Develop Reference

Thread.sleep() vs handler.postDelay() to execute network call in every 30sec

I want perform a network call in every 30sec to push some metrics to Server. Currently I am doing it using thread.sleep(). I found some articles saying thread.sleep() has some drawbacks. I need to know am I doing it right? or Replacing the thread with Handler will improve my code?
public static void startSending(final Context con) {
if (running) return;
running = true;
threadToSendUXMetrics = new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
do {
try {
Thread.sleep(AugmedixConstants.glassLogsPushInterval);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
mLogger.error(interrupt_exception + e.getMessage());
}
// to do to send each time, should have some sleep code
if (AugmedixConstants.WEBAPP_URL.equals(AugmedixConstants.EMPTY_STRING)||!StatsNetworkChecker.checkIsConnected(con)) {
Utility.populateNetworkStat();
mLogger.error(may_be_provider_not_login_yet);
} else
sendUXMetrics();
} while (running);
if (!uxMetricsQueue.isEmpty()) sendUXMetrics();
}
});
threadToSendUXMetrics.start();
}

If You are using only one thread in the network, then usage of the thread.sleep() is fine. If there are multiple threads in synchronization, then the thread.sleep() command will block all the other threads that are currently running.
As per the details you've provided, there is only one thread present which isn't blocking any other active threads which are running in synchronization, so using thread.sleep() shouldn't be a problem.

Use Handler.postDelayed to schedule tasks if you are working in UI Thread and Thread.sleep if you are working in background thread.
Apparently you are sending some data using network, you must do it in the background thread, hence Thread.sleep is recommended.

Simple is:
Thread.sleep(millisSeconds): With this method, you only can call in background tasks, for example in AsyncTask::doInBackground(), you can call to delay actions after that. RECOMMENDED CALL THIS METHOD IN BACKGROUND THREAD.
Handler().postDelayed({METHOD}, millisSeconds): With this instance, METHOD will trigged after millisSeconds declared.
But, to easy handle life cycle of Handler(), you need to declare a Handler() instance, with a Runnable instance. For example, when your Activity has paused or you just no need call that method again, you can remove callback from Handler(). Below is example:
public class MainActivity extends Activity {
private Handler mHandler = Handler();
public void onStart(...) {
super.onStart(...)
this.mHandler.postDelayed(this.foo, 1000)
}
public void onPaused(...) {
this.mHandler.removeCallback(this.foo)
super.onPaused(...)
}
private Runnable foo = new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
// your code will call after 1 second when activity start
// end remove callback when activity paused
// continue call...
mHandler.postDelayed(foo, 1000)
}
}
}
The code above just for reference, I type by hand because don't have IDE to write then copy paste.

Running a Method for a Certain Number of Time

So I have this method called PredictionEngine(int) that I want to run a certain number of time with a certain time-delay between each run. The method goes like this:
private void PredictionEngine(int delay) throws Exception {
final Handler handler = new Handler();
handler.postDelayed(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
enableStrictMode();
String val = null;
try {
if (tHighPass == 0 && tLowPass == 0 && tKalman == 1) {
//Magic
} else {
//Magic
}
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
enableStrictMode();
new DropboxTask(side_output, "Result", val).execute();
}
}, delay);
}
As obvious, I am running a network operation in the main thread as this is a research app and no client is ever going to use it.
I want this whole function to run for say a 100 times with a certain delay, say 2 seconds. The initial thought was to do this:
for(loop 100 times){
PredictionEngine(int)
Thread.sleep(2000); //sorry for StackOverflow programming.
}
However I don't want to block the main thread as I am reading some sensor data there. Any ideas for the same would be very helpful!
Thanks.

The best way to solve this is by using rxJava library, because it allow to create, modify and consume streams of events. You can implement everything in a few lines of code and modify it so operatioin will be performed in background as well.
Observable.interval(1, TimeUnit.SECONDS)
.take(100)
// switch execution into main thread
.subscribeOn(AndroidSchedulers.mainThread())
.subscribe(t -> {
doSomethingOnMainThread();
});
On the other hand, there is another solution- you can use Handler, which is usually bein used for thread communication. It has method .postDelayed() allowing you to postpone execution of task. Handler can be conveniently used along with HandlerThread. But, rxJava is more convenient and simple way to solve your problem.

While creating your Handler, you can provide a looper as one of the constructors parameters that is based on different thread then the main thread:
HandlerThread thread = new HandlerThread("Thread name", android.os.Process.THREAD_PRIORITY_BACKGROUND);
thread.start();
Looper looper = thread.getLooper();
Handler handler = new MyHandler(looper);
Messages received by MyHandler will be processed on a separated thread, leaving the UI thread clear from interferences.
To loop on the task periodically, use something like:
for (int i=0; i<100; i++){
handler.postDelayed(new Runnable(){
...
...
...
}, i*delay);
}
This way, in case you decide that the periodic tasks need to be canceled, you will always be able to invoke:
handler.removeCallbacksAndMessages(null);

I tried to solve the issue as follows without blocking the main Thread
I created the worker thread for looping and still running the predictionEngine() on main thread
MyThread t = new MyThread(2000, 3000); // delay and sleep
t.startExecution();
Worker thread class looks as follows
class MyThread extends Thread{
private int delay;
long sleep;
MyThread(int delay, long sleep){
this.delay = delay;
this.sleep = sleep;
}
#Override
public void run() {
for(int i = 0; i < 100; i++){
try {
MainActivity.this.runOnUiThread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
predictEngine(delay);
}
});
Log.i("Mtali","About to pause loop before next predict");
sleep(sleep);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
void startExecution(){
start();
}
}
Hop this helps!

Handler postDelayed and Thread.sleep()

I have a thread.sleep and a handler postDelayed in my code:
handler.postDelayed(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
Log.e(TAG, "I ran");
mIsDisconnect = false;
}
}, DISCONNECT_DELAY);
After the handler code and after the user press the button I have this:
while (mIsDisconnect) {
try {
Thread.sleep(DELAY);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
Log.e(TAG, "problem sleeping");
}
}
If the user wait long enough I can get the "I ran" in my log. But if the user press the button before the delay is up, it seems that the postDelayed never gets a chance to execute. My question is, does the thread.sleep() mess with the handler postDelayed?
Edit: The purpose of this code is that I want to continue the program only after DISCONNECT_DELAY seconds has already passed. So if the user clicks to early, I have to wait for the elapsed time to finish.

I'm assuming your handler is associated with the same thread the other loop is running on. (A Handler is associated with the thread it is created in.)
postDelayed() puts the Runnable in the handler thread's message queue. The message queue is processed when control returns to the thread's Looper.
Thread.sleep() simply blocks the thread. The control does not return to the Looper and messages cannot be processed. Sleeping in the UI thread is almost always wrong.
To accomplish what you're trying to do, remove the sleep and simply use postDelayed() to post a Runnable that changes your app state (like you already do by setting a member variable mIsDisconnect). Then in the onClick() just check the app state (mIsDisconnect flag) whether it is ok to proceed or not.

I guess that the second section runs on the main thread and you didn't move between threads.
You can't put the main thread on sleep, you stop all UI issues and other stuff that should be run on this thread (the main thread).
Use postDelayed of the handler instead.

The best way is with a sentinel:
runnable = new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
// condition to pass (sentinel == 1)
if (isActive == 0) {
handler.postDelayed(this, 1000); // 1 seconds
}
else {
// isActive == 1, we pass!
// Do something aweseome here!
}
}
};
handler = new Handler();
handler.postDelayed(runnable, 100);

Issues run code periodically updating button colors on the UI

I'm trying to run a piece of code periodically every 3 seconds that can change the color of a button.
So far I have:
ScheduledExecutorService scheduleTaskExecutor = Executors.newScheduledThreadPool(2);
// This schedule a runnable task every 2 minutes
scheduleTaskExecutor.scheduleAtFixedRate(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
queryFeedback2(); // display the data
}
}, 0, 3, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
This code will run the piece of code but will not update my UI with the results.
Firstly, what code be cause my UI updating issues?
And secondly, is this the way I should be running my code periodically? Is there a better way?

Yes, there are few options available.
Thread
Runnable
TimerTask
As stated by alex2k8 in their answer here:
final Runnable r = new Runnable()
{
public void run()
{
tv.append("Hello World");
handler.postDelayed(this, 1000);
}
};
handler.postDelayed(r, 1000);
Or we can use normal thread for example (with original Runner):
Thread thread = new Thread()
{
#Override
public void run() {
try {
while(true) {
sleep(1000);
handler.post(r);
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
};
thread.start();
You may consider your runnable object just as a command that can be
sent to the message queue for execution, and handler as just a helper
object used to send that command.
More details are here
http://developer.android.com/reference/android/os/Handler.html
You can update the UI from
handler. Tutorial for using handler, thread is available here.
Selecting between above mentioned option is really based on what kind of functionality you need. If you only need to do something at few interval then any of the above should be fine.

Handler/Runnable delays producing events that are out of sync sometimes

When trying to learn how to create a delay I researched and found the dominant answer to be to use Handler/Runnable/postDelayed.
Handler handler=new Handler();
final Runnable r = new Runnable()
{
public void run()
{
delayedMethod();
}
};
handler.postDelayed(r, 1000);
That worked ok for a while, but I've added a few more things going on and now they are sometimes happening in the wrong order.
This set of events:
paintScreen1()
...
delayedPaintScreen2()
...
paintScreen3()
is screwing up (sometimes) and doing this:
paintScreen1()
...
paintScreen3()
...
delayedPaintScreen2() (runs last and gets messed up by the actions of paintScreen3)
There doesn't seem to be another good way to create delays - one that doesn't create threads.
Solutions I have tried in order to make sure the code events run in the proper order:
0 Putting the main process inside one big synchronized block.
1 Putting the synchronized keyword in the method name of every method involved in the main process.
2 Putting the synchronized keyword only on the method in the Runnable.
3 Taking away the Handler/Runnable/postdelayed and replacing with handler.sendEmptyMessageDelayed(0,1000)
4 Making one Handler instance variable, used by every Handler/Runnable block (as opposed to Handler handler1, handler2, handler3, etc.)
5
Handler handler=new Handler();
final Runnable r = new Runnable()
{
public void run()
{
waitOver = true;
}
};
handler.postDelayed(r, 1000);
while (waitOver == false) {
}
delayedMethod();
waitOver = false;
My next attempt may be to try to used the Thread class somehow so I can call thread.join().
When that fails the next thing will be very long and complicated, I fear.
Any suggestions?
Any simple examples of a solution?
Thanks
Edit: I may be confused about whether Handler/Runnable results in literal threading or not.
Edit: It's a game. User makes a move, screen updated to show the move, calculation tells that they scored a point, recolor the boxes on the screen, add delay to allow user to see their point, then call method to removed colored squares, when that method completes and we return to the method that called it (containing the Handler/runnable), the code continues down to a point where it calls another method that results in a random square of the board being turned purple. So it should happen user-move, repaint to show point scored, delay so user can see point scored, repaint to erases squares, then random purple square happens. Sometimes what will happen (as far as I can tell) is the random purple square will execute before it should, choose one of the squares where the point was scored, interfere, and make it so the cleanup method gets confused and fails to cleanup.
mainmethod() {
...
if (pointscored) {
squaresglow();
...
//delay so user can see the glow before the cleanup happens
Handler-runnable
cleanup();
postdelayed
}
...
purpleSquare();
}
I hope this is not even more confusing. purpleSquare runs before cleanup and things get screwed up.
Edit:
Tried this:
6
CountDownLatch doneSignal = new CountDownLatch(1);
Handler handler=new Handler();
final LatchedRunnable lr = new LatchedRunnable(doneSignal);
handler.postDelayed(lr, COMPUTER_MOVE_DELAY);
try {
doneSignal.await();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
class LatchedRunnable implements Runnable {
private final CountDownLatch doneSignal;
LatchedRunnable(CountDownLatch doneSignal) {
this.doneSignal = doneSignal;
}
public void run() {
delayedProcess();
doneSignal.countDown();
}
}
7
ExecutorService executorService = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(5);
final CountDownLatch latch = new CountDownLatch(1);
executorService.execute(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
try {
Looper.prepare();
Handler handler=new Handler();
final Runnable r = new Runnable()
{
public void run()
{
delayedMethodCleanupCalc();
}
};
handler.postDelayed(r, 4000);
} finally {
latch.countDown();
}
}
});
try {
latch.await();
delayedMethodPaintScreen();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// todo >> handle exception
}

purpleSquare runs before cleanup and things get screwed up
mainmethod() {
...
if (pointscored) {
squaresglow();
...
//delay so user can see the glow before the cleanup happens
Handler-runnable
cleanup();
postdelayed
}
...
purpleSquare();
}
You have a design flaw here. Think of Handlers as a queue of messages that will execute code "later" whenever the processor decides to process messages and postDelayed as an inexact way to stuff that message at the bottom of the queue. If you call postDelayed and you still have lines of code left in the current method to execute, chances are very good that those lines will execute before postDelayed messages are even received.
What you are trying to do is to make sure purpleSquare() gets called after the pointscored routine has done it's job, which may require waiting for it to finish. PostDelaying to the message queue is not what you should be doing in this case. What you should be using is a semaphore and a pointScored thread.
Consider the following code design:
final Runnable pointScoredTask = new Runnable() {
public synchronized void run() {
try {
squaresglow();
//...
Thread.sleep(2500); //2.5 sec before cleanup occurs
cleanup();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
}
notify(); //make sure we call notify even if interrupted
}
};
void mainmethod() {
//...
if (bPointWasScored) {
synchronized (pointScoredTask) {
try {
Thread psThread = new Thread(pointScoredTask,"pointscored");
psThread.start(); //thread will start to call run(), but we get control back to avoid race condition
pointScoredTask.wait(6000); //wait no more than 6 sec for the notify() call
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
}
}
//if a point was scored, nothing past this line will execute until scoreglow has been cleaned up
}
//...
purpleSquare();
//...
}
I know you'd rather avoid threads, but there are some things that just work much better when you use them. Try the above design and see if that works out the synchronization issues you were seeing.