OK, so I'm a bit new to SwingWorker in Java.
I've built a Java GUI that, when the "Start" button is pressed, launches several SwingWorker threads. The first thread simply keeps track of run time and updates the GUI appropriately. The second one plays a series of sounds files. The third (and problematic) thread should monitor the serial port for incoming data to be manipulated later on down the road. All of these threads will be running for a while, hence them being SwingWorkers.
I am using the jSSC library (https://code.google.com/p/java-simple-serial-connector/wiki/jSSC_examples) to read data from the serial port, and it does so by firing an eventListener.
My question: Is it redundant/inelegant to code an EventListener inside of a SwingWorker thread? And if so, is there a better way to go about this?
Here is a bit of my code:
private void jButton1ActionPerformed(java.awt.event.ActionEvent evt) {
SerialPort serialPort = findPort(); // returns a serialport I can use to read data from.
SwingWorker worker1 = new SwingWorker<Void, Void>(){
#Override
protected Void doInBackground() throws Exception {
long elapsedTime, startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
while (true){
Thread.sleep(1000);
elapsedTime = (System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime)/1000;
jTimeField.setText(String.format("%02d:%02d:%02d", elapsedTime/3600, (elapsedTime%3600)/60, elapsedTime%60));
if (isCancelled()){} /* Check if thread has been canceled */
}
}
};
SwingWorker worker2 = new SwingWorker<Void, Void>(){
#Override
protected Void doInBackground() throws Exception {
// This Thread: Plays music files; Self terminates; On termination also terminates worker 1 and 3 via cancel().
}
};
SwingWorker worker3 = new SwingWorker<Void, Void>(){
#Override
protected Void doInBackground() throws Exception {
serialPort.addEventListener(new SerialPortReader());
return null;
}
class SerialPortReader implements SerialPortEventListener {
#Override
public void serialEvent(SerialPortEvent event) {
byte buffer[];
if (event.isRXCHAR() && event.getEventValue() > 0){
buffer = serialPort.readBytes();
for (byte b: buffer){
// Do stuff with incoming data
}
}
}
}
};
}
Any and all constructive criticism is appreciated.
It does not do any good to add the event listener in your swingworker thread and then return once that's done. Why not just add the listener from your EDT and, if it takes long to process events, fire off processing threads from there? Listening to events can't be blocking, that would defeat the entire Observer pattern.
Related
I'm trying to do some optimization in my code and would like to spawn a thread where I do a time consuming operation. During the implementation of that optimization I was running into an issue which was driving me crazy. I simplified the issue and created a test case for that specific issue: (I'm using SpringJUnit4ClassRunner so the transaction is properly started at the beginning of the testCRUD method)
Could someone help me understand why the foundParent is null in the thread ?
private Semaphore sema = new Semaphore(0, false);
private long parentId;
#Test
public void testCRUD() {
//create
DBParent parent = null;
{
parent = new DBParent();
parentDao.persist(parent);
parentId = parent.getId();
assertTrue(parentId > 0);
parentDao.flush();
}
(new Thread(
new Runnable() {
public void run()
{
System.out.println("Start adding childs !");
DBParent foundParent = parentDao.findById(parentId);
assertTrue(foundParent != null); //ASSERTION FAILS HERE !!!!
System.out.println("Releasing semaphore !");
sema.release();
System.out.println("End adding childs !");
}
})).start();
try {
System.out.println("Acquiring semaphore !");
sema.acquire();
}
catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
=============================EDITED===================================
As per one comment suggestion, I created a threadManager bean which spawn the thread. Here is the code of the threadManager:
public class ThreadManager {
#Transactional(propagation=Propagation.REQUIRES_NEW)
public void executeTask(String Name, Runnable task) {
(new Thread(task, Name)).start();
}
}
Then in the previous test, instead of staring the thread manually, I just post it in the thread manager like this:
#Autowired private ParentDao parentDao;
#Autowired private ThreadManager threadManager;
private Semaphore sema = new Semaphore(0, false);
private long parentId;
#Test
public void testCRUD() {
//create
DBParent parent = null;
{
parent = new DBParent();
parentDao.persist(parent);
parentId = parent.getId();
assertTrue(parentId > 0);
parentDao.flush();
}
threadManager.executeTask("BG processing...",
new Runnable() {
public void run()
{
System.out.println("Start adding childs !");
DBParent foundParent = parentDao.findById(parentId);
assertTrue(foundParent != null); //ASSERTION FAILS HERE !!!!
System.out.println("Releasing semaphore !");
sema.release();
System.out.println("End adding childs !");
}
});
try {
System.out.println("Acquiring semaphore !");
sema.acquire();
}
catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
Unfortunately this doesn't work either !!! :-(
The transaction context is bound to the thread. So the code in the spawned thread doesn't run in the same transaction context as the code in the initial thread. So, due to transaction isolation (the I in ACID), the spawned thread doesn't see what the initial thread's transaction is inserting in the database.
You can bind Spring transaction to a new thread, to run transactions & Hibernate/JPA access in it. But this has to be a different TX and JPA/HB session from other threads.
Spring code for OpenSessionInViewFilter, is a reasonable an example of how to bind Hibernate session to Spring's TX management. You can strip this down to fairly minimal code.
See:
org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.support.OpenSessionInViewFilter
OpenSessionInViewFilter.doFilterInternal() -- this is where it actually binds it
TransactionSynchronizationManager.bindResource()
TransactionSynchronizationManager.unbindResource()
TransactionSynchronizationManager.getResource()
In one project (IIRC) I wrapped this functionality into a 'ServerThreadHb' class, to setup & save previous thread-bindings on construction -- with a restore() method to be called in a finally block, to restore previous bindings.
For your posted code sample, there isn't much point in running work on a separate thread -- since you synchronously wait for the work to be done. However I assume you were planning to remove that constraint & extend that functionality.
I have a problem while working with JavaFX and Threads. Basically I have two options: working with Tasks or Platform.runLater. As I understand Platform.runLater should be used for simple/short tasks, and Task for the longer ones. However, I cannot use any of them.
When I call Thread, it has to pop up a captcha dialog in a middle of task. While using Task, it ignores my request to show new dialog... It does not let me to create a new stage.
On the other hand, when I use Platform.runLater, it lets me show a dialog, however, the program's main window freezes until the pop up dialog is showed.
I need any kind of solution for this. If anyone knows how to deal with this or had some similar experience and found a solution I am looking forward to hearing from you!
As puce says, you have to use Task or Service for the things that you need to do in background. And Platform.runLater to do things in the JavaFX Application thread from the background thread.
You have to synchronize them, and one of the ways to do that is using the class CountDownLatch.
Here is an example:
Service<Void> service = new Service<Void>() {
#Override
protected Task<Void> createTask() {
return new Task<Void>() {
#Override
protected Void call() throws Exception {
//Background work
final CountDownLatch latch = new CountDownLatch(1);
Platform.runLater(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
try{
//FX Stuff done here
}finally{
latch.countDown();
}
}
});
latch.await();
//Keep with the background work
return null;
}
};
}
};
service.start();
Use a Worker (Task, Service) from the JavaFX Application thread if you want to do something in the background.
http://docs.oracle.com/javafx/2/api/javafx/concurrent/package-summary.html
Use Platform.runLater from a background thread if you want to do something on the JavaFX Application thread.
http://docs.oracle.com/javafx/2/api/javafx/application/Platform.html#runLater%28java.lang.Runnable%29
It's too late to answer but for those who have the error, here is the solution XD
You can use one Thread.
Use the lambda expression for the runnable in the thread and the runlater.
Thread t = new Thread(() -> {
//Here write all actions that you want execute on background
Platform.runLater(() -> {
//Here the actions that use the gui where is finished the actions on background.
});
});
t.start();
You can user directly this code
Don't forget you can't send non-final variable in thread .
you can send final variable in thread
//final String me="ddddd";
new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
// me = me + "eee";
//...Your code....
}
}).start();
Use in
your code
try/catch
I am creating a j2me application which is interacting with a database on a server. Therefore I launch a thread to connect to the server. I handle all my command actions in a separate class which implements CommandListener.
When I try to get the response the server returned I get an empty String. I have tried waiting for the thread that connects to the server to return but this makes the application unresponsive.
Below is the code I am using.
//my network worker class.
public class NetworkConnector implements Runnable {
//constructor
public NetworkConnector(String url){
//url =>server url to connect to.
Thread thread = new Thread(this);
thread.start();
}
private String serverReply="";
private String url="
//method to connect to the server and return the
//response from the server.
public String sendData(String serverUrl) {
//open streams to connect to the Server.
httpConn = (HttpConnection)
Connector.open(serverUrl,Connector.READ_WRITE, true);
httpConn.setRequestMethod(HttpConnection.GET);
inStream = httpConn.openInputStream();
int read;
while ((read = inStream.read()) != -1) {
sb.append((char) read);
}
return sb.toString();
}
public String getServerReply() {
//serverReply is a class variable.
return serverReply;
}
public void run(){
//call the send method that connects to the server.
serverResponse = sendData(Url);
}
} //end of connector class.
// this class is where all my Command Actions are
//implemented.
public class CommandActionController implements
CommandListener, DataReceiver {
public void commandAction(Command cmd, Displayable d) {
//networkMgr => is the worker class that makes
//connection to the server.
networkMgr = new NetworkConnector("http://localhost
/JsonPhp/login.php?uname=" + loginUserInfo.userName +
"&passwd=" + loginUserInfo.password);
//here am getting the response from the server.
String serverResponse = networkMgr.getServerReply();
//at this point the ServerReponse String is Empty =>
//yet the server is supposed to return some String.
System.out.println("xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ServerResponse =" + serverResponse);
}
}//end of CommandListener class.
Your expectations about serverResponse value are wrong; it can be empty at the moment when you attempt to obtain it in commandAction with the code snippet in the question.
In order to get non-empty value, you need to redesign method NetworkConnector.getServerReply() to make it properly wait until thread finishes and server response is indeed obtained.
If you do that, however, you will also have to redesign CommandActionController to keep user interface responsive - your testing with "waiting for the thread that connects to the server" has shown just that.
Redesigned code should just launch the server connect thread and exit the commandAction as soon as possible (possibly changing to some "wait screen" to let user see what happens). Next screen update should be triggered only after server response is obtained.
Consider studying a tutorial specifically targeted on explaining how to properly design this kind applications - Networking, User Experience, and Threads:
This article explains how your MIDlet can make network connections without compromising your user interface. It includes six iterative examples that illustrate multithreaded networking and the use of a wait screen...
Here is how I'd do without java.util.concurrent:
Result handleRequest(){
final String url = // get url
Work work = new Work(url):
Thread t = new Thread(work);
t.start();
// do other stuff
if(t.isAlive()){
// still running
}
// this waits until the work is done
// and it will be safe to access work.result after
// this call has returned.
t.join();
return work.result;
}
and then
class Work implements Runnable{
final String url;
Result result;
public void run(){
this.result = // do your network stuff
}
}
You shouldn't start a thread in the constructor. Also, runnable are meant to be passed to threads. The easiest (and the "proper") way of doing this would be as follows:
Implement a Callable instead of a Runnable.
Use a ExecutorService instead of a Thread
Use Future object to do the processing asynchronously/be responsive to user
Here is a simple example.
class Stuff {
final ExecutorService exec =
Executors.newCachedExecutorService(// please see doc);
Result process(String url){
Future<Result> future = exec.submit(new Work(url));
// do some other stuff
if(future.isDone()){
// return result?
}
return future.get(); // this call will wait until result is available
}
}
and then
class Work implements Callable<Result> {
final String url;
Result call() throws Exception {
// do your network stuff here
return result;
}
}
See documentation of java.util.concurrent.ExecutorService.submit(), java.util.concurrent.Future and java.util.concurrent.Callable for details.
I am using threads in blackberry to perform web service calls. I want to get notified as soon as the call gets a response back. I was using
Handlers
in android. I didnt find anything similar in blackberry.
Here is the code I am using to run the thread
class PrimeRun implements Runnable {
long minPrime;
PrimeRun(long minPrime) {
this.minPrime = minPrime;
}
public void run() {
// compute primes larger than minPrime
. . .
}
}
How can I get a notification after the thread finished running?
How can I do this in blackberry?
Thanks
Added more Information : Thanks for your reply. Its really
informative. Let me explain a bit more on my issue. I have a
webservice call which is running on a thread. As soon as I get the
reply back from server I want to execute the next function(next call
to server) which is based on the response from the previous call.So I need to wait until I get a response back. Also
at them same time I need to show a activity indicator on screen. I was
using handler for this in android. I am looking for something similar
on blackberry.
So your question essentially is this
One thread does the job while the other thread waits for completion
The first thread completes the job and "notifies" the second thread.
This is a simple producer consumer problem. Here is the code how you can solve this.
class JobResult
{
boolean done = false;
}
JobResult result = new JobResult();
class Worker extends Thread
{
JobResult _result;
public Worker( JobResult result )
{
_result = result
}
public void run()
{
// Do some very long job
synchronized( _result )
{
// modify result
_result.done = true;
_result.notify();
}
}
}
public class Waiter extends Thread
{
JobResult _result;
public Waiter( JobResult result )
{
_result = result;
}
public void run()
{
synchroinzed( _result ){
while(! _result.done)
{
this.wait();
}
}
// Wait is over. You can do something now.
}
}
As I got the Zach's question - he asks how to execute some code that involves UI changes (something like showing an info popup or closing the progress popup) upon a background thread completion. On Android a Handler created on the UI thread is often used for that purpose.
In BB you can use another way which is similar to Swing on desktop Java. When you need some code to be executed on the UI thread you wrap it in a Runnable and pass to one of the following methods:
// Puts runnable object into this application's event queue,
// and waits until it is processed.
Application.invokeAndWait(Runnable runnable)
// Puts runnable object into this application's event queue.
Application.invokeLater(Runnable runnable)
// Puts runnable object into this application's event queue
// for repeated execution.
Application.invokeLater(Runnable runnable, long time, boolean repeat)
So the behaviour of the above calls is similar to what Handler.post(Runnable r) (and the like) does.
Note, you can always get a handle to your Application instance by a static call Application.getApplication().
So in the end of a background thread it is safe to do something like this:
Application.getApplication().invokeLater(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
progressScreen.close();
Dialog.alert("I am finished!");
}
});
It is similar to Android's:
handler.post(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
progressScreen.dismiss();
showDialog(DIALOG_TASK_FINISHED_ID);
}
});
Android has a much rich multi threading primitives. But you can achieve the same even in Blackberry with equal elegance. The solution I provide below is essentially the same as previous, but with a minor change. Waiter thread can be replaced with built-in utility to perform painting on UI thread using UiApplicaiton's invokeLater method. You don't actually need to "notify" anyone but just update the UI once a particular task is completed. Check the docs for more info.
Anyway, you can model your code along the lines:
class ProgressScreen extends FullScreen
{
LabelField _label;
public void start()
{
}
public void setMessage( final String message )
{
UiApplication.getApplication(
UiApplication.invokeLater(
new Runnable() {
_label.setText( message );
}
)
);
}
public void dismiss()
{
this.close();
}
}
interface WebserviceTask
{
int STATUS_CONDITIONS_NOT_SATISFIED = -3;
int STATUS_NET_ERR = -2;
int STATUS_FAILURE = -1;
int STATUS_SUCCESS = 0;
public int invoke();
}
public class Updater extends Thread
{
final int NUM_TASKS = 10;
WebServiceTask tasks[] = new WebServiceTask[ NUM_TASKS ];
WebServiceTask tasks[0] = new WebServiceTask(){
public int invoke()
{
int retCode = 0;
// invoke a particular web service
return STATUS_SUCCESS;
}
}
public void run()
{
ProgressScreen progress = new ProgressScreen();
progress.start();
for( int i=0; i < NUM_TASKS; i++ )
{
int retcode;
WebServiceTask t = tasks[i];
retcode = t.invoke();
String mesg;
switch( retcode )
{
case STATUS_SUCCESS: { mesg ="Task successfully completed!";} break;
case STATUS_NET_ERR: { mesg ="Could not connect to network";} break;
}
progress.setMessage(message);
}
progress.dismiss();
}
}
Note that I have provided only the stubs to give you an idea how you may accomplish. Let us know how it goes.
I have a program which runs a thread. The thread performs processing all the time and it uses some synchronized queue.
The class snapshot is as follows:
public class MyClass:IDisposable
{
private Thread myThread = new Thread(threadFunc);
private volatile bool runThread = true;
public MyClass()
{
myThread.Start();
}
public Dispose()
{
runThread = false;
}
private void threadFunc()
{
try
{
while(runThread){
queue.Take(); //This method blocks the thread if queue is empty. It uses Monitor class
//do some processing
}
}
catch(Exception e){...}
}
private void otherFunc()
{
queue.enqueue(...);//this method is executed by main thread and uses lock while adding element to the queue.
}
}
When I call Dispose() method, the thread exists threadFunc() method, but after a sec I get an execption from this func "Unable to avaluate expression...", as if the tread was terminated while doing some work. Maybe it has just released from queue.Take() blocking and has no context to run. I know I'm missing something...
How can I solve such problem and terminate the thread from the Dispose method.
Many thanks!!!
Use the overload of Take that accepts a CancellationToken. You can get a reference to a token by using the CancellationTokenSource which also has the Cancel method that you can call from Dispose to unblock the Take method. You can read more cancellation here.
Use the poison pill approach: See this thread