off the top of my head, but I think you can get your head around the basic principles.
Add a BackgroundWorker to your form named worker. Hook it up to the following event handlers:
void worker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
// Executed on GUI thread.
if (e.Error != null)
{
// Background thread errored - report it in a messagebox.
MessageBox.Show(e.Error.ToString());
return;
}
// Worker succeeded.
}
void worker_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
// Executed on GUI thread.
progressBar1.Value = e.ProgressPercentage;
}
void worker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
// Executed on ThreadPool thread.
int max = (int)e.Argument;
for (long i = 0; i < max; i++)
{
worker.ReportProgress(Convert.ToInt32(i));
}
}
Your click handler would look something like:
void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
int max;
try
{
// This is what you have in your click handler,
// Int32.TryParse is a much better alternative.
max = Convert.ToInt32(textBox1.Text);
}
catch
{
MessageBox.Show("Enter numbers", "ERROR");
return;
}
progressBar1.Maximum = max;
worker.RunWorkerAsync(max);
}
I hope that helps.

Try this. It runs the new Form on its own thread with its own message queues and what not.
Run this code:
new Thread(new ThreadStart(delegate
{
Application.Run(new Form());
})).Start();
Use Thread.CurrentThread.GetHashCode() to test that is runs on different thread.

It's possible to run different forms on different threads. There are two caveats I'm aware of:
Neither form may be an MDI client of the other. Attempting to make a form an MDI client of another when the forms have different threads will fail.
If an object will be sending events to multiple forms and all forms use the same thread, it's possible to synchronize the events to the main thread before raising it. Otherwise, the event must be raised asynchronously and each form must perform its own synchronization mechanism for incoming events.
Obviously it's desirable not to have any window's UI thread get blocked, but using separate threads for separate windows may be a nice alternative.