OpenNetCF FTP class multithreading question - winforms

Currently, I have something like:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
delegate void StringDelegate(string value);
private FTP m_ftp;
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void connect_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
OnResponse("Connecting");
m_ftp = new FTP(server.Text);
m_ftp.ResponseReceived += new FTPResponseHandler(m_ftp_ResponseReceived);
m_ftp.Connected += new FTPConnectedHandler(m_ftp_Connected);
m_ftp.BeginConnect(user.Text, password.Text);
}
void m_ftp_Connected(FTP source)
{
// when this happens we're ready to send command
OnResponse("Connected.");
}
void m_ftp_ResponseReceived(FTP source, FTPResponse Response)
{
OnResponse(Response.Text);
}
private void OnResponse(string response)
{
if (this.InvokeRequired)
{
this.Invoke(new StringDelegate(OnResponse), new object[] { response } );
return;
}
}
private void getFileList_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
FTPFiles files = m_ftp.EnumFiles();
fileList.Items.Clear();
foreach (FTPFile file in files)
{
fileList.Items.Add( new ListViewItem( new string[] { file.Name, file.Size.ToString() } ));
}
tabs.SelectedIndex = 1;
}
private void upload_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
FileStream stream = File.OpenRead("\\My Documents\\My Pictures\\Waterfall.jpg");
m_ftp.SendFile(stream, "waterfall.jpg");
stream.Close();
}
Which works fine - this example was taken from the samples. However, after a recent re-visit I have a question. In this particular case since OnResponse() function doesn't update the UI, it seems to serve no purpose here. I removed it (as well as all the calls to it) and it still works like before. Am I missing something?
After reading up more about multi threading with forms, I came to understand that this mechanism (demonstrated in the code above) is there to make sure the UI is responsive.
So in case when we need to say, update a UI element (such as textbox, label etc) we would have OnResponse implemented as follows:
delegate void StringDelegate(string dummy);
void OnResponse(string dummy)
{
if(!InvokeRequired)
{
button1.Text = dummy;
}
else
Invoke(new StringDelegate(OnResponse),new object[] {enabled});
}
If this function is implemented as:
delegate void StringDelegate(string dummy);
void OnResponse(string dummy)
{
if(InvokeRequired)
{
Invoke(new StringDelegate(OnResponse),new object[] {dummy});
return;
}
}
What's the use to have it at all? Is it absolutely necessary?
And another question: is ftp object running on its own thread here?

The FTP object is definitely running on its own thread. How do I know? This line:
m_ftp.BeginConnect(user.Text, password.Text);
This is an asynchronous method. Once you call this, the FTP component will use a thread from the .NET threadpool to do all of the work. This dedicated thread is the one that is used to "raise" the events. Ultimately a "raised event" is just one or more method calls to all of the delegates added to the event invocation list; it is this dedicated thread spun up by the Begin method that calls these methods. This thread is not the same thread as the thread that runs the UI, hence the need for the Invoke calls.
If you want the FTP component to use the UI thread, you'd use the Connect method instead of the BeginConnect method. This means your events wont work either, nor will your UI respond to interaction - this is completely expected because a thread can only do one thing at a time: it's either servicing the UI, or executing the FTP code. This is why you need a 2nd thread.
Make sense?
-Oisin

Related

.NET 5.0 - Stop immediately a running thread in WPF application

I'm developing a WPF application for real-time data gathering from a remote client. Data acquisition is managed by a different thread (different from the one used to run the main application). When the users press the connection button, the data acquisition thread is launched and, simmetrically, when the disconnection button is pressed the thread should stop. Data reading stops only when the user decides it.
I use the following code:
private void ConnectButton_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
connectionThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(myThreadStartFunc));
connectionThread.Start();
}
private void myThreadStartFunc()
{
TcpConnect();
ReadData();
}
private void TcpConnect()
{
mySocket = new Socket(...);
mySocket.Connect(ipEndPoint);
}
private void ReadData()
{
while(mySocket.Connected)
{
Thread.Sleep(300);
mySocket.Receive(data, ...);
}
}
private void DisconnectButton_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
StopThread(connectionThread);
}
private void StopThread(Thread thread)
{
}
What should be the body of the StopThread method? Currently I'm using thread.Interrupt() in a try and catch structure in thte StopThread method. It generates an exception in the while loop of the data reading method, at line Thread.Sleep(300): System.Threading.ThreadInterrupted
Exception: Thread was interrupted from a waiting state.
I would like to use the thread.Abort() method, but it is obsolete (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/compatibility/core-libraries/5.0/thread-abort-obsolete). Any suggestion? Thank you in advance.

MainWindow.Closing event not always raised in Silverlight 4 OOB app

I've made a rather complex Silverlight 4 out-of-browser application. One of my main view models adds an event handler to the Application.Current.MainWindow.Closing event.
This works fine when the application is initially run. It is able to cancel the close operation.
However, sometimes after performing operations like showing and closing a ChildWindow, the MainWindow's Closing event is no longer calling my handler.
In the debugger, I added a watch to the MainWindow's underlying closing event delegate. It's not null before showing the ChildWindow. Then sometimes after the ChildWindow is closed the delegate is null. This is explains why my handler is not called any more. But why is this delegate getting nulled? And why is it only happening occasionally?
My application is not unbinding my event handler at any point.
This is the delegate I'm watching:
System.Windows.Application.Current.MainWindow.m_closingEvent
Other stuff: I'm using Caliburn Micro
I had the exact same problem. We have a large silverlight application running OOB.
For some reason the m_ClosingEvent was nulled after running for a while. I have not been able to find the cause of this issue but I think it may have something to do with us changing the root visual or all the child windows we show.
I´m using a class ApplicationWrapper.
public class ApplicationWrapper : IApplicationWrapper
{
public void Initialize()
{
HookCloseEvent(true);
}
private void HookCloseEvent(bool hook)
{
if (hook && IsRunningOutOfBrowser)
{
Application.Current.MainWindow.Closing += OnClosing;
}
else
{
if (IsRunningOutOfBrowser)
{
Application.Current.MainWindow.Closing -= OnClosing;
}
}
}
private void OnClosing(object sender, ClosingEventArgs e)
{
InvokeClosing(e);
}
... etc..
}
And the InvokeClosing method was never called. But when I changed it to
public class ApplicationWrapper : IApplicationWrapper
{
private Window _mainWindow;
public void Initialize()
{
if(IsRunningOutOfBrowser)
{
_mainWindow = Application.Current.MainWindow;
}
HookCloseEvent(true);
}
private void HookCloseEvent(bool hook)
{
if (hook && IsRunningOutOfBrowser)
{
_mainWindow.Closing += OnClosing;
}
else
{
if (IsRunningOutOfBrowser)
{
_mainWindow.Closing -= OnClosing;
}
}
}
private void OnClosing(object sender, ClosingEventArgs e)
{
InvokeClosing(e);
}
... etc...
}
The m_ClosingEvent isn´t nulled.
So, try to just store the "initial" MainWindow in a field and check if that solves your problem.
Instead of hooking to the event, why not register a service instead? Create a class that implements IApplicationService and IApplicationLifetimeAware. The latter gives you an "onexiting" and "onexited" pair of events. You place the service in the application by pointing to it in a section called in your App.xaml. I've used this for many projects and never had an issue with the exiting methods not being called.
Ok, after pulling out my hair and many false starts I finally found the answer - it seems to be a known bug with the Closing event, OOB and ChildWindows open/closes...
The trick is to store a static reference to the Main Window:
public MainPage()
{
InitializeComponent();
Loaded += MainPage_Loaded;
}
private void MainPage_Loaded(object sender, System.Windows.RoutedEventArgs e)
{
//you have to store this to work around the bug
//http://forums.silverlight.net/forums/p/185664/424174.aspx
_mainWindow = App.GetApp.MainWindow;
App.GetApp.MainWindow.Closing += (s, e1) =>
{
if (UIUtilities.ShowMessage("Would you like to exit AMT Mobile?", "Exit Application", MessageBoxButton.OKCancel) != MessageBoxResult.OK)
{
e1.Cancel = true;
}
};
}

Diffrernce between BackgroundWorker.ReportProgress() and Control.BeginInvoke()

What is the difference between options 1 and 2 in the following?
private void BGW_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
for (int i=1; i<=100; i++)
{
string txt = i.ToString();
if (Test_Check.Checked)
//OPTION 1
Test_BackgroundWorker.ReportProgress(i, txt);
else
//OPTION 2
this.BeginInvoke((Action<int, string>)UpdateGUI,
new object[] {i, txt});
}
}
private void BGW_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
UpdateGUI(e.ProgressPercentage, (string)e.UserState);
}
private void UpdateGUI(int percent, string txt)
{
Test_ProgressBar.Value = percent;
Test_RichTextBox.AppendText(txt + Environment.NewLine);
}
Looking at reflector, the Control.BeginInvoke() appears to use:
this.FindMarshalingControl().MarshaledInvoke(this, method, args, 1);
Which seems to eventually call some native functions like PostMessage(), couldn't exactly figure out the flow from reflector (pesky compiler goto optimizations)
Whereas BackgroundWorker.Invoke() appears to use:
this.asyncOperation.Post(this.progressReporter, args);
Which seems to eventually call ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem()
(I'm just guessing these are the relevant function calls for each case.) If I understand correctly, using the ThreadPool would not guarantee execution order whereas using the Post mechanism would. Perhaps that would be a potential difference ? (EDIT - I couldn't synthesize such a situation - call order seems to be preserved in both cases, at least in my simple tests.)
Thanks!
They are both the same. The call you're seeing in BackgroundWorker uses SynchronizationContext. Indeed the default implementation of the Post() method uses the thread pool, but when starting a Windows Forms app, the default synchronization context is replaced by WindowsFormsSynchronizationContext, which actually calls Control.BeginInvoke().
One big difference is that Control.Invoke will block until the UpdateGUI call has been executed and completed, whereas BackgroundWorker.ReportProgress will not block (it will return immediately, before the BackgroundWorker raises the event).
If you want them to behave the same, call Control.BeginInvoke (which doesn't block) instead.
I've found a significant difference. Closing the form while the BGW is running will cause this.Invoke() and this.BeginInvoke() to throw an ObjectDisposedException. The BGW ReportProgress mechanism circumvents that. To enjoy the best of both worlds, the following pattern works nicely
public partial class MyForm : Form
{
private void InvokeViaBgw(Action action)
{
Packing_Worker.ReportProgress(0, action);
}
private void BGW_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
if (this.IsDisposed) return; //You are on the UI thread now, so no race condition
var action = (Action)e.UserState;
action();
}
private private void BGW_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
//Sample usage:
this.InvokeViaBgw(() => MyTextBox.Text = "Foo");
}
}

Winforms StatusStrip - why are there periods where it is blank when I'm updating it?

BACKGROUND: I have a WindowForms v3.5 application with a StatusStrip set to be used as a TooStripStatusLabel. I'm issues quite a lot of updates to it during a task that is running, however there are noticable periods where it is BLANK. There are no points when I am writing a blank to the status strip label either.
QUESTION: Any ideas why I would be seeing period where the status strip label is blank, when I don't expect it to be?
How I update it:
private void UpdateStatusStrip(string text)
{
toolStripStatusLabel1.Text = text;
toolStripStatusLabel1.Invalidate();
this.Update();
}
PS. Calling Application.DoEvents() after the this.Update() does not seem to help. I actually am calling this via the backgroundworker control, so:
(a) I start up the background worker:
private void Sync_Button_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerAsync();
DisableUpdateButtons();
}
(b) the background worker calls updates:
private void backgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, System.ComponentModel.DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
backgroundWorker1.ReportProgress(1, "Example string");
MainForm.MyC.SyncFiles(sender);
}
(c) The MyC business class uses it too, e.g.
public void SyncFiles(object sender)
{
BackgroundWorker bgw = (System.ComponentModel.BackgroundWorker) sender;
bgw.ReportProgress(1, "Starting sync...");
.
.
.
}
(d) This event picks it up:
private void backgroundWorker1_ProgressChanged(object sender, System.ComponentModel.ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
UpdateStatusStrip((string)e.UserState);
}
(e) And again the update status strip
private void UpdateStatusStrip(string text)
{
toolStripStatusLabel1.Text = text;
toolStripStatusLabel1.Invalidate();
this.Update();
}
Does this help?
The reason is possibly in the caller of this function. If you call it from another thread, use Control.BeginInvoke instead of direct call. If you call it from the main application thread during long processing, try Application.DoEvents after UpdateStatusStrip call.

How to run batched WCF service calls in Silverlight BackgroundWorker

Is there any existing plumbing to run WCF calls in batches in a BackgroundWorker?
Obviously since all Silverlight WCF calls are async - if I run them all in a backgroundworker they will all return instantly.
I just don't want to implement a nasty hack if theres a nice way to run service calls and collect the results.
Doesnt matter what order they are done in
All operations are independent
I'd like to have no more than 5 items running at once
Edit: i've also noticed (when using Fiddler) that no more than about 7 calls are able to be sent at any one time. Even when running out-of-browser this limit applies. Is this due to my default browser settings - or configurable also. obviously its a poor man's solution (and not suitable for what i want) but something I'll probably need to take account of to make sure the rest of my app remains responsive if i'm running this as a background task and don't want it using up all my connections.
I think your best bet would be to have your main thread put service request items into a Queue that is shared with a BackgroundWorker thread. The BackgroundWorker can then read from the Queue, and when it detects a new item, initiate the async WCF service request, and setup to handle the AsyncCompletion event. Don't forget to lock the Queue before you call Enqueue() or Dequeue() from different threads.
Here is some code that suggests the beginning of a solution:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.ComponentModel;
namespace MyApplication
{
public class RequestItem
{
public string RequestItemData { get; set; }
}
public class ServiceHelper
{
private BackgroundWorker _Worker = new BackgroundWorker();
private Queue<RequestItem> _Queue = new Queue<RequestItem>();
private List<RequestItem> _ActiveRequests = new List<RequestItem>();
private const int _MaxRequests = 3;
public ServiceHelper()
{
_Worker.DoWork += DoWork;
_Worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
private void DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
while (!_Worker.CancellationPending)
{
// TBD: Add a N millisecond timer here
// so we are not constantly checking the Queue
// Don't bother checking the queue
// if we already have MaxRequests in process
int _NumRequests = 0;
lock (_ActiveRequests)
{
_NumRequests = _ActiveRequests.Count;
}
if (_NumRequests >= _MaxRequests)
continue;
// Check the queue for new request items
RequestItem item = null;
lock (_Queue)
{
RequestItem item = _Queue.Dequeue();
}
if (item == null)
continue;
// We found a new request item!
lock (_ActiveRequests)
{
_ActiveRequests.Add(item);
}
// TBD: Initiate an async service request,
// something like the following:
try
{
MyServiceRequestClient proxy = new MyServiceRequestClient();
proxy.RequestCompleted += OnRequestCompleted;
proxy.RequestAsync(item);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
}
}
}
private void OnRequestCompleted(object sender, RequestCompletedEventArgs e)
{
try
{
if (e.Error != null || e.Cancelled)
return;
RequestItem item = e.Result;
lock (_ActiveRequests)
{
_ActiveRequests.Remove(item);
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
}
}
public void AddRequest(RequestItem item)
{
lock (_Queue)
{
_Queue.Enqueue(item);
}
}
}
}
Let me know if I can offer more help.

Resources