We Keep Coding

Gui: need to serialize a sequence of BackgroundWorker calls

I have a WPF app in which I've implemented some BackgroundWorker threads to update the Gui. Sometimes it works perfectly, other times I get variable out of range exceptions (when the same code is targeted by several threads simultaneously).
What is the simplest way to ensure I use ONE BackgroundWorker at a time to avoid these code clashes. In other words I want to make the BackgroundWorker calls sequential instead of paralell. I still want my GUI to be responsive. And the BackgroundWorker processes are fast enough that sequential speeds are adequate. I've attempted 'lock' and 'semaphore' but they don't seem to work with the BackgroundWorker constructs. Any quick fixes?

A global lock will prevent worker threads running concurrently. Having said that its not an approach I would choose. I'd rather use the Task Parallel Library for concurrent computations and Async for asynchronous IO. Here we go:
static object glock = new object();
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
using (BackgroundWorker w1 = new BackgroundWorker())
{
w1.DoWork += (s, we) =>
{
lock (glock)
{
//Some computation
we.Result = 1;
}
};
w1.RunWorkerAsync();
}
using (BackgroundWorker w2 = new BackgroundWorker())
{
w2.DoWork += (s, we) =>
{
lock (glock)
{
//Some computation
we.Result = 2;
}
};
w2.RunWorkerAsync();
}
}

Ok I discovered tasks and taskfactorys with continuations. That's a much more flexible solution for my current project than the background worker.
I'm using the synchronous option for continuations and its giving me the results I need.
Thanks for the help

Notify when thread is complete, without locking calling thread

I am working on a legacy application that is built on top of NET 3.5. This is a constraint that I can't change.
I need to execute a second thread to run a long running task without locking the UI. When the thread is complete, somehow I need to execute a Callback.
Right now I tried this pseudo-code:
Thread _thread = new Thread(myLongRunningTask) { IsBackground = True };
_tread.Start();
// wait until it's done
_thread.Join();
// execute finalizer
The second option, which does not lock the UI, is the following:
Thread _thread = new Thread(myLongRunningTask) { IsBackground = True };
_tread.Start();
// wait until it's done
while(_thread.IsAlive)
{
Application.DoEvents();
Thread.Sleep(100);
}
// execute finalizer
Of course the second solution is not good cause it overcharge the UI.
What is the correct way to execute a callback when a _thread is complete? Also, how do I know if the thread was cancelled or aborted?
*Note: * I can't use the BackgroundWorker and I can't use the Async library, I need to work with the native thread class.

There are two slightly different kinds of requirement here:
Execute a callback once the long-running task has completed
Execute a callback once the thread in which the long-running task was running has completed.
If you're happy with the first of these, the simplest approach is to create a compound task of "the original long-running task, and the callback", basically. You can even do this just using the way that multicast delegates work:
ThreadStart starter = myLongRunningTask;
starter += () => {
// Do what you want in the callback
};
Thread thread = new Thread(starter) { IsBackground = true };
thread.Start();
That's very vanilla, and the callback won't be fired if the thread is aborted or throws an exception. You could wrap it up in a class with either multiple callbacks, or a callback which specifies the status (aborted, threw an exception etc) and handles that by wrapping the original delegate, calling it in a method with a try/catch block and executing the callback appropriately.
Unless you take any special action, the callback will be executed in the background thread, so you'll need to use Control.BeginInvoke (or whatever) to marshal back to the UI thread.

I absolutely understand your requirements, but you've missed one crucial thing: do you really need to wait for the end of that thread synchronously? Or maybe you just need to execute the "finalizer" after thread's end is detected?
In the latter case, simply wrap the call to myLongRunningTask into another method:
void surrogateThreadRoutine() {
// try{ ..
mytask();
// finally { ..
..all 'finalization'.. or i.e. raising some Event that you'll handle elsewhere
}
and use it as the thread's routine. That way, you'll know that the finalization will occur at the thread's and, just after the end of the actual job.
However, of course, if you're with some UI or other schedulers, the "finalization" will now run on yours thread, not on the "normal threads" of your UI or comms framework. You will need to ensure that all resources are external to your thread-task are properly guarded or synchronized, or else you'll probably clash with other application threads.
For instance, in WinForms, before you touch any UI things from the finalizer, you will need the Control.InvokeRequired (surely=true) and Control.BeginInvoke/Invoke to bounce the context back to the UI thread.
For instance, in WPF, before you touch any UI things from the finalizer, you will need the Dispatcher.BeginInvoke..
Or, if the clash could occur with any threads you control, simple proper lock() could be enough. etc.

You can use a combination of custom event and the use of BeginInvoke:
public event EventHandler MyLongRunningTaskEvent;
private void StartMyLongRunningTask() {
MyLongRunningTaskEvent += myLongRunningTaskIsDone;
Thread _thread = new Thread(myLongRunningTask) { IsBackground = true };
_thread.Start();
label.Text = "Running...";
}
private void myLongRunningTaskIsDone(object sender, EventArgs arg)
{
label.Text = "Done!";
}
private void myLongRunningTask()
{
try
{
// Do my long task...
}
finally
{
this.BeginInvoke(Foo, this, EventArgs.Empty);
}
}
I checked, it's work under .NET 3.5

You could use the Observer Pattern, take a look here:
http://www.dofactory.com/Patterns/PatternObserver.aspx
The observer pattern will allow you, to notify other objects which were previously defined as observer.

A very simple thread of execution with completion callback
This does not need to run in a mono behavior and is simply used for convenience
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Threading;
using UnityEngine;
public class ThreadTest : MonoBehaviour
{
private List<int> numbers = null;
private void Start()
{
Debug.Log("1. Call thread task");
StartMyLongRunningTask();
Debug.Log("2. Do something else");
}
private void StartMyLongRunningTask()
{
numbers = new List<int>();
ThreadStart starter = myLongRunningTask;
starter += () =>
{
myLongRunningTaskDone();
};
Thread _thread = new Thread(starter) { IsBackground = true };
_thread.Start();
}
private void myLongRunningTaskDone()
{
Debug.Log("3. Task callback result");
foreach (int num in numbers)
Debug.Log(num);
}
private void myLongRunningTask()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
numbers.Add(i);
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
}
}

Try to use ManualRestEvent to signal of thread complete.

Maybe using conditional variables and mutex, or some functions like wait(), signal(), maybe timed wait() to not block main thread infinitely.
In C# this will be:
void Notify()
{
lock (syncPrimitive)
{
Monitor.Pulse(syncPrimitive);
}
}
void RunLoop()
{
for (;;)
{
// do work here...
lock (syncPrimitive)
{
Monitor.Wait(syncPrimitive);
}
}
}
more on that here:
Condition Variables C#/.NET
It is the concept of Monitor object in C#, you also have version that enables to set timeout
public static bool Wait(
object obj,
TimeSpan timeout
)
more on that here:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.threading.monitor_methods(v=vs.110).aspx

Multiple background threads

I have one c# application that uses BackGroundWorker to do a group of tasks:
private void buttonStartCheckOut_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker checkOuter = new BackgroundWorker();
checkOuter.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(checkOuter_DoWork);
checkOuter.RunWorkerAsync();
checkOuter.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(checkOuter_RunWorkerCompleted);
}
void checkOuter_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
if (textBoxCICheckOut.Text != "")
CheckOutCI();
if (textBoxCACheckOut.Text != "")
CheckOutCA();
if (textBoxCAuthCheckOut.Text != "")
CheckOutCAuth();
if (textBoxCLCheckOut.Text != "")
CheckOutCL();
if (textBoxCCCheckOut.Text != "")
CheckOutCC();
}
As you can see, I have only 2 threads; one for GUI and one for secondary task.
Its easy for me to track when all the functions finish.
Now I want to make it more fast by creating a separate thread for CheckOutCI(), CheckOutCA() and others.Creating 5 background workers looks kinda dirty.
I want to ask:
How will I keep track of when all the functions have finished executing.
If any one function returned an exception, I want to display it to user and ask the user to correct the user and try again. I hope I am able to explain my question properly.
PLEASE edit the code by wdavo as per my comment on his post.

I'd look at using the Task library (Assuming you are running .NET 4.5 or later). I find it much better to use than background workers in most cases.
(Note you can still use the Task library in .NET 4, however Task.WhenAll is only available in 4.5)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd235618
Without rewriting your whole program, here's an example of how you would use it:
Move your simple conditional logic to the button
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var tasks = new List<Task>();
if (Text == "A")
{
tasks.Add(funcA());
}
if (Text == "B")
{
tasks.Add(funcB());
}
//And so on....
Task.WhenAll(tasks.ToArray()).ContinueWith(t =>
{
if (t.Exception != null)
{
//One of the tasks threw an exception
MessageBox.Show("There was an exception!");
}
else
{
//None of the tasks threw an exception
MessageBox.Show("No Exceptions!");
}
});
}
We add the tasks to a collection so we can know when they all finish via Task.WhenAll. When all the tasks in the collection have finished, a message box will be displayed. If any of the tasks in the collection have thrown an exception, the Exception property of 't' will be populated. The specific exceptions exist as inner exceptions of this exception.
Move your threading code to individual task/functions. You'd create your checkout functions to look similar to this:
private Task funcA()
{
return Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
try
{
//Code running here will be executed on another thread
//This is where you would put your time consuming work
//
//
}
catch(Exception ex)
{
//Handle any exception locally if needed
//If you do handle it locally, make sure you throw it again so we can see it in Task.WhenAll
throw ex;
}
//Do any required UI updates after the work
//We aren't on the UI thread, so you will need to use BeginInvoke
//'this' would be a reference to your form
this.BeginInvoke(new Action(() =>
{
//...
}));
});
}
What this does is the following
Creates a and runs a task which does some work on a thread from the thread pool
If there is an exception, we handle it locally .We re-throw the exception so that we can know that a task has failed when 'Task.WhenAll' is executed
Updates the UI after the work is done. You need to call BeginInvoke to run the code on the UI thread to avoid cross threading issues.

Starting up more threads than CPUs or cores can actually make your application slower. When there are more CPU-bound threads than CPUs the OS needs to context switch more often between the threads--which is hugely expensive and could result in the OS spending more time context switching between your threads than giving them time to work.
You can use the parallel aspect of the Parallel Task Library to automatically distribute your load across CPUs. For example:
Action[] actions = new Action[] {CheckOutCI, CheckOutCA, CheckOutCAuth, CheckOutCL, CheckOutCC};
Parallel.ForEach(actions, e=>e());
...which isn't exactly what you want; but should give you a general idea. e.g. populate actions based on current conditions.

You need to use ReportProgress method in backgroundworker
void checkOuter_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
if (textBoxCICheckOut.Text != "")
CheckOutCI();
checkOuter.ReportProgress(completionPercentage,"Error message");
The data sent in ReportProgress can be captured in checkOuter_ProgressChanged event
checkOuter_ProgressChanged(object sender,ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
int percentage = e.ProgressPercentage;
string message = e.UserState;
}

How to update UI from another thread running in another class

I am currently writing my first program on C# and I am extremely new to the language (used to only work with C so far). I have done a lot of research, but all answers were too general and I simply couldn't get it t work.
So here my (very common) problem:
I have a WPF application which takes inputs from a few textboxes filled by the user and then uses that to do a lot of calculations with them. They should take around 2-3 minutes, so I would like to update a progress bar and a textblock telling me what the current status is.
Also I need to store the UI inputs from the user and give them to the thread, so I have a third class, which I use to create an object and would like to pass this object to the background thread.
Obviously I would run the calculations in another thread, so the UI doesn't freeze, but I don't know how to update the UI, since all the calculation methods are part of another class.
After a lot of reasearch I think the best method to go with would be using dispatchers and TPL and not a backgroundworker, but honestly I am not sure how they work and after around 20 hours of trial and error with other answers, I decided to ask a question myself.
Here a very simple structure of my program:
public partial class MainWindow : Window
{
public MainWindow()
{
Initialize Component();
}
private void startCalc(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
inputValues input = new inputValues();
calcClass calculations = new calcClass();
try
{
input.pota = Convert.ToDouble(aVar.Text);
input.potb = Convert.ToDouble(bVar.Text);
input.potc = Convert.ToDouble(cVar.Text);
input.potd = Convert.ToDouble(dVar.Text);
input.potf = Convert.ToDouble(fVar.Text);
input.potA = Convert.ToDouble(AVar.Text);
input.potB = Convert.ToDouble(BVar.Text);
input.initStart = Convert.ToDouble(initStart.Text);
input.initEnd = Convert.ToDouble(initEnd.Text);
input.inita = Convert.ToDouble(inita.Text);
input.initb = Convert.ToDouble(initb.Text);
input.initc = Convert.ToDouble(initb.Text);
}
catch
{
MessageBox.Show("Some input values are not of the expected Type.", "Wrong Input", MessageBoxButton.OK, MessageBoxImage.Error);
}
Thread calcthread = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart(calculations.testMethod);
calcthread.Start(input);
}
public class inputValues
{
public double pota, potb, potc, potd, potf, potA, potB;
public double initStart, initEnd, inita, initb, initc;
}
public class calcClass
{
public void testmethod(inputValues input)
{
Thread.CurrentThread.Priority = ThreadPriority.Lowest;
int i;
//the input object will be used somehow, but that doesn't matter for my problem
for (i = 0; i < 1000; i++)
{
Thread.Sleep(10);
}
}
}
I would be very grateful if someone had a simple explanation how to update the UI from inside the testmethod. Since I am new to C# and object oriented programming, too complicated answers I will very likely not understand, I'll do my best though.
Also if someone has a better idea in general (maybe using backgroundworker or anything else) I am open to see it.

First you need to use Dispatcher.Invoke to change the UI from another thread and to do that from another class, you can use events.
Then you can register to that event(s) in the main class and Dispatch the changes to the UI and in the calculation class you throw the event when you want to notify the UI:
class MainWindow : Window
{
private void startCalc()
{
//your code
CalcClass calc = new CalcClass();
calc.ProgressUpdate += (s, e) => {
Dispatcher.Invoke((Action)delegate() { /* update UI */ });
};
Thread calcthread = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart(calc.testMethod));
calcthread.Start(input);
}
}
class CalcClass
{
public event EventHandler ProgressUpdate;
public void testMethod(object input)
{
//part 1
if(ProgressUpdate != null)
ProgressUpdate(this, new YourEventArgs(status));
//part 2
}
}
UPDATE:
As it seems this is still an often visited question and answer I want to update this answer with how I would do it now (with .NET 4.5) - this is a little longer as I will show some different possibilities:
class MainWindow : Window
{
Task calcTask = null;
void buttonStartCalc_Clicked(object sender, EventArgs e) { StartCalc(); } // #1
async void buttonDoCalc_Clicked(object sender, EventArgs e) // #2
{
await CalcAsync(); // #2
}
void StartCalc()
{
var calc = PrepareCalc();
calcTask = Task.Run(() => calc.TestMethod(input)); // #3
}
Task CalcAsync()
{
var calc = PrepareCalc();
return Task.Run(() => calc.TestMethod(input)); // #4
}
CalcClass PrepareCalc()
{
//your code
var calc = new CalcClass();
calc.ProgressUpdate += (s, e) => Dispatcher.Invoke((Action)delegate()
{
// update UI
});
return calc;
}
}
class CalcClass
{
public event EventHandler<EventArgs<YourStatus>> ProgressUpdate; // #5
public TestMethod(InputValues input)
{
//part 1
ProgressUpdate.Raise(this, status); // #6 - status is of type YourStatus
// alternative version to the extension for C# 6+:
ProgressUpdate?.Invoke(this, new EventArgs<YourStatus>(status));
//part 2
}
}
static class EventExtensions
{
public static void Raise<T>(this EventHandler<EventArgs<T>> theEvent,
object sender, T args)
{
if (theEvent != null)
theEvent(sender, new EventArgs<T>(args));
}
}
#1) How to start the "synchronous" calculations and run them in the background
#2) How to start it "asynchronous" and "await it": Here the calculation is executed and completed before the method returns, but because of the async/await the UI is not blocked (BTW: such event handlers are the only valid usages of async void as the event handler must return void - use async Task in all other cases)
#3) Instead of a new Thread we now use a Task. To later be able to check its (successfull) completion we save it in the global calcTask member. In the background this also starts a new thread and runs the action there, but it is much easier to handle and has some other benefits.
#4) Here we also start the action, but this time we return the task, so the "async event handler" can "await it". We could also create async Task CalcAsync() and then await Task.Run(() => calc.TestMethod(input)).ConfigureAwait(false); (FYI: the ConfigureAwait(false) is to avoid deadlocks, you should read up on this if you use async/await as it would be to much to explain here) which would result in the same workflow, but as the Task.Run is the only "awaitable operation" and is the last one we can simply return the task and save one context switch, which saves some execution time.
#5) Here I now use a "strongly typed generic event" so we can pass and receive our "status object" easily
#6) Here I use the extension defined below, which (aside from ease of use) solve the possible race condition in the old example. There it could have happened that the event got null after the if-check, but before the call if the event handler was removed in another thread at just that moment. This can't happen here, as the extensions gets a "copy" of the event delegate and in the same situation the handler is still registered inside the Raise method.

I am going to throw you a curve ball here. If I have said it once I have said it a hundred times. Marshaling operations like Invoke or BeginInvoke are not always the best methods for updating the UI with worker thread progress.
In this case it usually works better to have the worker thread publish its progress information to a shared data structure that the UI thread then polls at regular intervals. This has several advantages.
It breaks the tight coupling between the UI and worker thread that Invoke imposes.
The UI thread gets to dictate when the UI controls get updated...the way it should be anyway when you really think about it.
There is no risk of overrunning the UI message queue as would be the case if BeginInvoke were used from the worker thread.
The worker thread does not have to wait for a response from the UI thread as would be the case with Invoke.
You get more throughput on both the UI and worker threads.
Invoke and BeginInvoke are expensive operations.
So in your calcClass create a data structure that will hold the progress information.
public class calcClass
{
private double percentComplete = 0;
public double PercentComplete
{
get
{
// Do a thread-safe read here.
return Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref percentComplete, 0, 0);
}
}
public testMethod(object input)
{
int count = 1000;
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++)
{
Thread.Sleep(10);
double newvalue = ((double)i + 1) / (double)count;
Interlocked.Exchange(ref percentComplete, newvalue);
}
}
}
Then in your MainWindow class use a DispatcherTimer to periodically poll the progress information. Configure the DispatcherTimer to raise the Tick event on whatever interval is most appropriate for your situation.
public partial class MainWindow : Window
{
public void YourDispatcherTimer_Tick(object sender, EventArgs args)
{
YourProgressBar.Value = calculation.PercentComplete;
}
}

You're right that you should use the Dispatcher to update controls on the UI thread, and also right that long-running processes should not run on the UI thread. Even if you run the long-running process asynchronously on the UI thread, it can still cause performance issues.
It should be noted that Dispatcher.CurrentDispatcher will return the dispatcher for the current thread, not necessarily the UI thread. I think you can use Application.Current.Dispatcher to get a reference to the UI thread's dispatcher if that's available to you, but if not you'll have to pass the UI dispatcher in to your background thread.
Typically I use the Task Parallel Library for threading operations instead of a BackgroundWorker. I just find it easier to use.
For example,
Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
SomeObject.RunLongProcess(someDataObject));
where
void RunLongProcess(SomeViewModel someDataObject)
{
for (int i = 0; i <= 1000; i++)
{
Thread.Sleep(10);
// Update every 10 executions
if (i % 10 == 0)
{
// Send message to UI thread
Application.Current.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(
DispatcherPriority.Normal,
(Action)(() => someDataObject.ProgressValue = (i / 1000)));
}
}
}

Everything that interacts with the UI must be called in the UI thread (unless it is a frozen object). To do that, you can use the dispatcher.
var disp = /* Get the UI dispatcher, each WPF object has a dispatcher which you can query*/
disp.BeginInvoke(DispatcherPriority.Normal,
(Action)(() => /*Do your UI Stuff here*/));
I use BeginInvoke here, usually a backgroundworker doesn't need to wait that the UI updates. If you want to wait, you can use Invoke. But you should be careful not to call BeginInvoke to fast to often, this can get really nasty.
By the way, The BackgroundWorker class helps with this kind of taks. It allows Reporting changes, like a percentage and dispatches this automatically from the Background thread into the ui thread. For the most thread <> update ui tasks the BackgroundWorker is a great tool.

If this is a long calculation then I would go background worker. It has progress support. It also has support for cancel.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc221403(v=VS.95).aspx
Here I have a TextBox bound to contents.
private void backgroundWorker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
Debug.Write("backgroundWorker_RunWorkerCompleted");
if (e.Cancelled)
{
contents = "Cancelled get contents.";
NotifyPropertyChanged("Contents");
}
else if (e.Error != null)
{
contents = "An Error Occured in get contents";
NotifyPropertyChanged("Contents");
}
else
{
contents = (string)e.Result;
if (contentTabSelectd) NotifyPropertyChanged("Contents");
}
}

You are going to have to come back to your main thread (also called UI thread) in order to update the UI.
Any other thread trying to update your UI will just cause exceptions to be thrown all over the place.
So because you are in WPF, you can use the Dispatcher and more specifically a beginInvoke on this dispatcher. This will allow you to execute what needs done (typically Update the UI) in the UI thread.
You migh also want to "register" the UI in your business, by maintaining a reference to a control/form, so you can use its dispatcher.

Thank God, Microsoft got that figured out in WPF :)
Every Control, like a progress bar, button, form, etc. has a Dispatcher on it. You can give the Dispatcher an Action that needs to be performed, and it will automatically call it on the correct thread (an Action is like a function delegate).
You can find an example here.
Of course, you'll have to have the control accessible from other classes, e.g. by making it public and handing a reference to the Window to your other class, or maybe by passing a reference only to the progress bar.

Felt the need to add this better answer, as nothing except BackgroundWorker seemed to help me, and the answer dealing with that thus far was woefully incomplete. This is how you would update a XAML page called MainWindow that has an Image tag like this:
<Image Name="imgNtwkInd" Source="Images/network_on.jpg" Width="50" />
with a BackgroundWorker process to show if you are connected to the network or not:
using System.ComponentModel;
using System.Windows;
using System.Windows.Controls;
public partial class MainWindow : Window
{
private BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
public MainWindow()
{
InitializeComponent();
// Set up background worker to allow progress reporting and cancellation
bw.WorkerReportsProgress = true;
bw.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
// This is your main work process that records progress
bw.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(SomeClass.DoWork);
// This will update your page based on that progress
bw.ProgressChanged += new ProgressChangedEventHandler(bw_ProgressChanged);
// This starts your background worker and "DoWork()"
bw.RunWorkerAsync();
// When this page closes, this will run and cancel your background worker
this.Closing += new CancelEventHandler(Page_Unload);
}
private void bw_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
BitmapImage bImg = new BitmapImage();
bool connected = false;
string response = e.ProgressPercentage.ToString(); // will either be 1 or 0 for true/false -- this is the result recorded in DoWork()
if (response == "1")
connected = true;
// Do something with the result we got
if (!connected)
{
bImg.BeginInit();
bImg.UriSource = new Uri("Images/network_off.jpg", UriKind.Relative);
bImg.EndInit();
imgNtwkInd.Source = bImg;
}
else
{
bImg.BeginInit();
bImg.UriSource = new Uri("Images/network_on.jpg", UriKind.Relative);
bImg.EndInit();
imgNtwkInd.Source = bImg;
}
}
private void Page_Unload(object sender, CancelEventArgs e)
{
bw.CancelAsync(); // stops the background worker when unloading the page
}
}
public class SomeClass
{
public static bool connected = false;
public void DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker bw = sender as BackgroundWorker;
int i = 0;
do
{
connected = CheckConn(); // do some task and get the result
if (bw.CancellationPending == true)
{
e.Cancel = true;
break;
}
else
{
Thread.Sleep(1000);
// Record your result here
if (connected)
bw.ReportProgress(1);
else
bw.ReportProgress(0);
}
}
while (i == 0);
}
private static bool CheckConn()
{
bool conn = false;
Ping png = new Ping();
string host = "SomeComputerNameHere";
try
{
PingReply pngReply = png.Send(host);
if (pngReply.Status == IPStatus.Success)
conn = true;
}
catch (PingException ex)
{
// write exception to log
}
return conn;
}
}
For more information: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc221403(v=VS.95).aspx

This BackgroundWorker is currently busy and cannot run multiple tasks concurrently

I'm trying to use a Background Worker in a WPF application. The heavy lifting task uses WebClient to download some HTML and parse some info out of it. Ideally I want to do that downloading and parsing without locking the UI and placing the results in the UI once it's done working.
And it works fine, however, if I quickly submit the "download and parse" command, I get the error:
This BackgroundWorker is currently busy and cannot run multiple tasks
concurrently
So I did some Googling and it seems that I can enable the .WorkerSupportsCancellation property of the background worker and just .CancelAsync(). However, this doesn't work as expected (canceling the current download and parse).
I still get the above error.
Here's my code:
//In window constructor.
_backgroundWorker.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
_backgroundWorker.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(_backgroundWorker_DoWork);
_backgroundWorker.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(_backgroundWorker_RunWorkerCompleted);
//Declared at class level variable.
BackgroundWorker _backgroundWorker = new BackgroundWorker();
//This is the method I call from my UI.
private void LoadHtmlAndParse(string foobar)
{
//Cancel whatever it is you're doing!
_backgroundWorker.CancelAsync();
//And start doing this immediately!
_backgroundWorker.RunWorkerAsync(foobar);
}
POCOClassFoo foo = new POCOClassFoo();
void _backgroundWorker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
//This automagically sets the UI to the data.
Foo.DataContext = foo;
}
void _backgroundWorker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
//DOING THE HEAVY LIFTING HERE!
foo = parseanddownloadresult()!
}

Calling CancelAsync will still fire the RunWorkerCompleted event. In this event, you need to make sure that CancelAsync has not been called, by checking e.Cancelled. Until this event fires, you cannot call RunWorkerAsync.
Alternatively, I would recommend you do what Tigran suggested and create a new BackgroundWorker each time.
Further more, I would recommend storing the results of_backgroundWorker_DoWork in e.Result, then retrieve them from the same in _backgroundWorker_RunWorkerCompleted
Maybe something like this
BackgroundWorker _backgroundWorker;
private BackgroundWorker CreateBackgroundWorker()
{
var bw = new BackgroundWorker();
bw.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
bw.DoWork += _backgroundWorker_DoWork;
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += new _backgroundWorker_RunWorkerCompleted;
return bw.
}
private void LoadHtmlAndParse(string foobar)
{
//Cancel whatever it is you're doing!
if (_backgroundWorer != null)
{
_backgroundWorker.CancelAsync();
}
_backgroundWorker = CreateBackgroundWorker();
//And start doing this immediately!
_backgroundWorker.RunWorkerAsync(foobar);
}
//you no longer need this because the value is being stored in e.Result
//POCOClassFoo foo = new POCOClassFoo();
private void _backgroundWorker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if (e.Error != null)
{
//Error handling goes here.
}
else
{
if (e.Cancelled)
{
//handle cancels here.
}
{
//This automagically sets the UI to the data.
Foo.DataContext = (POCOClassFoo)e.Result;
}
}
private void _backgroundWorker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
//DOING THE HEAVY LIFTING HERE!
e.Result = parseanddownloadresult()!
}

The thing is that CancelAsync() does what it climes: cancel in async way. That means that it will not stop immediately, but after some time. That time can never be calculated or predicted, so you have a couple of options:
Wait until this backround worker stops really, by waiting in cycle until IsBusy property of it becomes false
Or, I think, better solution is to start another background worker, considering that request of cancelation was already sent to the first one, so it will be soon or later stop. In this case, you need to know from which background worker data comes, in order to process it or not, cause on start of second the first one will still run and pump the data from WebService.
Hope this helps.

CancelAsync returns before the worker cancels and stops its work. Hence, your RunWorkerAsync call is starting before the worker is ready, and you're getting that error. You'll need to wait for the worker to be ready first.

When I'm not interested in tracking progress of an async operation, I tend to prefer to just slap a lambda at ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem instead of instantiating and setting up a background worker that I have to check the state of to be able to reuse in a sane way.

You need to verify before you kicks in.
f( !bw.IsBusy )
bw.RunWorkerAsync();
else
MessageBox.Show("Can't run the bw twice!");

You are calling CancelAsync without waiting for the background worker to actually cancel the work. Also you must have your own logic for cancelling the work. There is a good example on MSDN which shows how to do it. Basically in your parseanddownloadresult() method you need to check the CancellationPending property.