I want to know which is the best way to stop a thread in Android. I know I can use AsyncTask instead of it and that there is a cancel() method. I have to use Threads in my situation. Here is how I'm using Thread:
Runnable runnable = new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
//doing some work
}
};
new Thread(runnable).start();
So, does anyone have any idea of which is the best way to stop a thread?
You should make your thread support interrupts. Basically, you can call yourThread.interrupt() to stop the thread and, in your run() method you'd need to periodically check the status of Thread.interrupted()
There is a good tutorial here.
This situation isn't in any way different from the standard Java. You can use the standard way to stop a thread:
class WorkerThread extends Thread {
volatile boolean running = true;
public void run() {
// Do work...
if (!running) return;
//Continue doing the work
}
}
The main idea is to check the value of the field from time to time. When you need to stop your thread, you set running to false. Also, as Chris has pointed out, you can use the interruption mechanism.
By the way, when you use AsyncTask, your apporach won't differ much. The only difference is that you will have to call isCancel() method from your task instead of having a special field. If you call cancel(true), but don't implement this mechanism, the thread still won't stop by itself, it will run to the end.
On Android the same rules apply as in a normal Java environment.
In Java threads are not killed, but the stopping of a thread is done in a cooperative way. The thread is asked to terminate and the thread can then shutdown gracefully.
Often a volatile boolean field is used which the thread periodically checks and terminates when it is set to the corresponding value.
I would not use a boolean to check whether the thread should terminate. If you use volatile as a field modifier, this will work reliable, but if your code becomes more complex, for instead uses other blocking methods inside the while loop, it might happen, that your code will not terminate at all or at least takes longer as you might want.
Certain blocking library methods support interruption.
Every thread has already a boolean flag interrupted status and you should make use of it. It can be implemented like this:
public void run() {
try {
while(!Thread.currentThread().isInterrupted()) {
// ...
}
} catch (InterruptedException consumed)
/* Allow thread to exit */
}
}
public void cancel() { interrupt(); }
Source code taken from Java Concurrency in Practice. Since the cancel() method is public you can let another thread invoke this method as you wanted.
There is also a poorly named static method interrupted which clears the interrupted status of the current thread.
The Thread.stop() method that could be used to stop a thread has been deprecated; for more info see; Why are Thread.stop, Thread.suspend and Thread.resume Deprecated?.
Your best bet is to have a variable which the thread itself consults, and voluntarily exits if the variable equals a certain value. You then manipulate the variable inside your code when you want the thread to exit. Alternately of course, you can use an AsyncTask instead.
Currently and unfortunately we can't do anything to stop the thread....
Adding something to Matt's answer we can call interrupt() but that doesn't stop thread... Just tells the system to stop the thread when system wants to kill some threads. Rest is done by system, and we can check it by calling interrupted().
[p.s. : If you are really going with interrupt() I would ask you to do some experiments with a short sleep after calling interrupt()]
Try Like this
Thread thread = new Thread() {
#Override
public void run() {
Looper.prepare();
while(true){
Log.d("Current Thread", "Running");
try{
Thread.sleep(1000);
}catch(Exeption exception){ }
}
}
};
thread.start();
thread.interrupt();
There are 2 following ways preferred to stop a thread.
Create a volatile boolean variable and change its value to false and check inside the thread.
volatile isRunning = false;
public void run() {
if(!isRunning) {return;}
}
Or you can use the interrupt() method which can be receive inside a thread.
SomeThread.interrupt();
public void run() {
if(Thread.currentThread.isInterrupted()) {return;}
}
I used this method.
Looper.myLooper().quit();
you can try.
The thing is you need to check whether the thread is running or not !?
Field:
private boolean runningThread = false;
In the thread:
new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
while (true) {
try {
Thread.sleep((long) Math.floor(speed));
if (!runningThread) {
return;
}
yourWork();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}).start();
If you want to stop the thread you should make the below field
private boolean runningThread = false;
My requirement was slightly different than the question, still this is also a useful way of stopping the thread to be executing its tasks. All I wanted to do is to stop the thread on exiting the screen and resumes while returning to the screen.
As per the Android docs, this would be the proposed replacement for stop method which has been deprecated from API 15
Many uses of stop should be replaced by code that simply modifies some
variable to indicate that the target thread should stop running. The
target thread should check this variable regularly, and return from
its run method in an orderly fashion if the variable indicates that it
is to stop running.
My Thread class
class ThreadClass implements Runnable {
...
#Override
public void run() {
while (count < name.length()) {
if (!exited) // checks boolean
{
// perform your task
}
...
OnStop and OnResume would look like this
#Override
protected void onStop() {
super.onStop();
exited = true;
}
#Override
protected void onResume() {
super.onResume();
exited = false;
}
As we know that the Thread.stop() is deprecated in JAVA, under the hood the Thread.stop calls the interrupt() method on the thread to stop it, Interrupt is meant to be thrown from the methods which keep the thread waiting for some other thread to notify after the execution completes. Interrupt will cause nothing to the thread if it is not handled in the execution of a thread, like, if(Thread.interrupted())return;
So, all in all we need to basically manage the start and stop of the thread like calling the start() method like Thread.start() starts a while(true) inside the run() method of the thread and checks for interrupted status in each iteration and returns from the thread.
Please note that a thread will not die in the following situations:
The thread has not yet returned from the run().
Any of the objects owned by the thread is accessible. (This hints to null/dispose of the references for GC to do the rest)
This worked for me like this. Introduce a static variable in main activity and regularly check for it how i did was below.
public class MainActivity extends AppCompatActivity {
//This is the static variable introduced in main activity
public static boolean stopThread =false;
protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
setContentView(R.layout.activity_main);
Thread thread = new Thread(new Thread1());
thread.start();
Button stp_thread= findViewById(R.id.button_stop);
stp_thread.setOnClickListener(new Button.OnClickListener(){
#Override
public void onClick(View v){
stopThread = true;
}
}
}
class Thread1 implements Runnable{
public void run() {
// YOU CAN DO IT ON BELOW WAY
while(!MainActivity.stopThread) {
Do Something here
}
//OR YOU CAN CALL RETURN AFTER EVERY LINE LIKE BELOW
process 1 goes here;
//Below method also could be used
if(stopThread==true){
return ;
}
// use this after every line
process 2 goes here;
//Below method also could be used
if(stopThread==true){
return ;
}
// use this after every line
process 3 goes here;
//Below method also could be used
if(stopThread==true){
return ;
}
// use this after every line
process 4 goes here;
}
}
}
If there is thread class with a handler in your project, when you started from one of the fragment class if you wanted to stop here is the solution how to stop and avoid crashing the app when fragment removes from the stack.
This code is in Kotlin. It perfectly works.
class NewsFragment : Fragment() {
private var mGetRSSFeedsThread: GetRSSFeedsThread? = null
private val mHandler = object : Handler() {
override fun handleMessage(msg: Message?) {
if (msg?.what == GetRSSFeedsThread.GETRSSFEEDSTHREAD_SUCCESS) {
val updateXMLdata = msg.obj as String
if (!updateXMLdata.isNullOrEmpty())
parseUpdatePager(CommonUtils.getJSONObjectFromXML(updateXMLdata).toString())
} else if (msg?.what == GetRSSFeedsThread.GETRSSFEEDSTHREAD_SUCCESS) {
BaseActivity.make_toast(activity, resources.getString(R.string.pleaseTryAgain))
}
}
}
private var rootview: View? = null;
override fun onCreateView(inflater: LayoutInflater?, container: ViewGroup?, savedInstanceState: Bundle?): View? {
rootview = inflater?.inflate(R.layout.fragment_news, container, false);
news_listView = rootview?.findViewById(R.id.news_listView)
mGetRSSFeedsThread = GetRSSFeedsThread(this.activity, mHandler)
if (CommonUtils.isInternetAvailable(activity)) {
mGetRSSFeedsThread?.start()
}
return rootview
}
override fun onCreate(savedInstanceState: Bundle?) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState)
setHasOptionsMenu(true);
}
override fun onAttach(context: Context?) {
super.onAttach(context)
println("onAttach")
}
override fun onPause() {
super.onPause()
println("onPause fragment may return to active state again")
Thread.interrupted()
}
override fun onStart() {
super.onStart()
println("onStart")
}
override fun onResume() {
super.onResume()
println("onResume fragment may return to active state again")
}
override fun onDetach() {
super.onDetach()
println("onDetach fragment never return to active state again")
}
override fun onDestroy() {
super.onDestroy()
println("onDestroy fragment never return to active state again")
//check the state of the task
if (mGetRSSFeedsThread != null && mGetRSSFeedsThread?.isAlive!!) {
mGetRSSFeedsThread?.interrupt();
} else {
}
}
override fun onDestroyView() {
super.onDestroyView()
println("onDestroyView fragment may return to active state again")
}
override fun onStop() {
super.onStop()
println("onStop fragment may return to active state again")
}
}
Above code stops the running thread when you switch to any other fragment or activity from current fragment. also it recreates when you return to current fragment
Inside of any Activity class you create a method that will assign NULL to thread instance which can be used as an alternative to the depreciated stop() method for stopping thread execution:
public class MyActivity extends Activity {
private Thread mThread;
#Override
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState)
{
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
setContentView(R.layout.main);
mThread = new Thread(){
#Override
public void run(){
// Perform thread commands...
for (int i=0; i < 5000; i++)
{
// do something...
}
// Call the stopThread() method.
stopThread(this);
}
};
// Start the thread.
mThread.start();
}
private synchronized void stopThread(Thread theThread)
{
if (theThread != null)
{
theThread = null;
}
}
}
This works for me without a problem.
Related
Is it good to call Thread.join in onDestroy? Or just tell the thread to stop and leave it?
For example:
public class MyActivity extends Activity {
private Thread myThread;
private volatile boolean running = true;
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
myThread = new Thread(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
while(running) {
// Do something
}
}
});
myThread.start();
}
public void onDestroy() {
super.onDestroy();
running = false;
try {
myThread.join(); // Is it good to calling it here? Or just let it fininsh itself?
} catch(InterruptedException e){}
}
}
I know calling join() might block the UI thread, but what would happen if the activity finishes before the thread without calling join()?
What does the system do to the threads after the activity is destroyed? Does it wait for them, put them in background, or kill them?
No, don't. Thread.join() doesn't destroy a Thread- it waits for it to finish. This could take a very long time (or forever). It should only be called if doing so won't make the app unresponsive (if its not on the UI thread) and if you absolutely cannot continue without that thread being finished. Neither one is true here.
I need to destroy a thread before application suspend. This is my code:
public class MyThread extends Thread
{
public boolean mRun = false;;
#Override
public void run()
{
while (mRun)
{
.....
}
}
}
Activity:
#Override
public void onPause() {
if (mThread != null)
{
mThread.mRun = false;
try { mThread.join(); }
catch (InterruptedException e) { }
}
super.onPause();
}
But i'm pretty sure that the android system do not wait my thread conclusion and pause my application before it. How can i force thread conclusion?
This is the way, I used in my code meet your requirement.Hope, this will be helping you too. If you find a better solution, Please share it.
In the below snippet, mThread is thread got created in onCreate. OnDestroy is a method that would be called before your activity destroyed.Its a best place to empty the allocated resources.
#Override
public void onDestroy() {
super.onDestroy();
if(null != mThread) {
Thread dummyThread = mThread;
mThread = null;
dummyThread.interrupt(); // Post an interrupt request to this thread.
}
}
Cheers !
Are you sure that you are not getting an InterruptedException?
Try putting a stacktrace in the catch sentence...and also check if your thread isAlive().
You cannot do that. Thread.join is a blocking potentially long operation that must not be done on the UI Thread (onPause being on the UI Thread).
You can ask your thread to stop, (setting mRun to false is a commonly accepted way of doing so), but you cannot exclicitely wait on it.
To be sure , mark the thread as daemon, always check a flag if doing a repetitive task in a thread, like in a loop. Also, call interrupt, which will take care of blocking IO or network calls.
myThread.setDaemon(true)
and
cancelFlag = true;
myThread.interrupt();
I have a Service that launches a Thread and a Runnable like so.
t = new Thread(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
doSomething();
}
});
t.start();
The reason for the thread is to perform an Async task doSomething(). For now lets not worry about the other class AsyncTask. I have tried it and it does not work for my case. Edit: I can't use AsyncTask because it is meant for the UI thread only. This piece of code has to operate inside a Service, so nope, no AsyncTask :(
doSomething() contains some external libs so the issue I am having is that it can potentially be hung at one of the commands, without return any value (hence no error checking can even be done)
To work around this, I will want to, at some point of time, destroy the Service.
stopService(new Intent("net.MyService.intent));
This works fine and is easily verified on the phone. However, the Thread which was created above will continue to run even when the Service that spawned it is destroyed.
I am thus looking for the correct commands to insert in the Service's onDestroy() which will clean up the Thread for me.
t.destroy();
t.stop();
are both depreciated and cause application crashes.
I took this code from somewhere
#Override
public void onDestroy() {
Thread th = t;
t = null;
th.interrupt();
super.onDestroy();
}
but it still does not work, the thread continues to run. Any help guys?
The thread destroy and stop methods are inherently deadlock prone and not safe. Their existence also gives the illusion that there might be some way of halting another thread immediately when something else tells it to.
I understand your thinking, from your point of view their is one main thread, and when this thread hasn't received a response from it's worker thread in a while you'd like to kill it and restart it, without caring what it's up to. But the reason those methods are deprecated is you should care what the thread is up to. A lot.
What if the thread has a lock around a variable you need to use later? What if a thread has a file handle open? In all these cases, and many more, simply stopping the thread at it's current operation would leave things in mess -- quite likely your application would just crash further down the line.
So in order for a thread to be interruptible or cancel-able or stoppable, it has to manage this itself. If a thread or operation provides no way for itself to be interrupted, then you cannot interrupt it - it is assumed to do so would be unsafe.
If you runnable is literally
public void run() {
doSomething();
}
then there is no way to interrupt it. One would hope that if doSomething were a long operation that there might be a way to either interact with it incrementally with something like
public void run() {
while (running) {
MyParser.parseNext();
}
}
or to be able to pass in a variable by reference which indicates whether the thread is interrupted or not, and hopefully the method would interrupt itself at suitable location.
Remember a blocking operation is blocking. There is no way to get around that, you cannot cancel it part way through.
Alternative answer
Use the following code:
MyThread thread; // class field
Create and start the thread as you do it right now.
thread = new MyThread();
thread.start();
When the service is destroyed, "signal" the thread to quit
public void onDestroy() {
// Stop the thread
thread.abort = true;
thread.interrupt();
}
Here is thread implementation
//another class or maybe an inner class
class MyThread extends Thread {
syncronized boolean abort = false;
//ugly, I know
public void run() {
try {
if(!abort) doA();
if(!abort) doB();
if(!abort) doC();
if(!abort) doD();
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
Log.w("tag", "Interrupted!");
}
}
}
You might want to read the following:
How do you kill a thread in Java?
Thread Primitive Deprecation as already pointed by Claszen
http://www.devx.com/tips/Tip/31728 - based my code from here, but there are some issues with the code!
I think that you could rely on catching the exception and not check abort but I decided to keep it that way.
UPDATE
I've seen this sample in codeguru:
public class Worker implements Runnable {
private String result;
public run() {
result = blockingMethodCall();
}
public String getResult() {
return result;
}
}
public class MainProgram {
public void mainMethod() {
...
Worker worker = new Worker();
Thread thread = new Thread(worker);
thread.start();
// Returns when finished executing, or after maximum TIME_OUT time
thread.join(TIME_OUT);
if (thread.isAlive()) {
// If the thread is still alive, it's still blocking on the methodcall, try stopping it
thread.interrupt();
return null;
} else {
// The thread is finished, get the result
return worker.getResult();
}
}
}
Did you check the Java Thread Primitive Deprecation Documentation which is referenced in the Thread API JavaDoc. You will find some hints to handle your problem.
why don't you use an AsyncTask?
A task can be cancelled at any time by
invoking cancel(boolean). Invoking
this method will cause subsequent
calls to isCancelled() to return true.
After invoking this method,
onCancelled(Object), instead of
onPostExecute(Object) will be invoked
after doInBackground(Object[])
returns. To ensure that a task is
cancelled as quickly as possible, you
should always check the return value
of isCancelled() periodically from
doInBackground(Object[]), if possible
(inside a loop for instance.)
I like to take the following approach:
class MyHandler extends Handler {
final Semaphore stopEvent = new Semaphore(0);
#Override
public void handleMessage(Message msg) {
try {
while (!stopEvent.tryAcquire(0, TimeUnit.SECONDS)) {
doSomething();
if (stopEvent.tryAcquire(SLEEP_TIME, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS)) {
break;
}
}
} catch (InterruptedException ignored) {
}
stopSelf();
}
}
On service onDestroy just release the stopEvent:
#Override
public void onDestroy() {
myHandler.stopEvent.release();
myHandler = null;
super.onDestroy();
}
Better to use global variable stopThread, stop thread once variable changed to true.
btnStop.setOnClickListener(new OnClickListener() {
#Override
public void onClick(View arg0){
stopThread = true;
}
});
public void run() {
while (!stopThread) {
//do something
}
}
I think the best way to create and communicate with another thread is to use an AsyncTask. Heres an example of one:
public class Task extends AsyncTask<Void, Void, Void> {
private static final String TAG = "Task";
private boolean mPaused;
private Runnable mRunnable;
public Task(Runnable runnable) {
mRunnable = runnable;
play();
}
#Override
protected Void doInBackground(Void... params) {
while (!isCancelled()) {
if (!mPaused) {
mRunnable.run();
sleep();
}
}
return null;
}
private void sleep() {
try {
Thread.sleep(10);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
Log.w(TAG, e.getMessage());
}
}
public void play() {
mPaused = false;
}
public void pause() {
mPaused = true;
}
public void stop() {
pause();
cancel(true);
}
public boolean isPaused() {
return mPaused;
}
}
You can now easily use this class, and start the thread by writing:
Task task = new Task(myRunnable);
task.execute((Void) null);
Along with this you can easily pause or stop the thread from looping:
Example of pausing and playing the thread:
mButton.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener() {
#Override
public void onClick(View v) {
if (task.isPaused()) {
task.play();
} else {
task.pause();
}
}
});
Example of stopping and starting the thread:
mButton.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener() {
#Override
public void onClick(View v) {
if (task.isCancelled()) {
task = new Task(myRunnable);
task.execute((Void) null);
} else {
task.stop();
}
}
});
I am calling from a method:
myHandler.postDelayed(mMyRunnableHide, 6000);
which calls:
public Runnable mMyRunnableHide = new Runnable()
{
public void run()
{
mTextDisplay.setText("");
DisplayX();
}
};
if a button on screen is clicked I want to stop the runnable:
Button next = (Button) findViewById(R.id.Breaction);
next.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener() {
public void onClick(View view) {
myHandler.removeCallbacks(mMyRunnableHide);
mTextDisplay.setText("");
DisplayX();
}
});
}
the removecallbacks is not stopping the runnable. What am I doing wrong? Am I using the correct method? I just want the runnable to "Not Run" when the user clicks the button.
Thanks for any help.
It appears to me that removeCallbacks(..) only stops pending messages (Runnables). If your runnable has already started, then there's no stopping it (at least not this way).
Alternatively, you can extend the Runnable class and give it some kind of kill switch like this:
public class MyRunnable implements Runnable
{
private boolean killMe = false;
private void run()
{
if(killMe)
return;
/* do your work */
}
private void killRunnable()
{
killMe = true;
}
}
This will only prevent it from starting, but you could occasionally check killMe and bail out. If you are looping the runnable (like some kind of background thread) you can say:
while(!killMe) {
/* do work */
}
Hope this helps
EDIT I just wanted to post an update on this. Since this original post, Google has come up with a great class called AsyncTask that handles all of this stuff for you. Anyone reading this really should look into it because it is the correct way of doing things.
You can read about it here
Handler.removeCallback is synchronous and will work nicely provided:
You call postDelayed always in the main thread.
You call removeCallback always in the main thread
You don't call postDelayed again after having removed callbacks.
So in your case removeCallbacks is called from a button handler, which runs in the main thread. But you didn't show in your code the point from where you call postDelayed. If you call it from a background thread thats where your problem is.
If you are sure you don't call any of these methods from background threads, and the order of the calls is correct, then you might be leaving uncancelled tasks unadvertedly alive due to activity recreation on config changes (screen rotation, etc). Always make sure to call removeCallbacks again in the onDestroy method to prevent this kind of problems.
Here is another way to accomplish what mtmurdock is describing. This class will allow editing of instance variables in any class that your Runnable is defined as an anonymous inner class.
package support;
/**
* Runnable that can be stopped from executing
*/
public abstract class KillableRunnable implements Runnable{
private boolean isKilled=false;
/**
* Instead of Overriding run(), override this method to perform a Runnable operation.
* This will allow editing instance variables in the class that this Runnable is defined
*/
public abstract void doWork();
//The handler that posts this Runnable will call this method.
//By default, check if it has been killed. doWork() will now be the method
//override to implement this Runnable
#Override
final public void run(){
if(!isKilled){
doWork();
}
}
final public void kill(){
isKilled=true;
}
}
I don't think that removeCallbacks(..) only stops pending messages (Runnables) ，I think removeCallbacks(..) not working have other cause,but i don‘t know. because postDelayed(..) and removeCallbacks(..) is in the same thread
the following has worked for me. Place it in onResume.
mService= null;
public void onServiceConnected(ComponentName name, IBinder service) {
Log.i(TAG, "OnServiceConnected");
ContadorFG.LocalBinder binder = (ContadorFG.LocalBinder) service;
mService = binder.getService();
connected = true;
synchronized (lock){
lock.notifyAll();
}
}
public void onResume() {
super.onResume();
loopDelayed();
}
private void loopDelayed(){
final Handler handler = new Handler();
handler.postDelayed(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
if (mService != null) {
----
----
----
return;
}else{
//auto call
loopDelayed();
}
}
}, 10);
}
I have a main menu with an action bar. On create, I run a thread that hits my server for a current status. When Complete, the thread calls a handler which kicks off a constantly running thread that cycles through the items and uses another handler call to change the test in the actionbar. The problem is that when I change views, I either get android.view.WindowLeaked or View not attached to window manager
Here is some sample code
public class MainMenuActivity extends ProtectedWithActionBarActivity{
private int STATUS_COUNTER;
private final int RESULT_STATUS_LOADED = 2000;
private final int RESULT_SHOW_STATUS = 2001;
private CurrentStatusModel currentStatus;
#Override
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
setContentView(R.layout.mainmenu);
ActionBar footerbar = (ActionBar)findViewById(R.id.footerbar);
footerbar.setTitle("Currently connected to " + PreferencesHelper.getCurrentEnvironment().name());
STATUS_COUNTER = 0;
statusLoadThread.start();
}
Thread statusLoadThread = new Thread()
{
#Override
public void run()
{
//set currentStatus with data from server
}
};
Thread statusDisplayThread = new Thread()
{
int sleep = 5000;
boolean threadDone = false;
public void done()
{
threadDone = true;
}
#Override
public void run()
{
while(true)
{
//pick message to send to handler
//increment STATUS_COUNTER or reset to 0 when out of bounds
try
{
sleep(sleep);
}
catch (InterruptedException e)
{
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
};
private Handler handler = new Handler() {
#Override
public void handleMessage(Message msg) {
switch(msg.what)
{
case RESULT_STATUS_LOADED:
statusDisplayThread.start();
break;
case RESULT_SHOW_STATUS:
ActionBar footerbar = (ActionBar)findViewById(R.id.footerbar);
String message = ((Object[])msg.obj)[0].toString();
OnClickListener listener = (OnClickListener)((Object[])msg.obj)[1];
footerbar.setTitle(message);
footerbar.setOnTitleClickListener(listener);
break;
case ActivityBase.RESULT_ERROR:
break;
}
}
};
}
I'm not sure if what I'm doing is just wrong or if there is something blatantly obvious that I am missing. What needs to happen is the threads need to stop any time I change screens. Should I use Thread.interrupt(); before starting the next activity?
AsyncTasc allows you to implement doInBackground(), where your thread can crank away at its task. This is similar to the functionality you'd get from Thread.
The real magic happens when you override onPreExecute() and onPostExecute(), which are both executed on the UI thread. This should keep you from getting messages about your Activity not being attached.
Edit - this answer contains a small code example for AsyncTask that could get you started.
You are trying to update UI elements after the owning Activity has been detached from the windowing system.
You will make your life a lot simpler if you use AsyncTask instead of vanilla threads (no handler needed, for one thing) and cancel() the background tasks from your Activity.onPause().
Can't you set a flag in onPause that each of your Threads checks for? If the flag is set then the thread drops out of its loop. Thus whenever the Activity is moved to the background each of your Threads will stop. You would need to handle restarting the threads in onResume. You could alternatively use the AsyncTask approach, but this is not guaranteed to actually cancel when you call its cancel() method, it only attempts to cancel the task.