We Keep Coding

BeginInvoke not being executed

I have the next code on Windows Forms:
if (control.IsHandleCreated)
{
if (control.InvokeRequired)
{
control.BeginInvoke(action);
}
else
{
action.Invoke();
}
}
Debugging, it enters to InvokeRequired = false and it works perfectly, but on production environment. Somehow it enters to InvokeRequired = true, so it should execute BeginInvoke() method.
It doesn't. It never enters the action. This script belongs to a DataGrid control, but having the same on different DataGrids, Comboboxes, etc on the same Form it does work; so it seems to be something expecific for this DataGrid.
Any idea?
Thanks

I tried to find the true answer , my guess is that when you call begininvoke a message gets put in a queue for that thread. That thread takes items out of this queue and processes them 1 by 1. Let's say that you are calling BeginInvoke faster than the processing thread can handle it ... your queue will get bigger and bigger and take more and more time to process. then the main thread can become blocked doing other things. While your thread is doing these other things it will not be processing items out of the queue, then the thread can not access the control.
I tested your code, the code can not repeat in case of lack of access, then i changed the code and it works after repeat one or two times:
int i = 0;
public delegate void AsyncMethodCaller();
private void proc2()
{
Action action = () => control1.Text = (i += 1).ToString();
if (control1.IsHandleCreated)
{
if (control1.InvokeRequired)
{
control1.BeginInvoke(new AsyncMethodCaller(proc2));
}
else
{
action.Invoke();
}
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("Handle creation error");
}
}
private void proc1()
{
for (int i=0; i<1000; i++)
{
//do something
}
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Thread thread1 = new Thread(proc1);
thread1.Start();
Thread thread2 = new Thread(proc2);
thread2.Start();
}

This is what I just used:
<your control>.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate () {
… do your work here
}));
-Gina

WPF: How to do multithreading in a given situation where I need to check control's state

Here's my situation:
I have a WPF application, where I have a method which takes a lot of time to be completed. I don't want to lose UI responsiveness, so I'd like to call that method in another thread.
I won't paste here my entire code, because it's too long, instead I wrote this short program, which represents well what I'm dealing with:
public void MainWindow()
{
InitializeComponent();
ProcessThread = new Thread(TimeConsumingMethod);
ProcessThread.Name = "ProcessThread";
ProcessThread.Start();
}
public void TimeConsumingMethod()
{
this.Dispatcher.Invoke(() =>
{
MytextBlock.Text = "new text";
MyOtherTextBlock.Text = "Hello";
});
for (int i = 0; i < 50; i++)
{
Debug.WriteLine("Debug line " + i);
}
if (MyRadioButton.IsChecked == false) //????????????????
{
while (true)
{
if (DateTime.Now >= timePicker.Value)
break;
}
}
OtherMethod();
}
Actually, I have two questions for the above code:
1. Everytime I want to access UI controls in my code I have to use this.Dispatcher.Invoke() =>.... Is it the right thing to do? I mean, I have a few places in my method (in my real code) where I check the state of some controls and everytime I need to do his Dispatcher.invoke thing - isn't there a better way to acces these controls?
2. In the code above, there's IF block in the end - in that block I'm checking the state of my RadioButton. Inside of that IF, I have a time consuming code. I cannot just do this:
this.Dispatcher.Invoke(() =>
{
if (MyRadioButton.IsChecked == false) //????????????????
{
while (true)
{
if (DateTime.Now >= timePicker.Value)
break;
}
}
});
That code would tell my UI thread to handle this if block - but I don't want that! That would cause the whole UI to freeze until this IF block gets done. How should I handle this situation?

Well, there are a lot of ways to implement what you are trying to do. One of them might look like this:
public MainWindow() {
InitializeComponent();
Initialize(); //do some intialization
}
private async void Timer_Tick(object sender, EventArgs e) {
if (DateTime.Now >= timePicker.SelectedDate) { //check your condition
timer.Stop(); //probably you need to run it just once
await Task.Run(() => OtherMethod()); //instead of creating thread manually use Thread from ThreadPool
//use async method to avoid blocking UI during long method is running
}
}
private readonly DispatcherTimer timer = new DispatcherTimer(); //create a dispatcher timer that will execute code on UI thread
public void Initialize() {
MytextBlock.Text = "new text";
MyOtherTextBlock.Text = "Hello"; //access UI elements normally
for (var i = 0; i < 50; i++) {
Debug.WriteLine("Debug line " + i);
}
if (MyRadioButton.IsChecked == false)
{
timer.Interval = TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10); // during init setup timer instead of while loop
timer.IsEnabled = true;
timer.Tick += Timer_Tick; //when 10 sec pass, this method is called
timer.Start();
}
}
public void OtherMethod() {
//long running method
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
I've added some comments, but the main idea is this:
Don't create threads manually, use ThreadPool
Don't loop to wait for something, use timer to periodically check for it
Use async method when you have I/O Tasks

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 to stop BackgroundWorker correctly

I have a form with 2 comboboxes on it. And I want to fill combobox2.DataSource based on combobox1.Text and combobox2.Text (I assume that the user has completed input in combobox1 and is in the middle of inputting in combobox2). So I have an event handler for combobox2 like this:
private void combobox2_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)
cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancelAsync();
var filledComboboxValues = new FilledComboboxValues{ V1 = combobox1.Text,
V2 = combobox2.Text};
cmbDataSourceExtractor.RunWorkerAsync(filledComboboxValues );
}
As far as building DataSource is time-consuming process (it creates a request to database and executes it) I decided that it's better to perform it in another process using BackgroundWorker. So there's a scenario when cmbDataSourceExtractor hasn't completed its work and the user types one more symbol. In this case I get an exception on this line
cmbDataSourceExtractor.RunWorkerAsync(filledComboboxValues ); about that BackgroundWorker is busy and cannot perform several actions in the same time.
How to get rid of this exception?

CancelAsync doesn't actually abort your thread or anything like that. It sends a message to the worker thread that work should be cancelled via BackgroundWorker.CancellationPending. Your DoWork delegate that is being run in the background must periodically check this property and handle the cancellation itself.
The tricky part is that your DoWork delegate is probably blocking, meaning that the work you do on your DataSource must complete before you can do anything else (like check for CancellationPending). You may need to move your actual work to yet another async delegate (or maybe better yet, submit the work to the ThreadPool), and have your main worker thread poll until this inner worker thread triggers a wait state, OR it detects CancellationPending.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.backgroundworker.cancelasync.aspx
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/cpp/BackgroundWorker_Threads.aspx

If you add a loop between the CancelAsync() and the RunWorkerAsync() like so it will solve your problem
private void combobox2_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)
cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancelAsync();
while(cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)
Application.DoEvents();
var filledComboboxValues = new FilledComboboxValues{ V1 = combobox1.Text,
V2 = combobox2.Text};
cmbDataSourceExtractor.RunWorkerAsync(filledComboboxValues );
}
The while loop with the call to Application.DoEvents() will hault the execution of your new worker thread until the current one has properly cancelled, keep in mind you still need to handle the cancellation of your worker thread. With something like:
private void cmbDataSourceExtractor_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
if (this.cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancellationPending)
{
e.Cancel = true;
return;
}
// do stuff...
}
The Application.DoEvents() in the first code snippet will continue to process your GUI threads message queue so the even to cancel and update the cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy property will still be processed (if you simply added a continue instead of Application.DoEvents() the loop would lock the GUI thread into a busy state and would not process the event to update the cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)

You will have to use a flag shared between the main thread and the BackgroundWorker, such as BackgroundWorker.CancellationPending. When you want the BackgroundWorker to exit, just set the flag using BackgroundWorker.CancelAsync().
MSDN has a sample: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.backgroundworker.cancellationpending.aspx

MY example . DoWork is below:
DoLengthyWork();
//this is never executed
if(bgWorker.CancellationPending)
{
MessageBox.Show("Up to here? ...");
e.Cancel = true;
}
inside DoLenghtyWork :
public void DoLenghtyWork()
{
OtherStuff();
for(int i=0 ; i<10000000; i++)
{ int j = i/3; }
}
inside OtherStuff() :
public void OtherStuff()
{
for(int i=0 ; i<10000000; i++)
{ int j = i/3; }
}
What you want to do is modify both DoLenghtyWork and OtherStuff() so that they become:
public void DoLenghtyWork()
{
if(!bgWorker.CancellationPending)
{
OtherStuff();
for(int i=0 ; i<10000000; i++)
{
int j = i/3;
}
}
}
public void OtherStuff()
{
if(!bgWorker.CancellationPending)
{
for(int i=0 ; i<10000000; i++)
{
int j = i/3;
}
}
}

The problem is caused by the fact that cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancelAsync() is an asynchronous method, the Cancel operation has not yet completed when cmdDataSourceExtractor.RunWorkerAsync(...) exitst. You should wait for cmdDataSourceExtractor to complete before calling RunWorkerAsync again. How to do this is explained in this SO question.

My answer is a bit different because I've tried these methods but they didn't work. My code uses an extra class that checks for a Boolean flag in a public static class as the database values are read or where I prefer it just before an object is added to a List object or something as such. See the change in the code below. I added the ThreadWatcher.StopThread property. for this explation I'm nog going to reinstate the current thread because it's not your issue but that's as easy as setting the property to false before accessing the next thread...
private void combobox2_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
//Stop the thread here with this
ThreadWatcher.StopThread = true;//the rest of this thread will run normally after the database function has stopped.
if (cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)
cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancelAsync();
while(cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)
Application.DoEvents();
var filledComboboxValues = new FilledComboboxValues{ V1 = combobox1.Text,
V2 = combobox2.Text};
cmbDataSourceExtractor.RunWorkerAsync(filledComboboxValues );
}
all fine
private void cmbDataSourceExtractor_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
if (this.cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancellationPending)
{
e.Cancel = true;
return;
}
// do stuff...
}
Now add the following class
public static class ThreadWatcher
{
public static bool StopThread { get; set; }
}
and in your class where you read the database
List<SomeObject>list = new List<SomeObject>();
...
if (!reader.IsDbNull(0))
something = reader.getString(0);
someobject = new someobject(something);
if (ThreadWatcher.StopThread == true)
break;
list.Add(something);
...
don't forget to use a finally block to properly close your database connection etc. Hope this helps! Please mark me up if you find it helpful.

In my case, I had to pool database for payment confirmation to come in and then update WPF UI.
Mechanism that spins up all the processes:
public void Execute(object parameter)
{
try
{
var url = string.Format("{0}New?transactionReference={1}", Settings.Default.PaymentUrlWebsite, "transactionRef");
Process.Start(new ProcessStartInfo(url));
ViewModel.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment = new BackgroundWorker {WorkerSupportsCancellation = true};
ViewModel.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.DoWork += ViewModel.updateUiWhenDoneWithPayment_DoWork;
ViewModel.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.RunWorkerCompleted += ViewModel.updateUiWhenDoneWithPayment_RunWorkerCompleted;
ViewModel.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.RunWorkerAsync();
}
catch (Exception e)
{
ViewModel.Log.Error("Failed to navigate to payments", e);
MessageBox.Show("Failed to navigate to payments");
}
}
Mechanism that does checking for completion:
private void updateUiWhenDoneWithPayment_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
Thread.Sleep(30000);
while (string.IsNullOrEmpty(GetAuthToken()) && !((BackgroundWorker)sender).CancellationPending)
{
Thread.Sleep(5000);
}
//Plug in pooling mechanism
this.AuthCode = GetAuthToken();
}
Mechanism that cancels if window gets closed:
private void PaymentView_OnUnloaded(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
var context = DataContext as PaymentViewModel;
if (context.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment != null && context.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.WorkerSupportsCancellation && context.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.IsBusy)
context.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.CancelAsync();
}

I agree with guys. But sometimes you have to add more things.
IE
1) Add this worker.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
2) Add to you class some method to do the following things
public void KillMe()
{
worker.CancelAsync();
worker.Dispose();
worker = null;
GC.Collect();
}
So before close your application your have to call this method.
3) Probably you can Dispose, null all variables and timers which are inside of the BackgroundWorker.