Say I have a bunch of transformations on an Observable:
operation()
.flatMap(toSomething())
.map(toSomethingElse())
.flatMap(toYetSomethingElse())
.subscribeOn(Schedulers.newThread())
.observeOn(AdroidSchedulers.mainThread())
.subscribe(observer);
Are all of these operations synchronous except for the last call to flatMap()? Or are all of the operations run on the thread that I told it to subscribe on?
I figured this out, with a test. The following test passes (which means the emissions on the Observable are all on the same background thread):
volatile long observableThreadId;
#Test
public void transformedObservables_shouldRunInSameThread() {
Observable.from(new String[]{"a", "b", "c"}) //
.flatMap(new Func1<String, Observable<Object>>() {
#Override public Observable<Object> call(String s) {
observableThreadId = Thread.currentThread().getId();
return Observable.from((Object) s);
}
}) //
.map(new Func1<Object, String>() {
#Override public String call(Object o) {
long id = Thread.currentThread().getId();
if (id != observableThreadId) {
throw new RuntimeException("Thread ID mismatch");
}
return (String) o;
}
}) //
.flatMap(new Func1<String, Observable<String>>() {
#Override public Observable<String> call(String s) {
long id = Thread.currentThread().getId();
if (id != observableThreadId) {
throw new RuntimeException("Thread ID mismatch");
}
return Observable.from(s);
}
}) //
.subscribeOn(Schedulers.newThread()) //
.observeOn(Schedulers.currentThread()) //
.subscribe(new Observer<String>() {
#Override public void onCompleted() {
assertThat(Thread.currentThread().getId()).isNotEqualTo(observableThreadId);
}
#Override public void onError(Throwable throwable) {
}
#Override public void onNext(String s) {
}
});
System.out.println("blah");
}
===============================
UPDATE:
A better answer can actually be found in the ReactiveX documentation on Scheduler:
By default, an Observable and the chain of operators that you apply to
it will do its work, and will notify its observers, on the same thread
on which its Subscribe method is called. The SubscribeOn operator
changes this behavior by specifying a different Scheduler on which the
Observable should operate. The ObserveOn operator specifies a
different Scheduler that the Observable will use to send notifications
to its observers.
... the SubscribeOn operator designates which thread the Observable will
begin operating on, no matter at what point in the chain of operators
that operator is called. ObserveOn, on the other hand, affects the
thread that the Observable will use below where that operator appears.
For this reason, you may call ObserveOn multiple times at various
points during the chain of Observable operators in order to change on
which threads certain of those operators operate.
Related
I have a test project with Room database. Using Asynctask I can successfully insert an object with some test data into the database. I'm trying to learn RxJava and replace Asynctask with RxJava's observer, but it doesn't work. I have read alot of documentation and watched tutorials, but I don't think I quite get it. Here's the relevant code:
Here I set my Room object with the data from my List:
for(ObjectForArray item: listToDatabase) {
myRoomEntity.setName( item.getName() );
Log.d( "TAG", myRoomEntity.getName() );
}
Then I try to use RxJava Observable to insert data into the database. This was originally and successfully done using Asynctask:
Observable<MyRoomEntity> myRX = Observable
.just(myRoomEntity)
.subscribeOn( Schedulers.io() )
.observeOn( AndroidSchedulers.mainThread() );
myRX.subscribe( new Observer<MyRoomEntity>() {
#Override
public void onSubscribe(Disposable d) {
Log.d("TAG ONSUBSCRIBE", d.toString());
try {
myViewModel.insertDatabase( myRoomEntity );
Log.d( "TAG", "Populating database Success" );
}catch(Error error) {
Log.d( "TAG", error.toString() );
}
}
The OnNext, OnError and OnComplete are empty.
When I run the project it crashes with the error:
Cannot access database on the main thread since it may potentially lock the UI for a long period of time.
I'm obviously using RxJava wrong since the point is to do asynchronous tasks away from the main thread.
i have use RX java in replace of Asyntask as it has been deprecated in android 9
there are multiple replacements that android provides like Executors, threads, Listenable Futures , Coroutines 🔥, so you are looking how to implement this with rxjava and how RX Java java helps your to migrate just add these dependencies first in gradle
implementation "io.reactivex.rxjava2:rxjava:2.2.20"
implementation "io.reactivex.rxjava2:rxandroid:2.1.1"
once you import lets start working with RX java i will let you know where you can put background task, pre execute, on post execute like asynctask
lets start codding with Rx java first , i have comment in the method that will help you to put the code
Observable.fromCallable(new Callable<Boolean>() {
#Override
public Boolean call() throws Exception {
/// here is your background task
return true;
}
}).subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()).observeOn(AndroidSchedulers.mainThread())
.subscribe(new Observer<Boolean>() {
#Override
public void onSubscribe(Disposable d) {
//// pre execute here is my progress dialog
showProgressDialog(getString(R.string.scanning));
}
#Override
public void onNext(Boolean aBoolean) {
//// here is on sucess you can do anystuff here like
if (aBoolean){
/// if its value true you can go ahead with this
}
}
#Override
public void onError(Throwable e) {
/// this helps you to go if there is any error show dialog whatever you wants here
Log.e("error of kind",e.getMessage() );
}
#Override
public void onComplete() {
/// when your task done means post execute
}
});
once its done lets start working with implementation
Observable.fromCallable(new Callable<Boolean>() {
#Override
public Boolean call() throws Exception {
/// here is your background task
uribitmap = getScannedBitmap(original, points);
uri = Utils.getUri(getActivity(), uribitmap);
scanner.onScanFinish(uri);
return true;
}
}).subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()).observeOn(AndroidSchedulers.mainThread())
.subscribe(new Observer<Boolean>() {
#Override
public void onSubscribe(Disposable d) {
//// pre execute here is my progress dialog
showProgressDialog(getString(R.string.scanning));
}
#Override
public void onNext(Boolean aBoolean) {
//// here is on sucess you can do anystuff here like
if (aBoolean){
/// if its value true you can go ahead with this
}
}
#Override
public void onError(Throwable e) {
/// this helps you to go if there is any error show dialog whatever you wants here
Log.e("error of kind",e.getMessage() );
}
#Override
public void onComplete() {
/// when your task done means post execute
uribitmap.recycle();
dismissDialog();
}
});
now i will do this with executors :
/// pre execute you can trigger to progress dialog
showProgressDialog(getString(R.string.scanning));
ExecutorService executors = Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor();
executors.execute(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
//// do background heavy task here
final Bitmap uribitmap = getScannedBitmap(original, points);
uri = Utils.getUri(getActivity(), uribitmap);
scanner.onScanFinish(uri);
new Handler(Looper.getMainLooper()).post(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
//// Ui thread work like
uribitmap.recycle();
dismissDialog();
}
});
}
});
You are getting this error because you are trying to insert an Object on the main (UI) thread.
You should do something like this:
Observable.fromCallable(() -> myViewModel.insertDatabase( myRoomEntity ))
.subscribeOn( Schedulers.io() )
.observeOn( AndroidSchedulers.mainThread() );
And then use an Observer to subscribe to the Observable.
Please try restructuring your code like this:
Completable.fromAction(() -> myViewModel.insertDatabase(myRoomEntity))
.subscribeOn(Schedulers.io())
.observeOn(AndroidSchedulers.mainThread())
.subscribe(() -> Log.d("TAG", "Populating database Success"),
throwable -> Log.d("TAG", throwable.toString()))
Considerations:
If your myRoomEntity is not available before this whole construct gets subscribed, make sure you use defer http://reactivex.io/documentation/operators/defer.html
Your subscribe section handlers are operating on "main", that's why you were receiving a crash.
If possible, avoid unnecessary just calls
Here I want to call n threads and execute my function padrDao.saveGuidanceDetails(sgd) which is a DAO method performing insert operation and return a long value as shown in below code.
Im using Callable, but it asks me to return some value but I'm not familiar with threads to use Runnable for the same job. Can someone pls validate if code is right or any modifications to be done? I feel code is wrong since there is a return statement inside callable and that will take me outside the main method for the first task itself.
int totalThreadsNeeded=listForguidanceItems.size();
ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(totalThreadsNeeded);
List<Callable<Void>> runnableTasks = new ArrayList<>();
final PriceLineItemsResultExt response1=response;
for(final ProductLineItemResultExt item: listForguidanceItems)
{
int counter=0;
final SavedGuidanceDetailsDto sgd=list.get(counter);
Callable<Void> task1 = new Callable() {
public Void call() {
if (sgd.hasGuidance())
{
if (response1.isSaveGuidance()) {
long guidanceDetailsId = padrDao.saveGuidanceDetails(sgd);
item.setGuidanceDetailsId(String.valueOf(guidanceDetailsId));
}
}
return null;
}};
counter++;
runnableTasks.add(task1);
}
try {
executor.invokeAll(runnableTasks);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
logger.info("Thread fail exception " + e);
}
executor.shutdown();
Pls suggest me modifications with the right code? Thanks in advance
To use Runnable you can simply replace these :
Callable<Void> task1 = new Callable() {
public Void call() {
...
With
Runnable task1 = new Runnable {
public void run() {
...
And with runnable you wouldn't have to return anything.
Of course you'd also need to modify you runnableTasks to be a List<Runnable> if tou still want to store these in a Collection (possibly not), and also change the way you submit them in the ExecutorService as :
executor.submit(your_Runnable_object)
I read much about the JavaFX GUI Model, Plattform->RunLater and Threads, but I still do not figure out how to get this right. I had a JavaFX GUI which on a button click executed a process and updated a Progress Bar and Label. This was running well with Threading and Platform, but I had to Change this to an Observer Model.
I invoke a Progress Tracker in a Singleton Model, which gets updated by the class executing the process and is Observable. I implemented an Observer as well which should update the two UI Elements.
GUI Controller with Button Event
private void createKeyPressed(ActionEvent event) {
// Make Progressbar visible
pbKeyProgress.visibleProperty().set(true);
if (!Check.keyFileExistant() || cbKeyOverwrite.selectedProperty().get()) {
ProgressTracker.getTracker().addObserver(new ProgressObserver(pbKeyProgress, lblKeyProgress));
Creator.createKey(cbKeyLength.getValue());
} else {
}
}
Progress Observer
public class ProgressObserver implements Observer {
private final ProgressBar progressBar;
private final Label statusLabel;
public ProgressObserver(ProgressBar progressBar, Label statusLabel) {
this.progressBar = progressBar;
this.statusLabel = statusLabel;
}
#Override
public void update(Observable o, Object o1) {
Platform.runLater(() -> {
System.out.println("Tracker set to "+ProgressTracker.getProgress() + " " + ProgressTracker.getStatus());
progressBar.setProgress(ProgressTracker.getProgress());
statusLabel.setText(ProgressTracker.getStatus());
});
}
}
Progress Tracker
public synchronized void setTracker(int currentStep, String currentStatus) {
checkInstance();
instance.step = currentStep;
instance.status = currentStatus;
instance.notifyObservers();
System.out.println(instance.countObservers());
}
Creator
public static void createKey(String length) {
Task<Void> task;
task = new Task<Void>() {
#Override
public Void call() throws Exception {
initTracker(0,"Start");
doStuff();
ProgressTracker.getTracker().setTracker(1,"First");
doStuff();
ProgressTracker.getTracker().setTracker(2,"Second");
// and so on
return null;
}
};
new Thread(task)
.start();
}
The Print within the ProgressTracker gets executed. However, if I add a print within the update of the Observer nothing will be printed. If I check within the Progresstracker, the Observer Count is 1.
Why does the Observer not get notified or execute anything, even if the Notify is called? Did I get the Threading and Execution Modell wrong?
The Progress Bar and the Label will also stay on their initial values.
Don't reinvent the wheel. The JavaFX Properties Pattern is a ready-made implementation of the Observable pattern: there is no need to implement it yourself. Additionally, Task already defines methods for updating various properties, which can be called from any thread but will schedule the actual updates on the FX Application Thread. See updateProgress() and updateMessage(), for example.
So you can do, for example:
public static Task<Void> createKey(String length) {
Task<Void> task;
task = new Task<Void>() {
final int totalSteps = ... ;
#Override
public Void call() throws Exception {
updateProgress(0, totalSteps);
updateMessage("Start");
doStuff();
updateProgress(1, totalSteps);
updateMessage("First");
doStuff();
updateProgress(2, totalSteps);
updateMessage("Second");
// and so on
return null;
}
};
new Thread(task)
.start();
return task ;
}
and
private void createKeyPressed(ActionEvent event) {
// Make Progressbar visible
pbKeyProgress.visibleProperty().set(true);
if (!Check.keyFileExistant() || cbKeyOverwrite.selectedProperty().get()) {
Task<Void> task = Creator.createKey(cbKeyLength.getValue());
pbKeyProgress.progressProperty().bind(task.progressProperty());
lblKeyProgress.textProperty().bind(task.messageProperty());
} else {
}
}
We are launching a website that will have a very heavy volume for a short period of time. It is basically giving tickets. The code is written in Java, Spring & Hibernate. I want to mimic the high volume by spawning multiple threads and trying to get the ticket using JUnit test case. The problem is that in my DAO class the code just simply dies after I begin transaction. I mean there is no error trace in the log file or anything like that. Let me give some idea about the way my code is.
DAO code:
#Repository("customerTicketDAO")
public class CustomerTicketDAO extends BaseDAOImpl {// BaseDAOImpl extends HibernateDaoSupport
public void saveCustomerTicketUsingJDBC(String customerId) {
try{
getSession().getTransaction().begin(); //NOTHING HAPPENS AFTER THIS LINE OF CODE
// A select query
Query query1 = getSession().createSQLQuery("my query omitted on purpose");
.
.
// An update query
Query query2 = getSession().createSQLQuery("my query omitted on purpose");
getSession().getTransaction().commite();
} catch (Exception e) {
}
}
Runnable code:
public class InsertCustomerTicketRunnable implements Runnable {
#Autowired
private CustomerTicketDAO customerTicketDAO;
public InsertCustomerTicketRunnable(String customerId) {
this.customerId = customerId;
}
#Override
public void run() {
if (customerTicketDAO != null) {
customerTicketDAO.saveCustomerTicketUsingJDBC(customerId);
}
}
}
JUnit method:
#RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
#ContextConfiguration(locations={"file:src/test/resources/applicationContext-test.xml"})
public class DatabaseTest {
#Before
public void init() {
sessionFactory = (SessionFactory)applicationContext.getBean("sessionFactory");
Session session = SessionFactoryUtils.getSession(sessionFactory, true);
TransactionSynchronizationManager.bindResource(sessionFactory, new SessionHolder(session));
customerTicketDAO = (CustomerTicketDAO)applicationContext.getBean("customerTicketDAO");
}
#After
public void end() throws Exception {
SessionHolder sessionHolder = (SessionHolder) TransactionSynchronizationManager.unbindResource(sessionFactory);
SessionFactoryUtils.closeSession(session);
}
#Test
public void saveCustomerTicketInMultipleThreads () throws Exception {
ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(NTHREDS);
for (int i=0; i<1000; i++) {
executor.submit(new InsertCustomerTicketRunnable(i));
}
// This will make the executor accept no new threads
// and finish all existing threads in the queue
executor.shutdown();
// Wait until all threads are finish
executor.awaitTermination(1, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
}
I see no data being inserted into the database. Can someone please point me as to where I am going wrong?
Thanks
Raj
SessionFactory is thread safe but Session is not. So my guess is that you need to call SessionFactoryUtils.getSession() from within each thread, so that each thread gets its own instance. You are currently calling it from the main thread, so all children threads try to share the same instance.
Naughty, naughty!
public void saveCustomerTicketUsingJDBC(String customerId) {
try {
getSession().getTransaction().begin(); //NOTHING HAPPENS AFTER THIS LINE OF CODE
.
.
} catch (Exception e) {
}
}
You should never (well, hardly ever) have an empty catch block, if there is a problem you will find that your code 'just simply dies' with no log messages. Oh look, that's what's happening ;)
At the very minimum you should log the exception, that will go a long way towards you helping you find what the problem is (and from there, the solution).
I'm trying to implement a cancellable worker thread using the new threading constructs in System.Threading.Tasks namespace.
So far I have have come up with this implementation:
public sealed class Scheduler
{
private CancellationTokenSource _cancellationTokenSource;
public System.Threading.Tasks.Task Worker { get; private set; }
public void Start()
{
_cancellationTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
Worker = System.Threading.Tasks.Task.Factory.StartNew(
() => RunTasks(_cancellationTokenSource.Token),
_cancellationTokenSource.Token
);
}
private static void RunTasks(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
while (!cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested)
{
Thread.Sleep(1000); // simulate work
}
}
public void Stop()
{
try
{
_cancellationTokenSource.Cancel();
Worker.Wait(_cancellationTokenSource.Token);
}
catch (OperationCanceledException)
{
// OperationCanceledException is expected when a Task is cancelled.
}
}
}
When Stop() returns I expect Worker.Status to be TaskStatus.Canceled.
My unit tests have shown that under certain conditions Worker.Status remains set to TaskStatus.Running.
Is this a correct way to implement a cancellable worker thread?
I believe that the problem is in your call to
Worker.Wait(_cancellationTokenSource.Token);
That's waiting for the token to be signalled - which it already is, because you've just called Cancel(). If you change that to just
Worker.Wait();
then I believe you'll see a state of RanToCompletion. You won't see Canceled, because your task isn't throwing OperationCanceledException. If you change your RunTasks method to call
cancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested()
at the end, then you'll need to catch an AggregateException in Stop - but then you'll see a state of Canceled at the end.
At least, that's what my experimentation shows :)