I got some operations in my Controller class which could take some time. So I want to show a loading dialog while this operation is running.
I tried this:
Platform.runLater(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
loadingDialog.show();
}
});
Boolean opSuccess = myService.operate();
Platform.runLater(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
loadingDialog.hide();
}
});
if (opSuccess) {
// continue
}
Now, the Problem is, the loadingDialog is never show. The UI only blocks for some time and than continues on "//continue".
So it seems, the runLater call is blocked by the blocking operation (operate)?
I also tried CoundDownLatch, to wait for loadingDialog.show() to complete, before running myService.operate(). But the latch.await() method never completes.
So my question is, how my I show the loadingDialog until myService.operate() finished and returned true or false? Do I have to put the operate() call into another thread and run it async or is there an easier way?
Thanks for help.
Are you sure your entire code does not run in the JavaFX Thread?
Methods of your controller class usually do and I assume it due to your description.
However, better use the Task class. Here you'll find a tutorial and a short snippet for your application:
// here runs the JavaFX thread
// Boolean as generic parameter since you want to return it
Task<Boolean> task = new Task<Boolean>() {
#Override public Boolean call() {
// do your operation in here
return myService.operate();
}
};
task.setOnRunning((e) -> loadingDialog.show());
task.setOnSucceeded((e) -> {
loadingDialog.hide();
Boolean returnValue = task.get();
// process return value again in JavaFX thread
});
task.setOnFailed((e) -> {
// eventual error handling by catching exceptions from task.get()
});
new Thread(task).start();
I assumed Java 8 and the possibility to use Lambda expressions. Of course it is possible without them.
You are better off making use of concurrency mechanisms/Worker interfaces in JavaFx - Tasks and services instead of using Platform.runLater(). The tasks and services allow you to manage the long running tasks in a separate thread. They also provide callbacks to indicate the progress of the tasks.
You could explore further at http://docs.oracle.com/javafx/2/threads/jfxpub-threads.htm
Also have a look at the Ensemble JavaFX samples for Tasks and Services - http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/overview/javafx-samples-2158687.html
Related
I would understand why
scene.setCursor(Cursor.WAIT);
long task...
scene.setCursor(Cursor.DEFAULT);
needs new threads; it works with:
private void set_cursore_attesa(final Scene scene)
{
Runnable r=new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
scene.setCursor(Cursor.WAIT);
}
};
Thread t=new Thread(r);
t.start();
}
private void set_cursore_normale(final Scene scene)
{
Runnable r=new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
scene.setCursor(Cursor.DEFAULT);
}
};
Thread t=new Thread(r);
t.start();
}
in my function:
set_cursore_attesa(scene);
long task...
set_cursore_normale(scene);
why I can't use the same thread?
I:
set my cursor to WAIT (it goes in GUI queue)
do my long task... (it goes in GUI queue but I expected that cursor changing, that is up in queue, it is executed before this)
reset my cursor to DEFAULT (after my task has finished)
So, my long task doesn't go in MAIN queue? because, if it goes in main queue, I expected it's executed after my WAIT cursor that is inserted in queue first.
Why this behavior?
Without the threads, your code is being executed on the FX Application Thread. This is the thread that is (effectively) responsible for rendering the UI to the screen and for processing user input. If you execute a long-running task on this thread, then you prevent any of the normal functionality of the FX Application Thread from occurring until your long-running task is complete. In particular, if you do
scene.setCursor(Cursor.WAIT);
longRunningTask();
scene.setCursor(Cursor.DEFAULT);
then the settings take place in the order you specify, but the scene does not get rerendered until all lines of code are complete. Hence you never actually see any changes to the UI - including the change to the cursor - until after your code is complete. The next time the FX Application Thread has an opportunity to render the scene, the cursor is set to Cursor.DEFAULT, and you never see the wait cursor.
There are two basic rules for multithreading and JavaFX (and the same rules generally apply to most UI toolkits):
Any changes to the UI must be performed on the FX Application Thread
Long-running processes should not be performed on the FX Application Thread (as they make the UI unresponsive)
So your solution is not actually correct, because you violate both of those rules. You should
Set the cursor to WAIT on the FX Application Thread
Start your long running task on a background thread
When the task is complete, set the cursor back to DEFAULT, on the FX Application Thread.
You can do this using a Task:
scene.setCursor(Cursor.WAIT);
Task<Void> task = new Task<Void>() {
#Override
public Void call() {
// long running task here...
return null ;
}
};
task.setOnSucceeded(e -> scene.setCursor(Cursor.DEFAULT));
new Thread(task).start();
I'm trying to get a responsive JavaFX graphical interface while executing a cmd command.
The command I'm executing is the following.
youtube-dl.exe --audio-format mp3 --extract-audio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2vy6pJSo9c
As you see this is a youtube-downloader that converts a youtube link to an mp3-file.
I want this to be executed in a second thread and not in the main FX thread.
I've solved this by implementing interface Callable in the class StartDownloadingThread.
#Override
public Process call() throws Exception {
Process p = null;
p = ExecuteCommand(localCPara1, localCPara2, localDirectory).start();
try {
Thread.sleep(30);
}catch (InterruptedException e){}
return p;
}
The method ExecuteCommand just returns a ProcessBuilder object.
I try to use Thread.sleep to make the program return to the main thread and thus making the application responsive. Unfortunately the program still freezes.
This is how the method call is called.
ExecutorService pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(2);
StartDownloadingThread callable = new StartDownloadingThread(parameter1, parameter2, directory);
Future future = pool.submit(callable);
Process p = (Process) future.get();
p.waitFor();
How do I make my GUI responsive using the interface Callable?
Using a executor to run a task just for you to use the get method of the Future that is returned when submitting the task does not actually free the original thread to continue with other tasks. Later you even use the waitFor method on the original thread, which is likely to take even more time than anything you do in your Callable.
For this purpose the Task class may be better suited, since it allows you to handle success/failure on the application thread using event handlers.
Also please make sure an ExecutorService is shut down after you're done submitting tasks.
Task<Void> task = new Task<Void>() {
#Override
protected Void call() throws Exception {
Process p = null;
p = ExecuteCommand(localCPara1, localCPara2, localDirectory).start();
// why are you even doing this?
try {
Thread.sleep(30);
}catch (InterruptedException e){}
// do the rest of the long running things
p.waitFor();
return null;
}
};
task.setOnSucceeded(event -> {
// modify ui to show success
});
task.setOnFailed(event -> {
// modify ui to show failure
});
ExecutorService pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(2);
pool.submit(task);
// add more tasks...
// shutdown the pool not keep the jvm alive because of the pool
pool.shutdown();
I m sending several retrofit calls via SyncAdapter onPerformSync and I m trying to regulate http calls by sending out via a try/catch sleep statement. However, this is blocking the UI and will be not responsive only after all calls are done.
What is a better way to regulate network calls (with a sleep timer) in background in onPerformSync without blocking UI?
#Override
public void onPerformSync(Account account, Bundle extras, String authority, ContentProviderClient provider, SyncResult syncResult) {
String baseUrl = BuildConfig.API_BASE_URL;
Retrofit retrofit = new Retrofit.Builder()
.baseUrl(baseUrl)
.addConverterFactory(GsonConverterFactory.create())
.build();
service = retrofit.create(HTTPService.class);
Call<RetroFitModel> RetroFitModelCall = service.getRetroFit(apiKey, sortOrder);
RetroFitModelCall.enqueue(new Callback<RetroFitModel>() {
#Override
public void onResponse(Response<RetroFitModel> response) {
if (!response.isSuccess()) {
} else {
List<RetroFitResult> retrofitResultList = response.body().getResults();
Utility.storeList(getContext(), retrofitResultList);
for (final RetroFitResult result : retrofitResultList) {
RetroFitReview(result.getId(), service);
try {
// Sleep for SLEEP_TIME before running RetroFitReports & RetroFitTime
Thread.sleep(SLEEP_TIME);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
}
RetroFitReports(result.getId(), service);
RetroFitTime(result.getId(), service);
}
}
}
#Override
public void onFailure(Throwable t) {
Log.e(LOG_TAG, "Error: " + t.getMessage());
}
});
}
}
The "onPerformSync" code is executed within the "SyncAdapterThread" thread, not within the Main UI thread. However this could change when making asynchronous calls with callbacks (which is our case here).
Here you are using an asynchronous call of the Retrofit "call.enqueue" method, and this has an impact on thread execution. The question we need to ask at this point:
Where callback methods are going to be executed?
To get the answer to this question, we have to determine which Looper is going to be used by the Handler that will post callbacks.
In case we are playing with handlers ourselves, we can define the looper, the handler and how to process messages/runnables between handlers. But this time it is different because we are using a third party framework (Retrofit). So we have to know which looper used by Retrofit?
Please note that if Retrofit didn't already define his looper, you
could have caught an exception saying that you need a looper to
process callbacks. In other words, an asynchronous call needs to be in
a looper thread in order to post callbacks back to the thread from
where it was executed.
According to the code source of Retrofit (Platform.java):
static class Android extends Platform {
#Override CallAdapter.Factory defaultCallAdapterFactory(Executor callbackExecutor) {
if (callbackExecutor == null) {
callbackExecutor = new MainThreadExecutor();
}
return new ExecutorCallAdapterFactory(callbackExecutor);
}
static class MainThreadExecutor implements Executor {
private final Handler handler = new Handler(Looper.getMainLooper());
#Override public void execute(Runnable r) {
handler.post(r);
}
}
}
You can notice "Looper.getMainLooper()", which means that Retrofit will post messages/runnables into the main thread message queue (you can do research on this for further detailed explanation). Thus the posted message/runnable will be handled by the main thread.
So that being said, the onResponse/onFailure callbacks will be executed in the main thread. And it's going to block the UI, if you are doing too much work (Thread.sleep(SLEEP_TIME);). You can check it by yourself: just make a breakpoint in "onResponse" callback and check in which thread it is running.
So how to handle this situation? (the answer to your question about Retrofit use)
Since we are already in a background thread (SyncAdapterThread), so there is no need to make asynchronous calls in your case. Just make a Retrofit synchronous call and then process the result, or log a failure. This way, you will not block the UI.
I am working on making a scheduler, just like Windows Scheduler using Quartz.Net.
In Windows Scheduler, there is an option to stop a task from running if it takes more than the specified time. I have to implement the same in my scheduler.
But I am not able to find any extension method/setting to configure Trigger or Job accordingly.
I request some inputs or suggestions for it.
You can write small code to set a custom timout running on another thread. Implement IInterruptableJob interface and make a call to its Interrupt() method from that thread when the job should be interrupted. You can modify the following sample code as per your need. Please make necessary checks/config inputs wherever required.
public class MyCustomJob : IInterruptableJob
{
private Thread runner;
public void Execute(IJobExecutionContext context)
{
int timeOutInMinutes = 20; //Read this from some config or db.
TimeSpan timeout = TimeSpan.FromMinutes(timeOutInMinutes);
//Run your job here.
//As your job needs to be interrupted, let us create a new task for that.
var task = new Task(() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(timeout);
Interrupt();
});
task.Start();
runner = new Thread(PerformScheduledWork);
runner.Start();
}
private void PerformScheduledWork()
{
//Do what you wish to do in the schedled task.
}
public void Interrupt()
{
try
{
runner.Abort();
}
catch (Exception)
{
//log it!
}
finally
{
//do what you wish to do as a clean up task.
}
}
}
I am learning WF4 and got stuck at the following place. Please help.Thanks.
1) I have created a static method, MyMethod in a static class called Worker. Within this method I call Thread.Sleep(3000) and then print "MyMethod" called.
2) I then created an activity, DoWork (DoWork.xaml) which consists of a InvokeMethod (The target type is the Worker class in step 1 and MethodName = MyMethod).
3) In the main method, I call 2 methods called OutputSequence() and OutputParallel() which are as follows
private static void OutputSequence()
{
Sequence s = new Sequence() { Activities = new DoWork(), new DoWork() } };
WorkflowInvoker.Invoke(s);
}
private static void OutputParallel()
{
Parallel p = new Parallel() { Branches = new DoWork(), new DoWork() } };
WorkflowInvoker.Invoke(p);
}
The OutputSequence() is OK as it calls the target method twice (in sequence) but the parallel one seems to execute sequentially as well. I expected it to execute in parallel.
What am I missing.
The Parallel activity is not what you think it is - it allows you to wait for things in parallel not to execute CPU based code in parallel. The WF4 threading mode is that there is exactly one thread at a time active in the workflow.
If you put two delays in the parallel then both of those waits would occur in parallel as opposed to sequentially as they would in a sequence
The idea is you want to wait for a number of actions when you don;t know the order in which they will occur. Then the parallel activity is complete when all of its child branches have completed
Actually Parallel activity really executes all branches one-by-one and has nothing related to concurrent code execution, like two thread do.
But there is MS sample, that shows "true" concurrent execution for blocks inside of parallel activity. There is the AsyncCodeActivity in the .net 4 that allows to get concurrent execution of activities. Please check http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee358731(VS.100).aspx
Below you can find copy-pasted sample from link above:
public sealed class GenerateRandom : AsyncCodeActivity<int>
{
static Random r = new Random();
protected override IAsyncResult BeginExecute(AsyncCodeActivityContext context, AsyncCallback callback, object state)
{
// Create a delegate that references the method that implements
// the asynchronous work. Assign the delegate to the UserState,
// invoke the delegate, and return the resulting IAsyncResult.
Func<int> GetRandomDelegate = new Func<int>(GetRandom);
context.UserState = GetRandomDelegate;
return GetRandomDelegate.BeginInvoke(callback, state);
}
protected override int EndExecute(AsyncCodeActivityContext context, IAsyncResult result)
{
// Get the delegate from the UserState and call EndInvoke
Func<int> GetRandomDelegate = (Func<int>)context.UserState;
return (int)GetRandomDelegate.EndInvoke(result);
}
int GetRandom()
{
// This activity simulates taking a few moments
// to generate the random number. This code runs
// asynchronously with respect to the workflow thread.
Thread.Sleep(5000);
return r.Next(1, 101);
}
}
hope this will help for someone else