I want to optimize my code. I can see in my sample camera app, I am creating thread for takePicture. Something like:
WAY 1
private void takePicture() {
mTakePictureThread = new Thread() {
run() {
camera.takePicture(cb, cb, ..);
}
}
mTakePictureThread.start();
}
Now I can do same thing with Handler too as below:
WAY 2
//consider mTakePictureThread is started in onCreate()
//and mTakePictureHandler is global variable
private void takePicture() {
mTakePictureHandler.sendMessage(1);
}
private class TakePictureThread extends Thread {
#override
public void run() {
Looper.prepare();
mTakePictureHandler = new Handler() {
public void handlerMessage(Message msg) {
int what = msg.what;
switch(what) {
case 1:
camera.takePicture(...);
break;
default:
break;
}
}
}
Looper.loop();
}
}
Considering takePicture is called many times. So in case 1, new thread will be created as many time as takePicture is called means every time new thread will be created.
But in second case, I can always hold one handler and call takePicture just by passing a message through handler.
So my query is, which one is better considering I am calling takePicture many time. In terms of performance and memory.
I have seen people using WAY 1 always(couldn't get satisfied reply why). So can anyone explain Pros and Cons of both approach and when should I follow which approach?
The second way queries your messages and will only use one thread to take the pictures. So if your camera.takePicture(..) is not a blocking call this will result in unneccessary waiting times for your threads.
The first way can handle different query counts in the same time if your camera can broadcast the actual image.
You can find a good explanation of loopers in the answer on this question looper purpose. A looper is better if you want one thread to handle messages in a sequential manner.
Related
I am new to threading and i went through many post in stack overflow and find many solution for my problem but i am not sure which one is best for which condition.
First thing first, my problem is that i want to update one JSON file
when all threads are done with the bitmap generation at a specific path so
that i can get that all those image and update JSON file. So in
simple word my i want to run some code when all thread are done with it
execution and major requirement is that i don't want my main to be blocked because of this.
What i have found out
thread. join
excutorServive
android-priority-jobQueue (link)
Mutex in threadpool ( also let me know if any other is there)
I am confused which one is the best way to tackle my problem. if any
android expert out there can summarise that for following the two
scenerio what is the best available in android.
wait till when all thread completes
don't wait and get informed when all completes
You can have counter for your threads, after each thread is complete check how many have already completed, if not all completed, increment the number of completed threads and the last thread to complete will then run the piece of code.
You can do it like this.
In your thread:
private Runnable runnableThread= new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
try {
if (lastThreadDone){
handler.sendEmptyMessage("SUCCESS");
}
}
catch (Exception ex) {
throws ex;
}
}
};
lastThreadDone is boolean which will become true if the process is done, this is base on how you implement it.
then in you handler:
#SuppressLint("HandlerLeak")
private Handler handler = new Handler() {
#Override
public void handleMessage(Message msg) {
try {
switch (msg.what) {
case "SUCCESS": {
// your code here
break;
}
case "FAIL":
break;
default:
break;
}
}
catch (Exception ex) {
throw ex;
}
super.handleMessage(msg);
}
};
I would use a completion service and then poll until all tasks are finished. When they are done, the json file gets updated. The problem is that you need to do this async or you risk to block the ui. Therefore I would encapsulate the work with the completion service inside an intent service. If you need to update the ui you then can post local broadcasts from the intent service.
Furthermore for you cases
wait till when all thread completes
only do this when you are already on a background thread like intent service or async task
don't wait and get informed when all completes
implies the case above. Do the work async and notify the ui or some listening component with broadcasts, content observers, handlers or the 'onPostExecute' if you are using async task.
I've been writing android apps for some months now, and I'm at the point where I'm building an actual needed app.
As I want that to work nice and fast, I made a Workerthread to do all kinds of tasks in the background while the UI can...build up and work and stuff.
It's based on the Android Studio Drawer app blueprint.
In Main.onCreate I got my operator=new Operator(), which extends Thread.
Now, when loading a new Fragment, it sometimes calls MainActivity.operator.someMethod() (I made operator static so I can use it from anywhere), and after some time I realized, the only tasks actually running in background are those in the operators run() method and an Asynctask my login Fragment runs. Everything else the UI waits for to complete and therefore gets executed by the UI thread.
So I thought: no problem! My operator gets a handler which is built in run(), and I change those tasks:
public void run() {
Looper.prepare(); //Android crashed and said I had to call this
OpHandler = new Handler();
LoadLoginData();
[...Load up some Arrays with hardcoded stuff and compute for later use...]
}
public void LoadLoginData() {
OpHandler.post(LoadLoginDataRunnable);
}
private Runnable LoadLoginDataRunnable = new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
if(sharedPreferences==null)
sharedPreferences= PreferenceManager.getDefaultSharedPreferences(context);
sessionID=sharedPreferences.getString("sessionID", null);
if(sessionID!=null) {
postenID = sharedPreferences.getString("postenID", PID_STANDARD);
postenName = sharedPreferences.getString("postenName", PID_STANDARD);
context.QuickToast(sessionID, postenName, postenID);
}
}
};
context is my MainActivity, I gave the operator a reference so I could send Toasts for Debugging.
But now, the Runnables seem to not run or complete, any Log.e or Log.d stuff doesn't arrive in the console.
After some googeling and stackoverflowing, everyone is just always explaining what the difference is between Handlers, Asynctask, and Threads. And the multitask examples always only show something like new Thread(new Runnable{run(task1)}).start times 3 with different tasks.
And so became my big question:
How to correctly, over a longer time (~lifecycle of the MainActivity), with different tasks, use a background thread?
Edit: to clarify, I would also like a direct solution to my special problem.
Edit 2: after reading nikis comment (thank you), the simple answer seems to be "use HandlerThread instead of thread". Will try that as soon as I get home.
Trying a HandlerThread now. It seems my OpHandler, initialized in run(), gets destroyed or something after run() has finished, not sure whats up here (this is btw another mystery of the kind I hoped would get answered here). I get a NullpointerException as soon as I try to use it after run() has finished.
Make your worker thread own a queue of tasks. In the run() method, just pop a task from the queue and execute it. If the queue is empty, wait for it to fill.
class Operator extends Thread
{
private Deque<Runnable> tasks;
private boolean hasToStop=false;
void run()
{
boolean stop=false;
while(!stop)
{
sychronized(this)
{
stop=hasToStop;
}
Runnable task=null;
synchronized(tasks)
{
if(!tasks.isEmpty())
task=tasks.poll();
}
if(task!=null)
task.run();
}
}
void addTask(Runnable task)
{
synchronized(tasks)
{
tasks.add(task);
}
}
public synchronized void stop()
{
hasToStop=true;
}
}
while it is very convenient to use, from my understanding, AsyncTask has two important limitations:
doInBackground of any instances will share the same worker
thread, i.e. one long running AsyncTasks can block all others.
execute, onPostExecute and other "synchronizing" methods must/will always be executed on the UI-thread, i.e. not on the Thread, which wants to start the task.
I ran into trouble, when I tried to reuse some existing AsyncTasks in a background IntentService that are responsible for the client-server communication of my app. The tasks of the service would fight over time in the worker thread with those of the UI activities. Also they would force the service to fall back onto the UI-thread, although that service should perform its work quietly in the background.
How would I go about removing/circumventing these limitations? I basically want to achieve:
A framework that closely resembles AsyncTask (because I need to migrate a lot of critical code there).
Each instance of such a task should run its doInBackground on its own thread instead of a single worker thread for all instances.
Edit: Thx to VinceFR for pointing out this can be achieved by simply calling executeOnExecutor instead of execute.
The callbacks like onPostExecute should be called on the same thread that started the task by calling execute, which should not need to be the UI-thread.
I figure, I'm not the first person to require something like this. Therefore I wonder: Is there already some third-party library that can be recommended to accomplish this? If not, what would be a way to implement this?
Thanks in advance!
The solution looks like this:
All classes that spawn AsyncTasks that might interfere with each other get their own Executor like this one (make that elaborate as you like using thread pools etc.):
private Executor serviceExecutor = new Executor() {
public void execute(Runnable command) {
new Thread(command).start();
}
};
As pointed out by VinceFR you can run an AsyncTask on a given Executor by calling it like this (where payload are the parameters that you would regularly pass to a task):
task.executeOnExecutor(serviceExecutor, payload);
However, this breaks backwards-compatibility to Gingerbread and earlier. Also, if you want to support Honeycomb, you need to make sure, this call happens on the UI thread. Jelly Bean will take care of this automatically.
Now the trickier part: Keeping the service running on its own thread. As many things in Android this seems harder than it needs to be (or maybe I'm lacking some information here). You can't use an IntentService, because that will shut down automatically the first time an AsyncTask takes over and let's the onHandleIntent callback complete.
You need to setup your own thread and event loop on the service:
public class AsyncService extends Service {
private static final String TAG = AsyncService.class.getSimpleName();
private class LooperThread extends Thread {
public Handler threadHandler = null;
public void run() {
Looper.prepare();
this.threadHandler = new Handler();
Looper.loop();
}
}
private LooperThread serviceThread = null;
private Handler serviceThreadHandler = null;
#Override
// This happens on the UI thread
public void onCreate() {
super.onCreate();
}
#Override
// This happens on the UI thread
public int onStartCommand(Intent intent, int flags, int startId) {
this.serviceThread = new LooperThread();
this.serviceThread.start();
while(this.serviceThread.threadHandler == null) {
Log.d(TAG, "Waiting for service thread to start...");
}
this.serviceThreadHandler = this.serviceThread.threadHandler;
this.serviceThreadHandler.post(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
doTheFirstThingOnTheServiceThread();
}
});
return Service.START_STICKY;
}
// doTheFirstThingOnTheServiceThread
}
No you need to make sure that each time an AsyncTask returns to the UI thread, you end up in your service thread instead:
// This happens on the serviceThread
private void doTheFirstThingOnTheServiceThread() {
// do some stuff
// here we can reuse a class that performs some work on an AsyncTask
ExistingClassWithAsyncOperation someUsefullObject = new ExistingClassWithAsyncOperation();
// the existing class performs some work on an AsyncTask and reports back via an observer interface
someUsefullObject.setOnOperationCompleteListener(new OnOperationCompleteListener() {
#Override
// This happens on the UI thread (due to an ``AsyncTask`` in someUsefullObject ending)
public void onOperationComplete() {
serviceThreadHandler.post(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
doTheSecondThingOnTheServiceThread();
}
});
}
}
someUsefulObject.performOperation();
}
// This happens on the serviceThread
private void doTheSecondThingOnTheServiceThread() {
// continue working on the serviceThread
}
So, this works for me. I'd be delighted to see a simpler solution for this. Note that the solution requires the service to know that is will be called back by the ExistingClassWithAsyncOperation on the UI thread. I don't particularly like this dependency, but don't know how to do better right now. However, I don't have to rewrite a lot of existing classes that perform asynchronous operations using AsyncTask.
I have one function which queries a network server with a few "ping pongs" back and forth, and have written a custom handler to handle the message communication between my main UI thread and the communication thread (I was using AsyncTask for this, but as the program got more complex, I have decided to remove the communication code to its own class outside of the main activity).
Triggering a single instance of this thread communication from onCreate works perfectly, no problem.
I want this query to run on a regular timed basis -- in the background -- for the entire time the app is in use, so I've set up another thread called pollTimer, which I'm trying to use to call the OTHER thread at a regularly scheduled basis.
Obviously, it's crashing, or I wouldn't be posting this.
Is there a way to get a thread within a thread? Or put differently, trigger a thread from another thread?
Timer pollTimer = new Timer();
private void startPollTimer(){
pollTimer.scheduleAtFixedRate(new TimerTask(){
public void run(){
Log.d(TAG,"timer dinged");
//if the following is commented out, this "dings" every 6 seconds.
//if its not commented out, it crashes
threadedPoll();
}
}, 3120, 6000);
}
private void threadedPoll() {
testThread(asciiQueries,WorkerThreadRunnable.typeLogin);
}
edit: it would probably help to include the "testThread" function, which works by itself when called from onCreate, but does not make it when called from the Timer.
"WorkerThreadRunnable" is the massive chunk of code in its own class that has replaced the mess of having AsyncTask handle it inside the main activity.
private Handler runStatHandler = null;
Thread workerThread = null;
private void testThread(String[] threadCommands, int commandType){
if(runStatHandler == null){
runStatHandler = new ReportStatusHandler(this);
if(commandType == WorkerThreadRunnable.typeLogin){
workerThread = new Thread(new WorkerThreadRunnable(runStatHandler,threadCommands, WorkerThreadRunnable.typeLogin));
}
workerThread.start();
return;
}
//thread is already there
if(workerThread.getState() != Thread.State.TERMINATED){
Log.d(TAG,"thread is new or alive, but not terminated");
}else{
Log.d(TAG, "thread is likely deaad, starting now");
//there's no way to resurrect a dead thread
workerThread = new Thread(new WorkerThreadRunnable(runStatHandler));
workerThread.start();
}
}
You seem to be well on the way already - the nice thing about handlers, though, is that they aren't limited to the UI thread - so if you have a Handler declared by one thread, you can set it up to take asynchronous instructions from another thread
mWorkerThread = new WorkerThread()
private class WorkerThread extends Thread {
private Handler mHandler;
#Override
public void run() {
mHandler = new Handler(); // we do this here to ensure that
// the handler runs on this thread
}
public void doStuff() {
mHandler.post(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
// do stuff asynchronously
}
}
}
}
Hopefully that helps... if I'm totally off base on your problem let me know
Wots wrong with a sleep() loop? Why do you have pagefuls of complex, dodgy code when you could just loop in one thread?
I have a minor problem in one of my apps. It uses a BroadCastReceiver to detect when a call finishes and then performs some minor housekeeping tasks. These have to be delayed for a few seconds, to allow the user to see some data and to ensure that the call log has been updated. I'm currently using handler.postDelayed() for this purpose:
public class CallEndReceiver extends BroadcastReceiver {
#Override
public void onReceive(final Context context, final Intent intent) {
if (DebugFlags.LOG_OUTGOING)
Log.v("CallState changed "
+ intent.getStringExtra(TelephonyManager.EXTRA_STATE));
if (intent.getStringExtra(TelephonyManager.EXTRA_STATE)
.equalsIgnoreCase(TelephonyManager.EXTRA_STATE_IDLE)) {
SharedPreferences prefs = Utils.getPreferences(context);
if (prefs.getBoolean("auto_cancel_notification", true)) {
if (DebugFlags.LOG_OUTGOING)
Log.v("Posting Handler to remove Notification ");
final Handler mHandler = new Handler();
final Runnable mCancelNotification = new Runnable() {
public void run() {
NotificationManager notificationMgr = (NotificationManager) context
.getSystemService(Service.NOTIFICATION_SERVICE);
notificationMgr.cancel(12443);
if (DebugFlags.LOG_OUTGOING)
Log.v("Removing Notification ");
}
};
mHandler.postDelayed(mCancelNotification, 4000);
}
final Handler updateHandler = new Handler();
final Runnable mUpdate = new Runnable() {
public void run() {
if (DebugFlags.LOG_OUTGOING)
Log.v("Starting updateService");
Intent newBackgroundService = new Intent(context,
CallLogUpdateService.class);
context.startService(newBackgroundService);
}
};
updateHandler.postDelayed(mUpdate, 5000);
if (DebugFlags.TRACE_OUTGOING)
Debug.stopMethodTracing();
try
{
// Stopping old Service
Intent backgroundService = new Intent(context,
NetworkCheckService.class);
context.stopService(backgroundService);
context.unregisterReceiver(this);
}
catch(Exception e)
{
Log.e("Fehler beim Entfernen des Receivers", e);
}
}
}
}
Now I have the problem, that this setup works about 90% of the time. In about 10% of cases, the notification isn't removed. I suspect, that the thread dies before the message queue processes the message/runnable.
I'm now thinking about alternatives to postDelayed() and one of my choices is obviously the AlarmManager. However, I'm not sure about the performance impact (or the resources it uses).
Maybe there is a better way to ensure that all messages have been processed before a thread dies or another way to delay the execution of those two bits of code.
Thank you
I'm currently using handler.postDelayed() for this purpose:
That's not a good idea, assuming the BroadcastReceiver is being triggered by a filter in the manifest.
Now I have the problem, that this setup works about 90% of the time. In about 10% of cases, the notification isn't removed. I suspect, that the thread dies before the message queue processes the message/runnable.
More accurately, the process is terminated, taking everything with it.
I'm now thinking about alternatives to postDelayed() and one of my choices is obviously the AlarmManager. However, I'm not sure about the performance impact (or the resources it uses).
It's not that bad. Another possibility is to do your delayed work in an IntentService -- triggered via a call to startService() -- and have it sleep on its background thread for a couple of seconds.
Let's try a new way of doing this. Using RxJava. It's much simpler to prototype and easier to manage lots of threads if you want to ever run hundreds of such delayed tasks concurrently, sequentially, coupled with async tasks, chained with synchronous chained async calls etc.
Firstly, set up the Subscriber. Remember new on Subscriber should be done only once to avoid memory leaks.
// Set up a subscriber once
private Subscuber<Long> delaySubscriber = new Subscuber<Long> () {
#Override
public void onCompleted() {
//Wrap up things as onCompleted is called once onNext() is over
}
#Override
public void onError(Throwable e) {
//Keep an eye open for this. If onCompleted is not called, it means onError has been called. Make sure to override this method
}
#Override
public void onNext(Long aLong) {
// aLong will be from 0 to 1000
// Yuor code logic goes here
// If you want to run this code just once, just add a counter and call onComplete when the counter runs the first time
}
}
The snippet below will just emit the 1 in the onNext() of the subscriber.
Note that this is done on the Computation Threadpool created and managed by the RxJava library.
//Now when you want to start running your piece of cade, define an Observable interval that'll emit every second
private Observable<Long> runThisAfterDelay = Observable.just(1).delay(1000, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, Schedulers.computation());
// Subscribe to begin the emissions.
runThisAfterDelay.subscribe(delaySubscriber);
If you want to run a code after every one second, say, then you can do this:
private Observable<Long> runThisOnInterval = Observable.interval(1000, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, Schedulers.computation());
In addition to the first answer, you might want to consider what the API documentation says for the onReceive method:
[...] The function is normally called within the main thread of its process, so you should never perform long-running operations in it [...]
So it looks like generally it is not a good idea to start something that waits a couple of time within onReceive (even though, in your case it's less than the 10s limit).
I had a similar timinig problem with the BroadcastReceiver. I couldn't get my results processed even though I onReceive had been called with exactly what I was exepcting. It seemed that the thread the BroadastReceiver was running in, got killed before my result processing could finish. My solutuion was to kick off a new thread to perform all processing.
AlarmManager seems not to work very well for short periods of time like 10 seconds and according to user reports the behaviour heavily depends on the firmware.
At the end I decided to use Handler and Runnable in my service.
When creating the Handler, be sure to create it inside the Service class, not inside the BroadcastReceiver since in the last case you'll get Can't create Handler inside thread that has not called Looper.prepare()
public class NLService extends NotificationListenerService {
private NLServiceReceiver nlservicereciver;
Handler delayUpdateHandler = new Handler();
private Runnable runBroadcastUpdate;
public void triggerViewUpdate() {
/* Accumulate view updates for faster, resource saving operation.
Delay the update by some milliseconds.
And if there was pending update, remove it and plan new update.
*/
if (runBroadcastUpdate != null) {
delayUpdateHandler.removeCallbacks(runBroadcastUpdate);
}
runBroadcastUpdate = new Runnable() {
public void run() {
// Do the work here; execution is delayed
}
};
delayUpdateHandler.postDelayed(runBroadcastUpdate, 300);
}
class NLServiceReceiver extends BroadcastReceiver{
#Override
public void onReceive(Context context, Intent intent) {
triggerViewUpdate();
}
}
}