If there are two different reminders on the same grain activation to be fired at the same point, given that grain execution context is single-threaded, will both reminders be executed and interleaved at the same time?
Also, is the reminder execution limited by the default 30s timeout ?
Reminders are invoked using regular grain method calls: the IRemindable interface is a regular grain interface. IRemindable.ReceiveReminder(...) is not marked as [AlwaysInterleave], so it will only be interleaved if your grain class is marked as [Reentrant].
In short: no, reminder calls are not interleaved by default.
Reminders do not override the SiloMessagingOptions.ResponseTimeout value, so the default execution time will be 30s.
If you have a reminder that might need a very long time to execute, you can follow a pattern of starting the long-running work in a background task and ensuring that it is still running (not completed or faulted) whenever the relevant reminder fires.
Here is an example of using that pattern:
public class MyGrain : Grain, IMyGrain
{
private readonly CancellationTokenSource _deactivating = new CancellationTokenSource();
private Task _processQueueTask;
private IGrainReminder _reminder = null;
public Task ReceiveReminder(string reminderName, TickStatus status)
{
// Ensure that the reminder task is running.
if (_processQueueTask is null || _processQueueTask.IsCompleted)
{
if (_processQueueTask?.Exception is Exception exception)
{
// Log that an error occurred.
}
_processQueueTask = DoLongRunningWork();
_processQueueTask.Ignore();
}
return Task.CompletedTask;
}
public override async Task OnActivateAsync()
{
if (_reminder != null)
{
return;
}
_reminder = await RegisterOrUpdateReminder(
"long-running-work",
TimeSpan.FromMinutes(1),
TimeSpan.FromMinutes(1)
);
}
public override async Task OnDeactivateAsync()
{
_deactivating.Cancel(throwOnFirstException: false);
Task processQueueTask = _processQueueTask;
if (processQueueTask != null)
{
// Optionally add some max deactivation timeout here to stop waiting after (eg) 45 seconds
await processQueueTask;
}
}
public async Task StopAsync()
{
if (_reminder == null)
{
return;
}
await UnregisterReminder(_reminder);
_reminder = null;
}
private async Task DoLongRunningWork()
{
// Log that we are starting the long-running work
while (!_deactivating.IsCancellationRequested)
{
try
{
// Do long-running work
}
catch (Exception exception)
{
// Log exception. Potentially wait before retrying loop, since it seems like GetMessageAsync may have failed for us to end up here.
}
}
}
}
Related
I am using MudBlazor to develop a client-side Blazor-WASM app. I have a search field which is to update the bound variable in real-time (i.e. not only after losing focus, but while typing). Furthermore, I want to clear the MudTextField's text if user presses the -key (so they don't have to use the clear-button if they don't want to). Well, if I do it like this, it works perfectly:
<MudTextField Label="search something" Variant="Variant.Text" Clearable="true"
#bind-Value="SearchText" Immediate="true"
#onkeydown="e => KeyboardEventHandler(e)"
/>
#code {
public string SearchText { get; set; }
private void KeyboardEventHandler(KeyboardEventArgs args)
{
if (args.Code == "Escape") { SearchText = string.Empty; }
}
}
This works like a charm. However, I need the component to wait a little while before updating the variable, because each change triggers a new filtering process that may block the UI for a bit (since BlazorWASM, at the time, doesn't support multithreading). So, I use DebounceInterval, i. e. do it like this:
<MudTextField Label="search something" Variant="Variant.Text" Clearable="true"
#bind-Value="SearchText" Immediate="true" DebounceInterval="350"
#onkeydown="e => KeyboardEventHandler(e)"
/>
#code {
public string SearchText { get; set; }
private void KeyboardEventHandler(KeyboardEventArgs args)
{
if (args.Code == "Escape") { SearchText = string.Empty; }
}
}
If I do it like this, when typing faster than the debounce interval, only the last typed character is kept (i.e. every character typed replaces the one before it), as long as the #onkeydown event is used, too.
How can I make this work? I'd be grateful for a possible solution or ideas towards it.
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
There are a few ways to implement a debouncer. The simplest is just to do a backoff of say 300ms before doing your lookup. This gives you a 300ms + your lookup period.
Here's a slightly different method that uses Tasks and waits either the backoff period or the query period whichever is the longer.
The deboucer with lots of comment code to explain what's happening.
public sealed class ActionLimiter
{
private int _backOffPeriod = 0;
private Func<Task> _taskToRun;
private Task _activeTask = Task.CompletedTask;
private TaskCompletionSource<bool>? _queuedTaskCompletionSource;
private TaskCompletionSource<bool>? _activeTaskCompletionSource;
private async Task RunQueueAsync()
{
// if we have a completed task then null it
if (_activeTaskCompletionSource is not null && _activeTaskCompletionSource.Task.IsCompleted)
_activeTaskCompletionSource = null;
// if we have a running task then everything is already in motion and there's nothing to do
if (_activeTaskCompletionSource is not null)
return;
// run the loop while we have a queued request.
while (_queuedTaskCompletionSource is not null)
{
// assign the queued task reference to the running task
_activeTaskCompletionSource = _queuedTaskCompletionSource;
// And release the reference
_queuedTaskCompletionSource = null;
// start backoff task
var backoffTask = Task.Delay(_backOffPeriod);
// start main task
var mainTask = _taskToRun.Invoke();
// await both ensures we run the backoff period or greater
await Task.WhenAll( new Task[] { mainTask, backoffTask } );
// Set the running task completion as complete
_activeTaskCompletionSource.TrySetResult(true);
// and release our reference to the running task completion
// The originator will still hold a reference and can act on it's completion
_activeTaskCompletionSource = null;
// back to the top to check if another task has been queued
}
return;
}
public Task<bool> QueueAsync()
{
var oldCompletionTask = _queuedTaskCompletionSource;
// Create a new completion task
var newCompletionTask = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>();
// get the actual task before we assign it to the queue
var task = newCompletionTask.Task;
// replace _queuedTaskCompletionSource
_queuedTaskCompletionSource = newCompletionTask;
// check if we already have a queued queued task.
// If so set it as completed, false = not run
if (oldCompletionTask is not null && !oldCompletionTask.Task.IsCompleted)
oldCompletionTask?.TrySetResult(false);
// if we don't have a running task or the task is complete , then there's no process running the queue
// So we need to call it and assign it to `runningTask`
if (_activeTask is null || _activeTask.IsCompleted)
_activeTask = this.RunQueueAsync();
// return the reference to the task we queued
return task;
}
private ActionLimiter(Func<Task> toRun, int backOffPeriod)
{
_backOffPeriod = backOffPeriod;
_taskToRun = toRun;
}
/// <summary>
/// Static method to create a new deBouncer
/// </summary>
/// <param name="toRun">method to run to update the component</param>
/// <param name="backOffPeriod">Back off period in millisecs</param>
/// <returns></returns>
public static ActionLimiter Create(Func<Task> toRun, int backOffPeriod)
=> new ActionLimiter(toRun, backOffPeriod > 300 ? backOffPeriod : 300);
}
And a demo page to show how to use it:
#page "/"
#using Blazr.UI
<h3>Test</h3>
<input class="form-control mb-2" type="text" #oninput=OnInput />
<div class="alert alert-info">
#message
</div>
#code {
private ActionLimiter _limiter;
private string? message;
private string? value;
public Test()
=> _limiter = ActionLimiter.Create(this.RunTask, 300);
private async Task OnInput(ChangeEventArgs e)
{
value = e.Value?.ToString() ?? null;
await _limiter.QueueAsync();
}
private async Task RunTask()
{
// simulate doing your search
await Task.Delay(1000);
message = value;
}
}
There's a full CodeProject article here describing this technique and how to build a Typeahead control using it.
https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/5351256/Building-a-Blazor-Autocomplete-Control
Im trying to perform a synchronization task without blocking UI thread. I have implemented a Android Service to do so, but I found out, if the synchronization task needs too much computational time, the UI thread was blocked. So I tried the migration to IntentService. This is how my IntentService looks like:
[Service]
public class SynchronizeIntentService : IntentService
{
static readonly string TAG = typeof(SynchronizeIntentService).FullName;
private NotificationCompat.Builder Builder;
private NotificationManagerCompat NotificationManager;
public SynchronizeIntentService() : base("SynchronizeIntentService")
{
}
public override void OnDestroy()
{
var tmp = 5;
base.OnDestroy();
}
private NotificationChannel createNotificationChannel()
{
var channelId = Constants.NOTIFICATION_CHANNELID;
var channelName = "My Notification Service";
var Channel = new NotificationChannel(channelId, channelName, Android.App.NotificationImportance.Default);
Channel.LightColor = Android.Resource.Color.HoloBlueBright;
Channel.LockscreenVisibility = NotificationVisibility.Public;
return Channel;
}
private void createForegroundService()
{
var mNotificationManager = GetSystemService(Context.NotificationService) as NotificationManager;
if (Build.VERSION.SdkInt >= Android.OS.BuildVersionCodes.O)
{
mNotificationManager.CreateNotificationChannel(createNotificationChannel());
}
var notificationBuilder = new NotificationCompat.Builder(this, Constants.NOTIFICATION_CHANNELID);
GenerateNotification();
StartForeground(Constants.SERVICE_RUNNING_NOTIFICATION_ID, Builder.Notification);
}
private void GenerateNotification()
{
NotificationManager = NotificationManagerCompat.From(this);
Builder = new NotificationCompat.Builder(this, Constants.NOTIFICATION_CHANNELID);
Builder.SetContentTitle(ContaScan.Classes.Localize.GetString("Global_SynchProcess", ""))
.SetSmallIcon(Resource.Drawable.icon)
.SetPriority(NotificationCompat.PriorityLow);
}
protected async override void OnHandleIntent(Intent intent)
{
Log.Debug(TAG, "Service Started!");
await Synch();
Log.Debug(TAG, "Service Stopping!");
StopForeground(true);
this.StopSelf();
}
public override StartCommandResult OnStartCommand(Intent intent, [GeneratedEnum] StartCommandFlags flags, int startId)
{
base.OnStartCommand(intent, flags, startId);
createForegroundService();
return StartCommandResult.Sticky;
}
private async Task Synch()
{
//Large synch process
}
}
And this is how the service is getting started:
startServiceIntent = new Intent(Android.App.Application.Context, typeof(SynchronizeIntentService));
startServiceIntent.SetAction(Constants.ACTION_START_SERVICE);
ContextWrapper contextWrapper = new ContextWrapper(Android.App.Application.Context);
contextWrapper.StartService(startServiceIntent);
The problem is OnDestroy() method is called while the Synch() task is being performed and looks like the IntentService is being killed before ending the process.
What am I doing wrong?
First, check your API level. This class was deprecated in API level 30.
And then, when you use the OnHandleIntent, do not call Service.stopSelf().
This method is invoked on the worker thread with a request to process. Only one Intent is processed at a time, but the processing happens on a worker thread that runs independently from other application logic. So, if this code takes a long time, it will hold up other requests to the same IntentService, but it will not hold up anything else. When all requests have been handled, the IntentService stops itself, so you should not call Service.stopSelf().
For more details, please check the link below. https://developer.android.com/reference/android/app/IntentService#onHandleIntent(android.content.Intent)
I have used Task.WaitAll inside an async method in my HomeController, but it is not waiting to complete execution of the async methods. What did I do wrong here? Instead of waiting, it immediately goes to the next statement.
HomeController.cs:
private List<Task> taskList = new List<Task>();
public ActionResult Index()
{
for (i=0; i<5; i++)
{
SendMessages();
}
Task.WaitAll(taskList.ToArray());
// call demo method
}
private async Task SendMessages()
{
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() => ProcessMessages()
taskList.Add(task);
}
private async Task ProcessMessages()
{
while (run for 10 minutes)
{
// data save
}
}
I have added a Task into taskList and used Task.WaitAll(taskList.ToArray()); to wait for all tasks to complete, then call demo method. But instead of waiting and executing the whole loop, it immediately goes down after Task.WaitAll(taskList.ToArray()); and executes call demo method. Why is this?
Task.Factory.StartNew should not be used to launch asynchronous operations, since it does not unwrap the returned Task, and instead returns a new Task that completes as soon as the asynchronous operation launches (or, more precisely, completes its synchronous part). You should use Task.Run instead.
Additionally, SendMessages should not be async. However, Index should be, allowing you to use the asynchronous WhenAll instead of the blocking WaitAll.
private List<Task> taskList = new List<Task>();
public async Task<ActionResult> Index()
{
for (i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
SendMessages();
}
await Task.WhenAll(taskList);
// call demo method
}
private void SendMessages()
{
var task = Task.Run(() => ProcessMessagesAsync()); // here
taskList.Add(task);
}
private async Task ProcessMessagesAsync()
{
while (run for 10 minutes)
{
// data save
}
}
I have a JavaFX application which instantiates several Task objects.
Currently, my implementation (see below) calls the behavior runFactory() which performs computation under a Task object. Parallel to this, nextFunction() is invoked. Is there a way to have nextFunction() "wait" until the prior Task is complete?
I understand thread.join() waits until the running thread is complete, but with GUIs, there are additional layers of complexity due to the event dispatch thread.
As a matter of fact, adding thread.join() to the end of the code-segment below only ceases UI interaction.
If there are any suggestions how to make nextFunction wait until its prior function, runFactory is complete, I'd be very appreciative.
Thanks,
// High-level class to run the Knuth-Morris-Pratt algorithm.
public class AlignmentFactory {
public void perform() {
KnuthMorrisPrattFactory factory = new KnuthMorrisPrattFactory();
factory.runFactory(); // nextFunction invoked w/out runFactory finishing.
// Code to run once runFactory() is complete.
nextFunction() // also invokes a Task.
...
}
}
// Implementation of Knuth-Morris-Pratt given a list of words and a sub-string.
public class KnuthMorrisPratt {
public void runFactory() throws InterruptedException {
Thread thread = null;
Task<Void> task = new Task<Void>() {
#Override public Void call() throws InterruptedException {
for (InputSequence seq: getSequences) {
KnuthMorrisPratt kmp = new KnuthMorrisPratt(seq, substring);
kmp.align();
}
return null;
}
};
thread = new Thread(task);
thread.setDaemon(true);
thread.start();
}
When using Tasks you need to use setOnSucceeded and possibly setOnFailed to create a logic flow in your program, I propose that you also make runFactory() return the task rather than running it:
// Implementation of Knuth-Morris-Pratt given a list of words and a sub-string.
public class KnuthMorrisPratt {
public Task<Void> runFactory() throws InterruptedException {
return new Task<Void>() {
#Override public Void call() throws InterruptedException {
for (InputSequence seq: getSequences) {
KnuthMorrisPratt kmp = new KnuthMorrisPratt(seq, substring);
kmp.align();
}
return null;
}
};
}
// High-level class to run the Knuth-Morris-Pratt algorithm.
public class AlignmentFactory {
public void perform() {
KnuthMorrisPrattFactory factory = new KnuthMorrisPrattFactory();
Task<Void> runFactoryTask = factory.runFactory();
runFactoryTask.setOnSucceeded(new EventHandler<WorkerStateEvent>() {
#Override
public void handle(WorkerStateEvent t)
{
// Code to run once runFactory() is completed **successfully**
nextFunction() // also invokes a Task.
}
});
runFactoryTask.setOnFailed(new EventHandler<WorkerStateEvent>() {
#Override
public void handle(WorkerStateEvent t)
{
// Code to run once runFactory() **fails**
}
});
new Thread(runFactoryTask).start();
}
}
I am working with a BlackBerry App that has a number of timers in it to schedule sending reports to the server platform. It is all working fine until I changed the logic to prioritize reports. Therefore, now I am checking if, for instance, Report A is switched on and the user activates Report B as well, then only Report B should go through and Report A should halt UNTIL B is activated. Once B is deactivated (timer cancelled), Report A should resume. However, even when the code loops in the cancel timer task code, Report A continues to go through while B is still activated.
FieldChangeListener reportingListener = new FieldChangeListener() {
public void fieldChanged(Field field, int context)
{
try {
if (field == slider) {
int i = slider.getValue();
if(i==0)
lblInterval.setText(1+" minute");
if(i==1)
lblInterval.setText(2+" minutes");
if(i==2)
lblInterval.setText(5+" minutes");
if(i==3)
lblInterval.setText(10+" minutes");
if(i==4)
lblInterval.setText(15+" minutes");
if(i==5)
lblInterval.setText(30+" minutes");
if(i==6)
lblInterval.setText(1+" hour");
if(i==7)
lblInterval.setText(2+" hours");
if(i==8)
lblInterval.setText(6+" hours");
if(i==9)
lblInterval.setText(12+" hours");
if(i==10)
lblInterval.setText(24+" hours");
setSliderPosition(i);
value=setLblIntervalValue(i);
value2=setGpsTimerIntervalValue(i);
gpsReportValue=lblInterval.getText();
gpsIntervalValue1=setGpsTimerIntervalValue(i);
}
if (PersistentStoreHelper.persistentHashtable.containsKey("image"))
{
boolean trackONOFFImage = ((Boolean) PersistentStoreHelper.persistentHashtable.get("image")).booleanValue();
if(trackONOFFImage==true)
{
if (PersistentStoreHelper.persistentHashtable.containsKey("panic"))
{
boolean panicImage = ((Boolean)PersistentStoreHelper.persistentHashtable.get("panic")).booleanValue();
if(panicImage==true)
{
MyScreen.currentlyReporting.setText("PANIC ALARM TRIGGERED");
if (PersistentStoreHelper.persistentHashtable.containsKey("tabTrackValid"))
{
boolean trackingTab = ((Boolean)PersistentStoreHelper.persistentHashtable.get("tabTrackValid")).booleanValue();
if(trackingTab==false)
{
trackSlider.cancel();
}
PersistentStoreHelper.persistentHashtable.put("tabTrackValid", Boolean.TRUE);
}
}
else
{
//int gpsIntervalValue1=setGpsTimerIntervalValue(i);
if (PersistentStoreHelper.persistentHashtable.containsKey("gpsTimerIntervalValue"))
{
String intervalValue=((String)PersistentStoreHelper.persistentHashtable.get("gpsTimerIntervalValue"));
if(gpsIntervalValue1==Integer.parseInt(intervalValue))
{
//do nothing
}
else
{
trackSlider = new TimerTask() {
public void run() {
try {
UiApplication.getUiApplication().invokeLater(new Runnable()
{
public void run() {
//Dialog.alert("Invalid login details");
}
});
sendTrackingReport();
} catch (Exception e) {
Dialog.alert("Unable to track at the new interval set");
}
}
};
//trackSlider.run();
trackingTimerSlider.scheduleAtFixedRate(trackSlider , 0, gpsIntervalValue1);
PersistentStoreHelper.persistentHashtable.put("tabTrackValid", Boolean.FALSE);
}
}
}
}
}//this
}
} catch (IllegalStateException e) {
//Dialog.alert("CANCEL TRACK1");
e.printStackTrace();
} catch (NullPointerException e) {
//Dialog.alert("CANCEL TRACK2");
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
};
NOTE: Report A = Tracking. Report B = Panic. Panic has priority over Tracking. Slider is changing the timer interval value.
I debugged my code and while it goes into the loop and cancels the timer task of the requested report, I still see those reports going through. Am I not cancelling the timer correctly? Please advice.
From the TimerTask.cancel javadoc:
... If the task has been scheduled for repeated execution, it will never run again. (If the task is running when this call occurs, the task will run to completion, but will never run again.) ...
So to begin with, calling cancel from a thread does not immediatly stop the Timer thread as you can see.
Also you are creating a new Timer each time in your screen:
trackSlider = new TimerTask()
Thus it might be possible that if you create several instances of your screen during the app running, several timers of the same type will be created.