Develop Reference

Stopping a Handler Thread

On one of our applications, we use a background service with a notification (basically a foreground service but you get the idea, activity is closeable while the service stays alive.)
On this service, we use 3 separate HandlerThreads with Handlers to manage various operations with some delay (for example, 250 milliseconds). Now, these actions need to be stopped if the screen goes off and be resumed if the screen goes back on, due to this situation we added a broadcast receiver to the service, and created-deleted threads. Everything works fine so far.
In order to stop the operations, we deleted the messages on handlers by calling Handler.removeCallbacksAndMessages(null) and it actually clears the message queue. However, the handler thread stays alive. And this is a problem.
In order to stop the thread we used HandlerThread.quit() which internally calls Looper.quit() that we thought, that it will finish the thread, but no sir, it does not delete the thread because we get some reports from Fabric that goes pthread_create failed (1040kb stack), try again or something. Under it, there were 940 separate threads that named the same, which caused a OOM (Out Of Memory) error. This was a huge mistake from us.
The question: How can we stop the handler threads? Is HandlerThread.interrupt() will be enough? Any help is appreciated, thanks. PS: I cannot share any source codes, and in this situation I don't think it is necessary since the question itself is self-explanatory.
Edit: Since you asked for some code, I'm showing an example of some logic I'm following.
public class ThreadHelper implements Runnable
{
private HandlerThread handlerThread = new HandlerThread("ThreadName");
private Handler handler;
private boolean shouldRun = true;
public ThreadHelper()
{
handlerThread.start();
startThread();
}
// Called if the screen state is turned on.
public void startThread()
{
if (handlerThread == null)
{
handlerThread = new HandlerThread("ThreadName");
handlerThread.start();
}
if (handler == null)
{
handler = new Handler(handlerThread.getLooper());
handler.post(this);
}
}
// Called if the screen state is turned off.
public void stopThread()
{
shouldRun = false;
handler.removeCallbacksAndMessages(null);
handlerThread.quit();
try
{
handlerThread.interrupt();
}
catch (Exception ignored)
{
// Skipped Thread.currentThread().interrupt() check here since this is
// called from a different thread that is not associated.
}
// remove variables.
handler = null;
handlerThread = null;
}
#Override
public void run()
{
if (shouldRun)
{
// rest of the code without having a long-running
// operation. Mostly ends in 1~2 millseconds.
// Continue looping.
handler.postDelayed(this, 250);
}
}
}

Is this code executing in a different thread to the main UI thread

Ive been struggling with the concept of threads on android. I thought the following code was running on a different thread to the main UI thread but I am not 100% sure so I thought i would come here for clarification as the android docs arent written in any language i understand. below is my code.
public void retrieveImages(final ImagePresenterInt imagepresenter) {
storedImages = new ArrayList<Image>();
new Handler().postDelayed(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
File imagedir = new File("/mnt/shared/images");
File [] myfiles = File.listRoots();
String canread = String.valueOf(imagedir.canRead());
String isfile = String.valueOf(imagedir.isFile());
String isdir = String.valueOf(imagedir.isDirectory());
Log.d("Can Read?","Canread from file :" + canread);
Log.d("is file?","Is a file ? :" + isfile);
Log.d("is dir?","Is a Dir file :" + isdir);
File [] rootfiles =myfiles[0].listFiles();
for (File item : rootfiles)
{
Log.d(item.getAbsolutePath(),item.getName());
}
if(Looper.myLooper() == Looper.getMainLooper())
{
Log.d("main thread ?", "YES");
}
}
}, 2000);
}
my understanding of the above code is that I create a handler. which is associated with the main thread or UI thread. It has a message queue and a looper associated with it. this code is passed to the message queue and run by the looper on a seperate thread to the main UI thread? I could be well wrong here. but mainly I want to know if this is running on the main thread. And how would i get it onto a different thread if not? I tried to verify that the code is running on a different thread using code i found in this question
How to check if current thread is not main thread
this apparently tells me Iam still running in the main thread. thanks for your help

The Handler you create in retrieveImages() is bound to the thread which this function is called from.
The doc on Handler says:
Default constructor associates this handler with the Looper for the current thread. If this thread does not have a looper, this handler won't be able to receive messages so an exception is thrown.
So if retrieveImages() is called from the UI thread, the Handler created in it is also bound to the UI thread.
UPDATE: If you want your code to be executed in different thread, the easiest way is to use AsyncTask.

The Handler is created in the calling thread, which is probably the UI-Thread in your case. If you like to start a new Thread, there are three possibilities I know of: the first is to simple start a new thread:
thread = new Thread() {
#Override
public void run() {
//Do your thing here
}
};
thread.start();
The thread will die, if your Activity gets killed.
The second is to define an IntentService:
public class SimpleIntentService extends IntentService {
public SimpleIntentService() {
super("SimpleIntentService");
}
#Override
protected void onHandleIntent(Intent intent) {
//Do your thing here
}
and start it via
Intent intent = new Intent(this, SimpleIntentService.class);
intent.putExtra("SomeString", "SomeValueYouNeed");
startService(intent);
The IntentService will run on, until onHandleIntent() is done and than close itself.
The third possibility is an AsyncTask:
private class TestTask extends AsyncTask<Datatype1, Datatype2, Datatype3>{
protected Long doInBackground(Datatype1... params) {
// Do your thing here
}
protected void onProgressUpdate(Datatype2... progress) {
//Do a Progress-Bar or something like that
}
protected void onPostExecute(Datatype3 result) {
//Do something, when your work is done
}
}
And in your Activity:
new TestTask().execute(params);
The docs state you shouldn't use Async-Tasks for very long calulations, but I'm not shure why. It might be easier to get your data back to the UI-Thread if you use an Asynctask instead of the Intentservice, but I for myself don't use them very often, so I'm maybe not the best person to ask here.
Edit: I forgot this:
IntentService is executed once for every ntent you pass, the Asynctask will be callable just once.
Furthermore the IntentService has to be declared in the Manifest.

Why should we use aysntask or service instead of a new thread

In android why should we use a asyntask and service, instead of using a new thread() and write the necessary background functionality?
I know that we should not run long running operations like downloading a file from server on the mainthread aka UI thread. And should use a asynctask or service.
But why cant we create a new thread() {which is eventually a new thread other than the main thread} and write necessarily long running operation in that thread.
why did google create the AsyncTask and Service without suggesting to use the regular New Thread()???
thanks in advance
edit1:
may be i wasn't clear in my question or not sure, if i am, even now. help me out.
i get it, the whole point starts from
Do not block the UI thread
Do not access the Android UI toolkit from outside the UI thread
why ?
1.how much can the UI thread handle ? how can we determine a breakpoint? how is a ANR point determined? can we track?
2. when a service component handles long running operations why can't a activity component handle?
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
http://developer.android.com/guide/components/services.html
the above statement is from android documentation.
3.why cant a service start in a new thread straight away, if we are so concerned about main thread? don't get me wrong in question 3, i am trying to understand the advantage of starting the service in main thread. by default.
in the above statement , does it suggest the main thread's ability to start and handle a service's long running operation load? if so does it contradict with question 1.

Well let's look how you'd perform a simple task using a Thread.
The first step is to create a Thread using a Runnable. Something like this:
private void fetchResultsAsync() {
Runnable runner = new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
List<String> results = fetchResultsFromWebServer();
}
};
new Thread(runner).run();
}
The thing is, we need to show the results so it would actually be more like this:
private void fetchResultsAsync() {
Runnable runner = new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
List<String> results = fetchResultsFromWebServer();
workFinished(results);
}
};
new Thread(runner).run();
}
private void workFinished(List<String> results) {
// show the results on the UI
}
It looks good, but there's a problem; the callback method (workFinished) has to update the UI. If we do this from any non-main thread, there will be big problems. We need a thread-safe way to call that method, which is what Handlers are for. Let's also throw in a method for updating our progress, which is very common. The code would now look like this:
private final Handler myHandler = new Handler();
private void fetchResultsAsync() {
Runnable runner = new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
List<String> results = fetchResultsFromWebServer();
workFinished(results);
}
};
new Thread(runner).run();
}
private void showProgress(int result) {
myHandler.post(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
// update a progress bar here
}
});
}
private void workFinished(final List<String> results) {
myHandler.post(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
// show the results on the UI
}
});
}
Compare this to the implementation using an AsyncTask:
private void fetchWithTask() {
new AsyncTask<Void, Integer, List<String>>() {
#Override
protected List<String> doInBackground(Void... params) {
return fetchResultsFromWebServer();
}
#Override
protected void onPostExecute(List<String> strings) {
// show the results on the UI
}
#Override
protected void onProgressUpdate(Integer... values) {
// update a progress bar here
}
}.execute();
}
It doesn't differ much by lines of code, but it's much more obvious what needs to happen and where. It protects you from nasty mistakes like forgetting to wrap UI-touching code in a Runnable that has to be posted to a UI-Thread-owned Handler.
Now imagine that you have several different types of small background tasks that need to be performed. It would be very easy to call the wrong showProgress or workFinished method from the wrong background Thread because you have to plug all those pieces together yourself.
There's also a very nasty bug lurking in the use of Handler's default constructor. If the containing class is first referenced by a non-UI thread during runtime, the Handler would belong to that Thread. AsyncTask hides always does things on the correct Thread. This is hard to catch!
At first blush AsyncTasks don't seem all that useful, but the callback plumbing is where they really pay off in spades.

"instead of using a new thread() and write the necessary background functionality?"
Why rewrite the background functionality? AsyncTask does it for you. As njk2 mentioned a Service is not really a fair comparison, though IntentService automatically creates a new thread for you in onHandleIntent().
edit: To answer your other questions, blocking the UI thread, will block all user interaction and the app will appear to "freeze". Definitely not something we want to do at all.

How to implement a more flexible AsyncTask?

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.

Android: Implication of using AsyncTask to make repeated Ajax Calls

I need my Android app to periodically fetch data from a server using AJAX calls, and update the UI accordingly (just a bunch of TextViews that need to be updated with setText()). Note that this involves 2 tasks:
Making an AJAX call, and updating the UI once I receive a response - I use a simple AsyncTask for this.
Doing the above repeatedly, at regular intervals.
I haven't figured out an elegant way to achieve Point 2 above. Currently, I am simply executing the task itself from OnPostExecute(). I read on this thread at SO that I need not worry about garbage collection as far as the AsyncTask objects are concerned.
But I'm still unsure as to how I set up a timer that will fire my AsyncTask after it expires. Any pointers will be appreciated. Here is my code:
public class MyActivity extends Activity {
/** Called when the activity is first created. */
#Override
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
setContentView(R.layout.main);
new AjaxRequestTask().execute(MY_REST_API_URL);
}
private void updateReadings(String newReadings) {
//Update the UI
}
class AjaxRequestTask extends AsyncTask<String, Integer, String> {
#Override
protected String doInBackground(String... restApiUrl) {
//Do AJAX Request
}
#Override
protected void onPostExecute(String result) {
updateReadings(result);
/*Is there a more elegant way to achieve this than create a new AsyncTask object every 10 seconds? Also, How can I update the UI if I create a timer here? */
new AjaxRequestTask().execute(MY_REST_API_URL);
}
}
}
Thanks in advance
EDIT:
I tried posting an answer but couldn't do it since I don't have the reputation to answer within 8 hours.
Well, so I found a solution. I'm not convinced however.
protected void onPostExecute(String result) {
updateReadings(result);
// super.onPostExecute(result);
new Timer().schedule(
new TimerTask() {
#Override
public void run() {
new AjaxRequestTask().execute(MY_REST_API_URL);
}
},
TIMER_ONE_TIME_EXECUTION_DELAY
);
}
Are there any flip sides that I should be aware of when I use this? In particular, I am seeing lots of GCs happening in the LogCat. Also, I am wondering how an AsyncTask can be candidate for GC unless the onPostExecute() completes?
How can I "stop" the updates? One way I thought of was to make the very first AsyncTask instance as a member variable of the Activity. That way, I can invoke cancel(true) on it and hope that this will "stop" the tasks.
SOLUTION:
In case anyone is looking for something similar - none of the solutions I mentioned here work satisfactorily. They all suffer from OutOfMemory issues. I did not debug into the details of the OOM, but I suspect it could either be because of the recursion, or because of having HTTP-related objects as member variables in the AsyncTask rather than as members of the Activity (basically because of NOT reusing HTTP and other objects).
I discarded this approach for a different one - making my Ajax Calls endlessly in the doInBackground() of my AsyncTask; and updating the UI in onProgressUpdate(). That way I also avoid the overhead of maintaining too many threads or Handlers for updating the UI (remember UI can be updated in onProgressUpdate() ).
This approach also eliminates the need for Timers and TimerTasks, favoring the use of Thread.sleep() instead. This thread on SO has more details and a code snippet too.

Call postDelayed() on any View to schedule a hunk of code to be run on the main application thread after a certain delay. Do this in onPostExecute() of the AsyncTask to create and execute another AsyncTask.
You could use AlarmManager, as others have cited, but I would agree with you that it feels a bit like overkill for timing that occurs purely within an activity.
That being said, if the AJAX calls should be occurring regardless of whether the activity exists, definitely consider switching to AlarmManager and an IntentService.

I think the android way to do this is using AlarmManager. Or you can user a basic java Timer as well. I'd recommend AlarmManager.
Set it up to send some intent with a custom Action, and register a broadcastreceiver for it.

If the ajax calls are only executed in the activity you can just use a timer in the activity which starts the tasks.
Otherwise use a service which uses the AlarmManager and which connects to the gui via a broadcast.

The recommended way to do a repeated task, is via AlarmManager, as alluded to by Scythe. Basically it involves setting up a broadcast listener, and having AlarmManager fire off an intent to that listener at whatever interval you choose. You then would have your broadcast listener call out to the activity to run the AsyncTask. If you need a very tight timer (less than 5s calls I'd say), then you're better off using a Timer within a Service, and using AIDL to call back to the activity.
Instead of talking directly from the broadcast intent, you could also setup an IntentService which you can poke, and use AIDL to update the activity.

This is how I achieved it finally. Note that the AsyncTask cancel(true) method is useless in my scenario because of the recursion. I used what #CommonsWare suggested - used a flag to indicate whether any more tasks should be executed.
public class MyActivity extends Activity {
/*Flag which indicates whether the execution should be halted or not.*/
private boolean mCancelFlag = false;
private AjaxRequestTask mAjaxTask;
/** Called when the activity is first created. */
#Override
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
setContentView(R.layout.main);
if(mAjaxTask == null){
mAjaxTask = new AjaxRequestTask();
}
mAjaxTask.execute(MY_REST_API_URL);
}
#Override
protected void onResume() {
super.onResume();
mCancelFlag = false; /*when we resume, we want the tasks to restart. Unset cancel flag*/
/* If the main task is Finished, create a new task and execute it.*/
if(mAjaxTask == null || mAjaxTask.getStatus().equals(AsyncTask.Status.FINISHED)){
new AjaxRequestTask().execute(TLS_REST_API_URL);
}
}
#Override
protected void onPause() {
mCancelFlag = true; /*We want the execution to stop on pause. Set the cancel flag to true*/
super.onPause();
}
#Override
protected void onDestroy() {
mCancelFlag = true;/*We want the execution to stop on destroy. Set the cancel flag to true*/
super.onDestroy();
}
private void updateReadings(String result) {
//Update the UI using the new readings.
}
class AjaxRequestTask extends AsyncTask<String, Integer, String> {
private AjaxRequestTask mChainAjaxRequest;
private Timer mTimer;
private TimerTask mTimerTask;
#Override
protected String doInBackground(String... restApiUrl) {
//Do AJAX call and get the response
return ajaxResponse;
}
#Override
protected void onPostExecute(String result) {
Log.d(TAG, "Updating readings");
updateReadings(result);
// super.onPostExecute(result);
if(mTimer == null){
mTimer = new Timer();
}
if(!mCancelFlag){/*Check if the task has been cancelled prior to creating a new TimerTask*/
if(mTimerTask == null){
mTimerTask = new TimerTask() {
#Override
public void run() {
if(!mCancelFlag){/*One additional level of checking*/
if(mChainAjaxRequest == null){
mChainAjaxRequest = new AjaxRequestTask();
}
mChainAjaxRequest.execute(MY_REST_API_URL);
}
}
};
}
mTimer.schedule(mTimerTask,TIMER_ONE_TIME_EXECUTION_DELAY);
}
}
}
}