I'm working on asynchronous operation which needs to invoke further asynchronous tasks. I'm trying to keep it simple by using BackgroundWorkers, with the result being that one BackgroundWorker's DoWork() callback calls a method which creates a second BackgroundWorker, like so (minus error checking and all that jazz for brevity):
class Class1
{
private BackgroundWorker _worker = null;
public void DoSomethingAsync()
{
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
_worker.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(_worker_RunWorkerCompleted);
_worker.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(_worker_DoWork);
_worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
void _worker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
Class2 foo = new Class2();
foo.DoSomethingElseAsync();
while(foo.IsBusy) Thread.Sleep(0); // try to wait for foo to finish.
}
void _worker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
// do stuff
}
}
class Class2
{
private BackgroundWorker _worker = null;
Thread _originalThread = null;
public AsyncCompletedEventHandler DoSomethingCompleted;
public bool IsBusy { get { return _worker != null && _worker.IsBusy; } }
public void DoSomethingElseAsync()
{
_originalThread = Thread.CurrentThread;
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
_worker.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(_worker_RunWorkerCompleted);
_worker.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(_worker_DoWork);
_worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
void _worker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
// do stuff
}
void _worker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
Debug.Assert(Thread.CurrentThread == _originalThread); // fails
// Assuming the above Assert() were excluded, the following event would be raised on the wrong thread.
if (DoSomethingCompleted != null) DoSomethingCompleted(this, new AsyncCompletedEventArgs(e.Error, e.Cancelled, null));
}
}
So the problem is, I'm expecting Class2._Worker_RunWorkerCompleted() to execute on the same thread on which Class2.DoSomethingElseAsync() was called. This never happens - instead, the callback runs on a completely new thread.
Here's my suspicion: Class1's _worker_DoWork() never returns, which means that thread would never get back to an event listener, even if one existed (I suspect one doesn't). On the other hand, if _worker_DoWork() did return, Class1's BackgroundWorker would automatically finish prematurely - it needs to wait for Class2 to finish working before it can finish its work.
That leads to two questions:
Is my suspicion correct?
What's the best way to nest asynchronous operations like this? Can I salvage the BackgroundWorker approach, or is there some other, more suitable technique?
If a BackgroundWorker is created on the UI thread, DoWork will run on a thread pool thread and RunWorkerCompleted will run on the UI thread.
If a BackgroundWorker is created on a background thread (ie not the UI thread) DoWork will still run on a thread pool thread and RunWorkerCompleted will also run on a thread pool thread.
In your case, since you can't marshal a call to an arbitrary (thread pool) thread, you won't be able to guarantee the behaviour you want, although you might want to take a look at System.Threading.SynchronizationContext.
You should use ManualResetEvent to communicate between threads:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.threading.manualresetevent%28VS.71%29.aspx
Firstly, I can't see anywhere that actually starts running the worker. You could change the DoSomethingAsync method (also add the call to the DoSomethingElseAsync method in Class2)
public void DoSomethingAsync()
{
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
_worker.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(_worker_RunWorkerCompleted);
_worker.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(_worker_DoWork);
_worker.RunWorkerAsync(); // add this line to start it
}
Secondly, the work handler (the _worker_DoWork method) is not guaranteed to be on the same thread as the call to DoSomethingAsync - this is the whole point of the Background Worker. ie/ to do work on another thread. The same applies for worker complete handler (the _worker_RunWorkerCompleted method).
Finally, It doesn't seem to make sense to attach the two different background workers unless the top level one (Class1) always requires Class2 work to happen too. You would be better of having a single manager to handle each background worker.
Related
I'm running some scripts in runtime, but it's freezing my UI, I'm calling the CodeProvider inside a Thread, but it still freezing.
In my form I call:
var mre = new ManualResetEvent(false);
Thread tr = new Thread(() =>
{
Script sp = new Script();
code = textBox.Text;
sp.Comp(code);
mre.Set();
});
tr.Start();
mre.WaitOne();
I'm using the mre.WaitOne() because I want to wait the thread finish to keep running my code.
Tried to use the same way inside the Compile method too:
public bool Comps(string code)
{
var mre = new ManualResetEvent(false);
Thread tr = new Thread(() =>
{
//Code to generate a CompilerResult and generate the assembly
Run();
mre.Set();
});
tr.Start();
mre.WaitOne();
return true;
}
But while it's waiting it still freezing the UI.
Any ideas?
Thanks
I'm using the mre.WaitOne() because I want to wait the thread finish
to keep running my code.
What did you expect to happen if you force the calling thread to freeze until your processing thread has completed processing? Doing it this way, there is no point in having that extra thread and if the calling thread is the UI thread, of course it will freeze.
If you do background processing you cannot wait for the result synchronously, instead you have to notify the UI in some sort of fashion that the processing is done, i.e. using a callback or dispatching the result back to the UI in some other form.
The entire point of multi-threading is to allow the Thread to execute on it's own, independent of any other threads. What you want to do is use a callback to signal the completion of your thread and then have your UI respond to the completion.
The BackgroundWorker class has an event already built in for this purpose.
There are three events you want to subscribe to:
bw.DoWork +=
new DoWorkEventHandler(bw_DoWork);
bw.ProgressChanged +=
new ProgressChangedEventHandler(bw_ProgressChanged);
bw.RunWorkerCompleted +=
new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(bw_RunWorkerCompleted);
DoWork is where your work will happen. ProgressChanged allows you to update the UI of progress. RunWorkerCompleted will pop the event with your DoWork function has completed.
This object handles the threading and can be set to run asynchronously by running the bw.RunWorkerAsync() call.
See the following page for detail for this:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc221403%28v=vs.95%29.aspx
As an example:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
MessageBox.Show(String.Format("UI thread: {0}", Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId));
this.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate() { MessageBox.Show(String.Format("Invoke thread: {0}", Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId)); }));
backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerAsync();
}
private void backgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
MessageBox.Show(String.Format("Worker thread: {0}", Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId));
}
}
This example can be built by adding one button and one background worker to a form. Wire up the events through the events designer for the button1_Click and the backgroundWorker1_DoWork function. You should have three MessagesBoxes that pop up after clicking button1. You'll notice the Id for the UI thread and the Invoke thread are the same, which means that any processing you do from the invoke will cause your UI thread to wait. The third popup is from the worker thread, which has a different ID.
Use BeginInvoke when done. For example:
delegate void MyAction();
void Form1_Load( object sender, EventArgs e )
{
Thread tr = new Thread( () =>
{
Script sp = new Script();
code = textBox.Text;
sp.Comp(code);
BeginInvoke( new MyAction( ThreadOperationEnded ) );
} );
tr.Start();
}
void ThreadOperationEnded()
{
MessageBox.Show( "Finished!" );
}
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.
I have an external library which has a method which performs a long running task on a background thread. When it's done it fires off a Completed event on the thread that kicked off the method (typically the UI thread). It looks like this:
public class Foo
{
public delegate void CompletedEventHandler(object sender, EventArgs e);
public event CompletedEventHandler Completed;
public void LongRunningTask()
{
BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
bw.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(bw_DoWork);
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(bw_RunWorkerCompleted);
bw.RunWorkerAsync();
}
void bw_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
Thread.Sleep(5000);
}
void bw_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if (Completed != null)
Completed(this, EventArgs.Empty);
}
}
The code that calls this library looks like this:
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Foo b = new Foo();
b.Completed += new Foo.CompletedEventHandler(b_Completed);
b.LongRunningTask();
Debug.WriteLine("It's all done");
}
void b_Completed(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// do stuff
}
In the button1_Click method, after I call b.LongRunningTask(), the Completed event fires off 5 seconds later on the UI thread, I update the UI and everything is great, since I don't have to deal with marshaling stuff to the proper thread.
However, I now have a need for the process to be synchronous (without changing the external library). In other words, after I kick off .LongRunningTask method, the next meaningful statement in that method should fire after .LongRunningTask has completed.
I've tried doing it with the EventWaitHandle (e.g. doing WaitOne after the call to LongRunningTask and then Resetting it in the Completed event, but that just locks everything up).
Is there a method in the .NET framework that allows me to do this?
I've tried doing it with the EventWaitHandle (e.g. doing WaitOne after the call to LongRunningTask and then Resetting it in the Completed event, but that just locks everything up).
That is exactly what will happen if you make this synchronous, by definition. You can't make it synchronous without blocking the UI thread.
Instead of having "the next meaningful statement in that method" fire after the operation, you'll need to either make it blocking, or have the meaningful statement fire in the callback.
I have a worker thread that needs to add items to a BindingList. However, the BindingList is databound to a DataGridView. So, when I try to add to the list, I get an InvalidOperationException (Cross-thread operation not valid: Control accessed from a thread other than the thread it was created on.)
Normally for this exception you would do:
if(winformControl.InvokeRequired) {
winformControl.Invoke(MethodDelegate);
}
However, the databinding confuses things, as there is no Winform control in sight. All I have is the following line, which throws the exception:
ClassInstance.MyBindingList.Add(myObject);
If you have a solution specifically for this scenario, great.
If not, how can I get the worker thread to tell my main thread to perform a particular method (with several parameters supplied by the worker thread)? This may be a preferable option, since my worker thread is actually doing a bunch of stuff at the moment (like writing to the database), and I'm not sure if everything is thread-safe. I'm a student, and new to multithreading, and it really is not my forte yet.
One option here is to tell BindingList<T> to use the sync-context, like this - however, this is arguably not the best approach. I wonder if you could expose your data via an event or similar (rather than adding to the list directly) - then have your UI handle the event by sending to the right thread and adding to the UI model.
In your worker class constructor, try this:
private System.Threading.SynchronizationContext mContext = null;
/// <summary>
/// Constructor for MyBackgroundWorkerClass
/// </summary>
public MyBackgroundWorkerClass(System.Threading.SynchronizationContext context)
{
mContext = context;
}
Then, when you need to invoke something on the UI thread:
private void CallOnTheUiThread(object dataToPassToUiThread)
{
// Make sure the code is run on the provided thread context.
// Make the calling thread wait for completion by calling Send, not Post.
mContext.Send(state =>
{
// Change your UI here using dataToPassToUiThread.
// Since this class is not on a form, you probably would
// raise an event with the data.
}
), null);
}
When creating your worker class from a form on the UI thread, this is what you would pass as the synchronization context.
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var worker = new MyBackgroundWorkerClass(SynchronizationContext.Current);
}
You can fire an event to the main, UI, thread and there have:
if (this.InvokeRequired)
{
this.Invoke(...);
}
so you are testing on the main Window itself.
BackgroundWorkers are easy to implement if you are able to given the requirements.
Define a DoWork method that runs on a background thread such as saves to the database. The RunWorkerCompleted method is called when DoWork finishes. RunWorkerCompleted runs on the UI thread, and you can update the view's list with no problems.
// on the UI thread
BackgroundWorker worker = new BackgroundWorker();
worker.DoWork += DoWork;
worker.RunWorkerCompleted += RunWorkerCompleted;
worker.RunWorkerAsync("argument");
Events:
static void DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
e.Result = "4";
}
static void RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if (e.Error == null)
{
string a = (string)e.Result;
Console.WriteLine(a);
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine(e.Error.Message);
}
}
I use BackgroundWorker most of the time in the win form apps to show progress as I'm getting data. I was under impression that Work_completed is guaranteed to be executed on Main UI thread but it's not. If we create a thread and call the worker.RunWorkerAsync within it, it breaks if we try to update any gui control. Here is an example
private void StartButton_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Thread thread1 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(PerformWorkerTask));
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
thread1.Start();
}
public void PerformWorkerTask()
{
_worker.DoWork += delegate
{
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
Thread.Sleep(100);
}
};
_worker.RunWorkerCompleted += delegate
{
// this throws exception
MessageLabel.Text = "Completed";
};
_worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
How can we make backgroundworker work in this case?
RunWorkerAsync does its thread-synchronization magic by getting the SynchronizationContext from the thread that it is called on. It then guarantees that the events will be executed on the correct thread according to the semantics of the SynchronizationContext it got. In the case of the WindowsFormsSynchronizationContext, which is what is automatically used if you're using WinForms, the events are synchronized by posting to the message queue of the thread that started the operation. Of course, this is all transparent to you until it breaks.
EDIT: You MUST call RunWorkerAsync from the UI thread for this to work. If you can't do it any other way, your best bet is to invoke the beginning of the operation on a control so that the worker is started on the UI thread:
private void RunWorker()
{
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
_worker.DoWork += delegate
{
// do work
};
_worker.RunWorkerCompleted += delegate
{
MessageLabel.Text = "Completed";
};
_worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
// ... some code that's executing on a non-UI thread ...
{
MessageLabel.Invoke(new Action(RunWorker));
}
From your example it's hard to see what good the Thread (thread1) is, but if you really do need this thread1 then I think your only option is to use MainForm.Invoke() to execute RunWorkerAsync() (or a small method around it) on the main thread.
Added: You can use something like this:
Action a = new Action(_worker.RunWorkerAsync);
this.Invoke(a);
It sounds like the issue is just that you want to make a change to a GUI component and you aren't actually sure if you're on the GUI thread. Dan posted a valid method of setting a GUI component property safely, but I find the following shortcut method the simplest:
MessageLabel.Invoke(
(MethodInvoker)delegate
{
MessageLabel.Text = "Hello World";
});
If there are any issues with this approach, I'd like to know about them!
In the code you have presented here, you're adding the delegates for the BackgroundWorker events in a separate thread from the UI thread.
Try adding the event handlers in the main UI thread, and you should be okay.
You could probably make your existing code work by doing:
this.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(() => MessageLabel.Text = "Completed")
instead of
MessageLabel.Text = "Completed"
You're probably having cross-thread data access issues, so you have to ensure that you access properties of MessageLabel on your UI thread. This is one way to do that. Some of the other suggestions are valid too. The question to ask yourself is: why are you creating a thread that does nothing other than create a BackgroundWorker thread? If there's a reason, then fine, but from what you've shown here there's no reason you couldn't create and start the BackgroundWorker thread from your event handler, in which case there would be no cross-thread access issue because the RunWorkerCompleted event handler will call its delegates on the UI thread.
I believe BackgroundWorker is designed to automatically utilize a new thread. Therefore creating a new thread just to call RunWorkerAsync is redundant. You are creating a thread just to create yet another thread. What's probably happening is this:
You create a new thread from thread 1 (the GUI thread); call this thread 2.
From thread 2, you launch RunWorkerAsync which itself creates yet another thread; call this thread 3.
The code for RunWorkerCompleted runs on thread 2, which is the thread that called RunWorkerAsync.
Since thread 2 is not the same as the GUI thread (thread 1), you get an illegal cross-thread call exception.
(The below suggestion uses VB instead of C# since that's what I'm more familiar with; I'm guessing you can figure out how to write the appropriate C# code to do the same thing.)
Get rid of the extraneous new thread; just declare _worker WithEvents, add handlers to _worker.DoWork and _worker.RunWorkerCompleted, and then call _worker.RunWorkerAsync instead of defining a custom PerformWorkerTask function.
EDIT: To update GUI controls in a thread-safe manner, use code like the following (more or less copied from this article from MSDN):
delegate void SetTextCallback(System.Windows.Forms.Control c, string t);
private void SafeSetText(System.Windows.Forms.Control c, string t)
{
if (c.InvokeRequired)
{
SetTextCallback d = new SetTextCallback(SafeSetText);
d.Invoke(d, new object[] { c, t });
}
else
{
c.Text = t;
}
}
The best way to deal with these generic problems is to deal it once. Here I'm posting a small class that wraps the backgroupdworker thread and makes sure that the workcompleted always gets executed on the UI thread.
using System.Windows.Forms;
namespace UI.Windows.Forms.Utilities.DataManagment
{
public class DataLoader
{
private BackgroundWorker _worker;
private DoWorkEventHandler _workDelegate;
private RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler _workCompleted;
private ExceptionHandlerDelegate _exceptionHandler;
public static readonly Control ControlInvoker = new Control();
public DoWorkEventHandler WorkDelegate
{
get { return _workDelegate; }
set { _workDelegate = value; }
}
public RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler WorkCompleted
{
get { return _workCompleted; }
set { _workCompleted = value; }
}
public ExceptionHandlerDelegate ExceptionHandler
{
get { return _exceptionHandler; }
set { _exceptionHandler = value; }
}
public void Execute()
{
if (WorkDelegate == null)
{
throw new Exception(
"WorkDelegage is not assinged any method to execute. Use WorkDelegate Property to assing the method to execute");
}
if (WorkCompleted == null)
{
throw new Exception(
"WorkCompleted is not assinged any method to execute. Use WorkCompleted Property to assing the method to execute");
}
SetupWorkerThread();
_worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
private void SetupWorkerThread()
{
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
_worker.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
_worker.DoWork += WorkDelegate;
_worker.RunWorkerCompleted += worker_RunWorkerCompleted;
}
void worker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if(e.Error !=null && ExceptionHandler != null)
{
ExceptionHandler(e.Error);
return;
}
ControlInvoker.Invoke(WorkCompleted, this, e);
}
}
}
And here is the usage. One thing to note is that it exposes a static property ControlInvoker that needs to be set only once (you should do it at the beginning of the app load)
Let's take the same example that I posted in question and re write it
DataLoader loader = new DataLoader();
loader.ControlInvoker.Parent = this; // needed to be set only once
private void StartButton_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Thread thread1 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(PerformWorkerTask));
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
thread1.Start();
}
public void PerformWorkerTask()
{
loader.WorkDelegate = delegate {
// get any data you want
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
Thread.Sleep(100);
}
};
loader.WorkCompleted = delegate
{
// access any control you want
MessageLabel.Text = "Completed";
};
loader.Execute();
}
Cheers