I am lagging in basic android concept,
As per the documentation Service is running in MainThread. and Activity(UI) also running in same thread. In what way MainThread in the android application is running both components code (Service and Activity) paralelly. How android is handling this as local Service is not a separate process. Please give me detailed explanation or any specific links
You'll notice most, if not all of the "main UI thread" methods you write, are callbacks -- they are not running any single main loop, but rather are called when needed, to perform bried tasks (ie: change UI). There is clearly an android main loop that is listening and trigerring these methods.
That same android main loop sometimes also runs Services and Handler code.
As a result, basic simple Services should not kick off extended work loops, as that would prevent focus getting back to the UI methods.
Finally, if a UI method (or Service or Handler) starts doing a lot of work, the android main loop will trigger an Application Not Responding (ANR) to kill the app.
Related
I was going through Bound Service in Android Developer website. I thought I understood the service enough but I just found another way of connecting service through Using a Messenger class especially for local service. There I got confused. Maybe I got the concept wrong.
Here is my understanding of Android Service. You create a service when
You want to do separate jobs in the background.
You want to make it a separate process.
You want to make it run in a lifecycle that's independent of the component that started it.
Confusion is the first item in the list, the definition of the background. Isn't the background a thread or process? I never thought that it can run on the main thread.
Here is the caution of service in the dev pages about.
Caution: A service runs in the main thread of its hosting process—the service does not create its own thread and does not run in a separate process (unless you specify otherwise). This means that, if your service is going to do any CPU intensive work or blocking operations (such as MP3 playback or networking), you should create a new thread within the service to do that work. By using a separate thread, you will reduce the risk of Application Not Responding (ANR) errors and the application's main thread can remain dedicated to user interaction with your activities.
Questions
Why does one choose to use service if the service function will anyway run on the main thread?
Do we have to write a service only to block ANR even if the time-consuming job is done in the main thread? Assume the service is only for my application.
Are there any practical cases or reasons to use a service as private and running in the same thread?
Application main thread is not always the UI thread. For example, when Activity is stopped, the onStop() is invoked, hence the UI thread is taken away from that Activity and moved to another Activity within the same or a different application. However it doesn't mean the application is no longer active, it can continue working in the background until it is closed either by OS or by user. Then who keeps it running in the background? It is the main thread and not the UI thread.
What are services
In Android, a Service is an application component that can perform
long-running operations in the background on the UI thread. By
background, it means that it doesn’t have a user interface. A Service
runs on the main thread of the calling Component’s process by default
(and hence can degrade responsiveness and cause ANRs), hence you
should create a new Thread to perform long running operations. A
Service can also be made to run in a completely different process.
Unlike Activity components, Services do not have any graphical
interfaces. Also Broadcast Receivers are for receiving broadcast
messages (broadcast, multicast, unicast) and perform short tasks
whereas Services are meant to do lengthy processing like streaming
music, network transactions, file I/O, interact with databases, etc.
When a Service is started by an application component like an Activity
it runs in the background and keeps running even if the user switches
to another application or the starting component is itself destroyed
Why use service
Services are given higher priority than other Background processes and
hence it’s less likely that Android will terminate it. Although it can
be configured to restart once there is ample resources available
again. You should go through the different processes and their
priority/important level in the documentation on processes and
threads. Assigning them the same priority as foreground activities is
definitely possible in which case it’ll need to have a visible
notification active (generally used for Services playing music).
Use IntentService if you don't want to fiddle with managing threads on your own. Otherwise, use AsyncTasks.
Please read this excellent article to understand more in detail and also read this answer.
Service basically runs in UI thread or main thread.But,if we are going to perform long running operations in service,we need to create a background thread and perform that task.
But why we have to use service?
Now let's think of Music Application.We need songs to be played continuously even if we leave music app.If we use activities,we can't achieve above requirement.So,service helps in these kind of scenarios.Even if the app is not in foreground, service keeps on running and we are able to listen to songs.This is why we use service even though it runs on main thread.
In short, Services runs on the background of the UI thread.
You can perform tasks like client-server authentication or write to a database where the tasks are done in the background with no graphical interface.
But if you're doing a really long processing tasks that could freeze the interface, you use a service on a separate thread.
eg of a Service on a separate thread is IntentService
http://developer.android.com/guide/components/services.html
The page starts off by saying services are used to run long standing tasks in the background. Later in the "caution:", it says they are run on the UI thread, and any intensive work should be done in a separate thread, like the code placed inside IntentService's "onHandleIntent" callback.
If the code in onHandleIntent is the service's long standing task, and that runs in a background thread, why do they say a service runs on the UI thread?
There are multiple reasons for this:
UI thread is the way to work with events and binding, and is easier to understand how to interact with the service. That's usually already done on the UI thread, so it would also be easier to initiate functions on the service.
The service is a component without any UI, so it has less memory being used compared to activities, and also has less chance of having memory leaks compared to activities.
The service can run in the foreground, making it have less chance of being killed when the user goes to other apps.
there is also an IntentService, which has a function (called "onHandleIntent" )that runs only on the background thread, if you wish to perform easy background tasks easily.
Instead of forcing you to work in some way, Google lets you decide how&what to perform on the service.
It has its own lifecycle that isn't affected by UI. It's more affected by resource usage and OS decisions, and by the developer's choice of course.
I am looking for what service should be used in android applicaton.
Docs says
A Service is an application component that can perform long-running operations in the background and does not provide a user interface.
I have read this thread Application threads vs Service threads that saying same services are for running operation in background.
But here this can be done using Thread also. Any difference between them and where you should use them
UPDATE based on latest documentation:
Android has included in its documentation on when you should use Service vs Thread. Here is what it says:
If you need to perform work outside your main thread, but only while
the user is interacting with your application, then you should
probably instead create a new thread and not a service. For example,
if you want to play some music, but only while your activity is
running, you might create a thread in onCreate(), start running it in
onStart(), then stop it in onStop(). Also consider using AsyncTask or
HandlerThread, instead of the traditional Thread class. See the
Processes and Threading document for more information about threads.
Remember that if you do use a service, it still runs in your
application's main thread by default, so you should still create a new
thread within the service if it performs intensive or blocking
operations.
Another notable difference between these two approaches is that Thread will sleep if your device sleeps. Whereas, Service can perform operation even if the device goes to sleep. Let's take for example playing music using both approaches.
Thread Approach: the music will only play if your app is active or screen display is on.
Service Approach: the music can still play even if you minimized your app or screen is off.
Note: Starting API Level 23, you should Test your app with Doze.
Android Documentation - Services
A Service is meant to run your task independently of the Activity, it allows you to run any task in background. This run on the main UI thread so when you want to perform any network or heavy load operation then you have to use the Thread there.
Example : Suppose you want to take backup of your instant messages daily in the background then here you would use the Service.
Threads is for run your task in its own thread instead of main UI thread. You would use when you want to do some heavy network operation like sending bytes to the server continuously, and it is associated with the Android components. When your component destroy who started this then you should have stop it also.
Example : You are using the Thread in the Activity for some purpose, it is good practice to stop it when your activity destroy.
This is the principle i largely follow
Use a Thread when
app is required to be visible when the operation occurs.
background operation is relatively short running (less than a minute or two)
the activity/screen/app is highly coupled with the background operation, the user usually 'waits' for this operation to finish before doing anything else in the app.
Using a thread in these cases leads to cleaner, more readable & maintainable code. That being said its possible to use a Service( or IntentService).
Use a Service when
app could be invisible when the operation occurs (Features like Foreground service could help with operations being interrupted)
User is not required to 'wait' for the operation to finish to do other things in the app.
app is visible and the operation is independent of the app/screen context.
Reference from https://developer.android.com/guide/components/services.html
A service is simply a component that can run in the background even when the user is not interacting with your application. Thus, you should create a service only if that is what you need.
If you need to perform work outside your main thread, but only while the user is interacting with your application, then you should probably instead create a new thread and not a service.
For example, if you want to play some music, but only while your activity is running, you might create a thread in onCreate(), start running it in onStart(), then stop it in onStop().
Remember that if you do use a service, it still runs in your application's main thread by default, so you should still create a new thread within the service if it performs intensive or blocking operations.
My Approach for explanation is simple:
Create a thread when you are in the activity and want to do some background operation with frequent communication with the main thread.
Alert- Don't create too many threads as 1 thread is equal to 1 processor thread. If you want to do parallel processing with threads(multiple) try your hands on Executors
Now you want long running operations with less interaction with UI then go for Service. Keep in mind service runs on UI thread. But now you want the processing should be done in background thread, then go for Intent Service.Intent service maintains their Thread Pools and do not create new threads and runs your tasks serially.
I am editing the code of an android app that is making GPS calls in a service. LocationListener. It also uses ServiceConnection
In some views the device decides that my application is taking too long to respond, and that the user can either "Force Close" or "Wait". Before this popup appears, the application is still usable by the user, they can scroll, slide, press buttons etc.
I am only assuming this is related to the GPS service as it is running whenever this problem happens.
I heard that this problem has to do with a thread running on the UIthread, instead of a background thread. But I was sure that services run asynchronously in the background thread.
Insight appreciated
Using a service does not necessarily spawn a new thread, the service call runs on it's caller thread. From the android API Service doc at:
"Note that services, like other application objects, run in the main thread of their hosting process..".
You can specify the service to run on a different process but best practice is to spawn a new thread in the service.
More on android service at:
http://developer.android.com/reference/android/app/Service.html
I fully recommend you to extend AsyncTask,it enables proper and easy use of the UI thread. Allows you to perform background operations and publish results on the UI thread without having to manipulate threads and/or handlers. You may want to do all the computing in doInBackground method.BTW Force Close or Wait is a classic behavior for this kind of issues.
Good Luck!!!
Processing in a service can still cause your application to hang.
The solution you should be looking at implementing is to run any logic that may bog down your activity in a separate thread. This includes things like: Database updates/insertions, Network communication, and any other pieces of long running code.
The AsyncTask is a convenient method for this as you can manipulate the UI in the onPreExecute and the onPostExecute functions.
You can implement an AsyncTask directly in your service as a subclass.
Hoepfully this helps!
Cheers
Why do I read in the answer to most questions here a lot about AsyncTask and Loaders but nothing about Services? Are Services just not known very well or are they deprecated or have some bad attributes or something? What are the differences?
(By the way, I know that there are other threads about it, but none really states clear differences that help a developer to easily decide if he is better off using the one or the other for an actual problem.)
In some cases it is possible to accomplish the same task with either an AsyncTask or a Service however usually one is better suited to a task than the other.
AsyncTasks are designed for once-off time-consuming tasks that cannot be run of the UI thread. A common example is fetching/processing data when a button is pressed.
Services are designed to be continually running in the background. In the example above of fetching data when a button is pressed, you could start a service, let it fetch the data, and then stop it, but this is inefficient. It is far faster to use an AsyncTask that will run once, return the data, and be done.
If you need to be continually doing something in the background, though, a Service is your best bet. Examples of this include playing music, continually checking for new data, etc.
Also, as Sherif already said, services do not necessarily run off of the UI thread.
For the most part, Services are for when you want to run code even when your application's Activity isn't open. AsyncTasks are designed to make executing code off of the UI thread incredibly simple.
Services are completely different: Services are not threads!
Your Activity binds to a service and the service contains some functions that when called, blocks the calling thread. Your service might be used to change temperature from Celsius to Degrees. Any activity that binds can get this service.
However AsyncTask is a Thread that does some work in the background and at the same time has the ability to report results back to the calling thread.
Just a thought: A service may have a AsyncTask object!
Service is one of the components of the Android framework, which does not require UI to execute, which mean even when the app is not actively used by the user, you can perform some operation with service. That doesn't mean service will run in a separate thread, but it runs in main thread and operation can be performed in a separate thread when needed.
Examples usages are playing music in background, syncing data with server in backgroud without user interaction etc
AsyncTask on other hand is used for UI blocking tasks to be performed on a separate thread. It is same like creating a new thread and doing the task when all the tasks of creating and maintaining the threads and send back result to main thread are taken care by the AsyncTask
Example usage are fetching data from server, CRUD operations on content resolver etc
Service and asynctasks are almost doing the same thing,almost.using service or a asynctask depends on what is your requirement is.
as a example if you want to load data to a listview from a server after hitting some button or changing screen you better go with a asynctask.it runs parallel with main ui thread (runs in background).for run asynctack activity or your app should on main UI thread.after exit from the app there is no asynctask.
But services are not like that, once you start a service it can run after you exit from the app, unless you are stop the service.like i said it depends on your requirement.if you want to keep checking data receiving or check network state continuously you better go with service.
happy coding.
In few cases, you can achieve same functionality using both. Unlike Async Task, service has it's own life cycle and inherits Context (Service is more robust than an Async Task). Service can run even if you have exited the app. If you want to do something even after app closing and also need the context variable, you will go for Service.
Example: If you want to play a music and you don't want to pause if user leaves the app, you will definitely go for Service.
Comparison of a local, in-process, base class Service✱ to an AsyncTask:
✱ (This answer does not address exported services, or any service that runs in a process different from that of the client, since the expected use cases differ substantially from those of an AsyncTask. Also, in the interest of brevity, the nature of certain specialized Service subclasses (e.g., IntentService, JobService) will be ignored here.)
Process Lifetime
A Service represents, to the OS, "an application's desire to perform a longer-running operation while not interacting with the user" [ref].
While you have a Service running, Android understands that you don't want your process to be killed. This is also true whenever you have an Activity onscreen, and it is especially true when you are running a foreground service. (When all your application components go away, Android thinks, "Oh, now is a good time to kill this app, so I can free up resources".)
Also, depending on the last return value from Service.onCreate(), Android can attempt to "revive" apps/services that were killed due to resource pressure [ref].
AsyncTasks don't do any of that. It doesn't matter how many background threads you have running, or how hard they are working: Android will not keep your app alive just because your app is using the CPU. It has to have some way of knowing that your app still has work to do; that's why Services are registered with the OS, and AsyncTasks aren't.
Multithreading
AsyncTasks are all about creating a background thread on which to do work, and then presenting the result of that work to the UI thread in a threadsafe manner.
Each new AsyncTask execution generally results in more concurrency (more threads), subject to the limitations of the AsyncTasks's thread-pool [ref].
Service methods, on the other hand, are always invoked on the UI thread [ref]. This applies to onCreate(), onStartCommand(), onDestroy(), onServiceConnected(), etc. So, in some sense, Services don't "run" in the background. Once they start up (onCreate()), they just kinda "sit" there -- until it's time to clean up, execute an onStartCommand(), etc.
In other words, adding additional Services does not result in more concurrency. Service methods are not a good place to do large amounts of work, because they run on the UI thread.
Of course, you can extend Service, add your own methods, and call them from any thread you want. But if you do that, the responsibility for thread safety lies with you -- not the framework.
If you want to add a background thread (or some other sort of worker) to your Service, you are free to do so. You could start a background thread/AsyncTask in Service.onCreate(), for example. But not all use cases require this. For example:
You may wish to keep a Service running so you can continue getting location updates in the "background" (meaning, without necessarily having any Activities onscreen).
Or, you may want to keep your app alive just so you can keep an "implicit" BroadcastReceiver registered on a long-term basis (after API 26, you can't always do this via the manifest, so you have to register at runtime instead [ref]).
Neither of these use cases require a great deal of CPU activity; they just require that the app not be killed.
As Workers
Services are not task-oriented. They are not set up to "perform a task" and "deliver a result", like AsyncTasks are. Services do not solve any thread-safety problems (notwithstanding the fact that all methods execute on a single thread). AsyncTasks, on the other hand, handle that complexity for you.
Note that AsyncTask is slated for deprecation. But that doesn't mean your should replace your AsyncTasks with Services! (If you have learned anything from this answer, that much should be clear.)
TL;DR
Services are mostly there to "exist". They are like an off-screen Activity, providing a reason for the app to stay alive, while other components take care of doing the "work". AsyncTasks do "work", but they will not, in and of themselves, keep a process alive.