Multiple background threads - c#

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;
}

Related

Terminate Window on another thread

I have a simple C# winform app where I spawn a new thread to show another winform. After a process is completed i want to close that form using the below code. The issue I have is that when I call busyForm.BeginInvoke it is bypassing the null check and throw and error. How to correctly close the winform in another thread?
static Indicator busyForm;
public static async Task Execute()
{
Thread busyIndicatorthread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(()=>FormThread()));
busyIndicatorthread.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.STA);
busyIndicatorthread.Start();
}
private static void FormThread()
{
busyForm = new Indicator();
busyForm.Closed += (sender2, e2) => busyForm.Dispatcher.InvokeShutdown();
Dispatcher.Run();
}
public static Task Execute(){
Thread busyIndicatorthread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(()=>FormThread(hwind)));
busyIndicatorthread.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.STA);
busyIndicatorthread.Start();
// dos some stuff
if (busyForm != null)
{
busyForm.BeginInvoke(new System.Action(() => busyForm.Close())); <--- throw null error
busyForm = null;
}
}
That is because before calling .Close() method, time has passed and it is not assured that busyForm exists anymore.
In fact, it is possible that, while the new System.Action(() => busyForm.Close() thread is starting, you main thread goes to busyForm = null;.
You can try moving the null to secondary thread.
if (busyForm != null)
{
busyForm.BeginInvoke(new System.Action(() =>
{
lock(busyForm){
busyForm.Close();
busyForm = null;
}
}));
}
Almost no application starts another message pump to display notifications. It's not needed. In all applications, the busy and progress dialog boxes are generated and displayed.by the UI thread. Operations that could block are performed in the background, eg in a background thread or far better, using async/await and Task.Run. The UI is updated using events or callbacks, eg using the Progress< T> class.
In this case though, it seems all that's needed is to display a form before a long-running task and hide it afterward:
public async void btnDoStuff_Async(object sender, EventArgs args)
{
//Disable controls, display indicator, etc
btnDoStuff.Enabled=false;
using var busyForm = new Indicator();
busyForm.Show();
try
{
var result=await Task.Run(()=> ActuallyDoStuffAndReturnResult());
//Back in the UI form
//Do something with the result
}
finally
{
//Close the busy indicator, re-enable buttons etc.
busyForm.Close();
btnDoStuff.Enabled=true;
}
}
The finally block ensures the UI is enabled and the busy form hidden even in case of error.
20+ years ago some Visual Basic 6 applications did start another Window message pump to act as a "server". Visual Basic 6 threading was very quirky, so people used various tricks to get around its limitations.
When you write this code:
busyForm.BeginInvoke(new System.Action(() => busyForm.Close())); <--- throw null error
busyForm = null;
The order in which it executes is almost certainly this:
busyForm = null;
busyForm.Close();
No wonder you're getting a null reference exception!
Simply set the form to null in your invoke. That'll fix it.
However, the correct way to do this is as Panagiotis Kanavos suggests.

C# Is it safe to call 'BackgroundWorker' inside 'using' statement?

I have developed a windows service. In the service I was using a BackgroundWorker to Post data in my Database.
I declared a BackgroundWorker inside my database constructor class and was using that whenever needed.
During the test I got one error:
This BackgroundWorker is currently busy and cannot run multiple tasks
concurrently
I tried to find out the solution and many people suggest to use new instance for each task. I changed my code like:
...
using (BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker())
{
bw.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(bkDoPost);
bw.RunWorkerAsync(dbobj);
}
...
and my 'bkDoPost' is:
void bkDoPost(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
try
{
dbObject dbj = e.Argument as dbObject;
this.db.Insert(dbj.tableName, dbj.data);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
logs.logMessage("There was an error in data post. See the ErrorLog");
logs.logError(ex);
}
}
The code works fine during test.
My question is am I doing correct way?
OR Is there any issue doing in that way?
Thanks
Don't do that. Your background worker will be disposed before your work completes.
It is better to call Dispose manually after the work completes.
Better still, consider using a different scheme for handling asynchronous work. Background worker is becoming obsolete and is targeted at UI applications, rather than services. The restriction on parallel operations highlights the intention of the class.
Don't put the BackgroundWorker into a using statement. Instead put the Dispose() call into the RunWorkerCompleted event.
Nevertheless BackgroundWorker is maybe not the best thing to use in your case, cause it is primilary use is to run some buisness code while the UI stays responive and to automatically update the UI within the RunWorkerCompeleted event.
If you don't need to interfere with the UI when the job is finished or you have a lot of smaller jobs to be done it would be more efficient to switch to encapsulate your jobs within Tasks.
If you have many updates, creating one BackgroundWorker for each one could be very time and memory consuming.
I would use an independant thread that I would wake up each time an update has to be done :
Queue<DbWork> dbUpdates = new Queue<DbWork>();
EventWaitHandle waiter = new EventWaitHandle(false, EventResetMode.ManualReset);
...
// Init :
new Thread(new ThreadStart(DbUpdateWorker));
...
private void DbUpdateWorker()
{
while (true)
{
DbWork currentWork = null;
lock (dbUpdates)
{
if (dbUpdates.Count > 0)
currentWork = dbUpdates.Dequeue();
}
if (currentWork != null)
{
currentWork.DoWork();
}
if (dbUpdates.Count == 0)
{
waiter.WaitOne();
}
}
}
public void AddWork(DbWork work)
{
lock (dbUpdates)
{
dbUpdates.Enqueue(work);
}
waiter.Set();
}

BeginInvoke is blocking the UI, whereas Invoke is not. Why?

I am confused with scenario which I have encountered with cross thread access. Here is what I am trying to do:
Main UI thread - menu item click I create a background worker and run it asynchronously
private void actionSubMenuItem_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
ToolStripMenuItem itemSelected = (ToolStripMenuItem)sender;
ExecuteTheActionSelected(itemSelected.Text);
}
The method ExecuteTheActionSelected is as follows:
private void ExecuteTheActionSelected(string actionSelected)
{
BackgroundWorker localBackgroundWorker = new BackgroundWorker();
localBackgroundWorker.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(localBackgroundWorker_DoWork);
localBackgroundWorker.RunWorkerAsync(SynchronizationContext.Current);
}
The localBackgroundWorker_DoWork has:
ActionExecutionHelper actionExecutioner = new ActionExecutionHelper()
actionExecutioner.Execute();
The Execute method in that class that has method invoker which infact invokes the event handler in UI thread:
public void Execute()
{
// ---- CODE -----
new MethodInvoker(ReadStdOut).BeginInvoke(null, null);
}
protected virtual void ReadStdOut()
{
string str;
while ((str = executionProcess.StandardOutput.ReadLine()) != null)
{
object sender = new object();
DataReceivedEventArgs e = new DataReceivedEventArgs(str);
outputDataReceived.Invoke(sender, e);
//This delegate invokes UI event handler
}
}
The UI event handler is as follows:
private void executionProcess_OutputDataReceived(object sender, DataReceivedEventArgs e)
{
if (_dwExecuteAction != null)
{
_dwExecuteAction.ShowDataInExecutionWindow(e.Text);
}
}
Now here comes the cross thread issue:
public void ShowDataInExecutionWindow(string message)
{
if (rchtxtExecutionResults.InvokeRequired)
{
rchtxtExecutionResults.Invoke(new ShowDataExecutionDelegate(ShowDataInExecutionWindow), message);
}
else
{
this.rchtxtExecutionResults.AppendText(message + Environment.NewLine);
}
}
Here Invoke doesn't block the UI where as BeginInvoke blocks.
Please help me understand this scenario as i m confused a lot.
Yes, this is normal. The benefit you get out of Invoke() is that it blocks the worker thread. When you use BeginInvoke() the thread keeps motoring and issues invoke requests at a rate higher than the UI thread can handle. It depends on what you ask the UI thread to do but it starts to become a problem around 1000 invokes per second.
The UI thread stops being responsive in this scenario, it is constantly finding another invoke request back while it pumps the message loop and doesn't get around doing its regular duties anymore. Input and paint requests no longer get processed.
The clear source of the problem is the invoke request on every single line of output retrieved from the process. It is just generating them too quickly. You need to fix this by lowering the rate at which you invoke. There's a simple rule for that, you are only trying to keep a human occupied, invoking more than 25 times per second turns whatever you produce in but a blur to the eye. So buffer the lines and measure the amount of time that has passed since the last invoke call.
Also note that using Invoke() is an easy workaround but it isn't exactly guaranteed to work. It is a race, the worker thread could potentially always call the next Invoke() a wee bit earlier than the main thread re-entering the message loop and reading the next message. In which case you will still have the exact same problem.

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

Running a BackgroundWorker within another BackgroundWorker

I'm attempting a very DB intensive task in a project. Here is a walk-through:
We need to search our DB of workers, we called Locums, and find one for a specific job. This procedure starts when we decide to process x number of jobs. So, on the click of a button, we process using the ProcessJobBatch() method. However, this method only process against a very limited number of Locums. So it takes less then 10 seconds to fill up a scheduler control. Now, once the limited number of Locums are served, we need to run a background task to check the rest of the Locums. There are around 1250 of them!
So, once ProcessJobBatch() finishes, a BackgroundWorker, BackgroundWorkerMoreLocums, goes off. Now, this worker basically does a simple loop: For each job, go through the whole 1250 employees. This takes way too long. I need to plan this out using an alternate strategy that I can't of ATM or I need to show a secondary progress bar for the inner for-each loop.
More Explanation: We import a batch of Jobs (10 to 70) numerous times on daily bases. Once a batch is imported, the application instructs the logged-in user to "Preference Find" those newly created jobs. The user already has a list of his favorite locums (1 to 20). He wants to distribute the jobs among his favorites first. That is done through ProcessJobBatch(). But, there are two scenarios that prevent the flow there and then:
What if certain jobs didn't fall to
any favorite locum?
What if there is a locum in the whole
DB who can do almost all the jobs but
since he isn't favorite?
So, I end up with a scenario of matching a job with each Locum.
Question:
Can second BackgroundWorker run within a BackgroundWorker's DoWork?
Am I doing the second scan wrong?
Environment: Windows 7 Pro 64-bit, Visual Studio 2010, C#, .NET 4.0, and Windows Forms
private void ButtonPreferenceFind_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) {
if (LookUpBatches.EditValue != null) {
JobBatch JobBatchSelected = DbContext.JobBatches.FirstOrDefault(job_batch=> job_batch.OID == LookUpBatches.EditValue.ToString());
if (JobBatchSelected != null && JobBatchSelected.Jobs.Count(condition => condition.JobStatusID == 1) > 0) {
if (XtraMessageBox.Show(String.Format("Are you sure to process {0} job(s)?", JobBatchSelected.Jobs.Count(condition => condition.JobStatusID == 1)), Text, MessageBoxButtons.YesNo, MessageBoxIcon.Question) == DialogResult.Yes) {
ProcessJobBatch(JobBatchSelected);
IEnumerable<Job> SpecificJobs = from req_jobs in JobBatchSelected.Jobs
where req_jobs.JobStatusID == 1
select req_jobs;
ProgressBarControlPreferenceFinder.EditValue = 0;
ProgressBarControlPreferenceFinder.Properties.Minimum = 0;
ProgressBarControlPreferenceFinder.Properties.Maximum = SpecificJobs.Count() - 1;
BackgroundWorkerMoreLocums.RunWorkerAsync(SpecificJobs);
} else {
LookUpBatches.Focus();
}
} else {
XtraMessageBox.Show("Unable to retrieve the selected batch or the batch has no processable jobs.", Text, MessageBoxButtons.OK, MessageBoxIcon.Exclamation);
LookUpBatches.Focus();
}
} else {
XtraMessageBox.Show("Select a batch first.", Text, MessageBoxButtons.OK, MessageBoxIcon.Exclamation);
LookUpBatches.Focus();
}
}
#region Background Searching
private void BackgroundWorkerMoreLocums_DoWork(object sender, System.ComponentModel.DoWorkEventArgs e) {
try {
e.Result = GetTableData(e.Argument);
}
catch (Exception ex) {
XtraMessageBox.Show("Background Error: " + ex.Message, "Excite Engine 2", MessageBoxButtons.OK, MessageBoxIcon.Error);
e.Result = ex;
}
}
private void BackgroundWorkerMoreLocums_ProgressChanged(object sender, System.ComponentModel.ProgressChangedEventArgs e) {
// only display progress, do not assign it to grid
ProgressBarControlPreferenceFinder.Increment(e.ProgressPercentage);
}
private void BackgroundWorkerMoreLocums_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, System.ComponentModel.RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e) {
if (e.Result is DataTable) {
//dataGridView1.DataSource = e.Result as DataTable;
}
else if (e.Result is Exception) {
}
}
private DataTable GetTableData(Object JobList) {
DataTable ResultDataTable = new DataTable();
ResultDataTable.Columns.Add();
IEnumerable<Job> JobBatchSelected = (IEnumerable<Job>)JobList;
IEnumerable<Locum> LeftOverLocums = from lefties in DbContext.Locums
//where SchedulerMatrixStorage.Resources.Items.Select(res => (long)res.Id).ToList().Contains(lefties.OID) == false
select lefties;
int NumOfJobsProcessed = 0;
List<KeyValuePair<long, TemporaryPreferenceFindLocum>> AlreadyPrefferedLocums = new List<KeyValuePair<long, TemporaryPreferenceFindLocum>>();
foreach (Job oneJob in JobBatchSelected) {
foreach (Locum oneLocum in LeftOverLocums) {
if (DbContext.Availabilities.Any(check => check.LocumID == oneLocum.OID && check.AvailableDate == oneJob.JobDate && check.AvailabilityStatusID == 1)) {
//This Locum can do this job
//Now check if he/she has been just alloted
if (AlreadyPrefferedLocums.Any(search => search.Key == oneLocum.OID && search.Value.JobDate == oneJob.JobDate) == false) {
//No? Cool!
//Add to the list to prevent double allocation
AlreadyPrefferedLocums.Add(new KeyValuePair<long, TemporaryPreferenceFindLocum>(oneJob.OID, new TemporaryPreferenceFindLocum(oneJob.JobDate, oneJob.OID, oneLocum.OID, oneLocum.FirstName + " " + oneLocum.LastName)));
}
else {
continue;
}
}
else {
//Not marked as Avaliable on the required job date...
continue;
}
}
NumOfJobsProcessed++;
BackgroundWorkerMoreLocums.ReportProgress((int)(NumOfJobsProcessed * 100F / (JobBatchSelected.Count() - 1)));
}
return ResultDataTable;
}
#endregion
A BackgroundWorker can be started from within the DoWork handler of another BackgroundWorker, but you need to be aware of the consequences of using such a scheme. When you start a background worker from your main UI thread the DoWork handler is executed on a thread pool thread while the ProgressChanged and RunWorkerCompleted are executed back on the main UI thread making it safe for you to interact with windows forms controls.
This scenario is guaranteed when you start the worker from the main UI thread because it picks up the SynchronizationContext available on that thread and which is initialized by the windows forms infra-structure.
However, when you start a background worker from the DoWork handler of another worker, you'll be starting it from a thread pool thread that lacks the synchronization context causing the ProgressChanged and RunWorkerCompleted handlers to also be executed on thread pool threads and not in your main UI thread making it unsafe for you to interact with windows forms controls from within those handlers.
It is quite common to have one background thread spawn new background threads. I don't think it is a problem if you scan the list on a background thread and process each list item on another thread.
In such cases there is no background worker within another. There is just a background worker starting other threads.
Things you should consider -
Be aware of what you do in the completed event handlers in case you handle that event.
Consider the performance implications of running so many threads for small tasks. You should consider using PLINQ or parallel tasks so that .Net can handle the partitioning of input and merging of results giving you optimum performance.

Categories