How to get cancellation state for multiple DispatchWorkItems - ios

Question

Background
I'm implementing a search. Each search query results in one DispatchWorkItem which is then queued for execution. As the user can trigger a new search faster than the previous one can be completed, I'd like to cancel the previous one as soon as I receive a new one.
This is my current setup:
var currentSearchJob: DispatchWorkItem?
let searchJobQueue = DispatchQueue(label: QUEUE_KEY)
func updateSearchResults(for searchController: UISearchController) {
let queryString = searchController.searchBar.text?.lowercased() ?? ""
// if there is already an (older) search job running, cancel it
currentSearchJob?.cancel()
// create a new search job
currentSearchJob = DispatchWorkItem() {
self.filter(queryString: queryString)
}
// start the new job
searchJobQueue.async(execute: currentSearchJob!)
}
Problem
I understand that dispatchWorkItem.cancel() doesn't kill the running task immediately. Instead, I need to check for dispatchWorkItem.isCancelled manually. But how do I get the right dispatchWorkItemobject in this case?
If I were setting currentSearchJob only once, I could simply access that attribute like done in this case. However, this isn't applicable here, because the attribute will be overriden before the filter() method will be finished. How do I know which instance is actually running the code in which I want to check for dispatchWorkItem.isCancelled?
Ideally, I'd like to provide the newly-created DispatchWorkItem as an additional parameter to the filter() method. But that's not possible, because I'll get a Variable used within its own initial value error.
I'm new to Swift, so I hope I'm just missing something. Any help is appreciated very much!

Answer 1

The trick is how to have a dispatched task check if it has been canceled. I'd actually suggest consider OperationQueue approach, rather than using dispatch queues directly.
There are at least two approaches:
Most elegant, IMHO, is to just subclass Operation, passing whatever you want to it in the init method, and performing the work in the main method:
class SearchOperation: Operation {
private var queryString: String
init(queryString: String) {
self.queryString = queryString
super.init()
}
override func main() {
// do something synchronous, periodically checking `isCancelled`
// e.g., for illustrative purposes
print("starting \(queryString)")
for i in 0 ... 10 {
if isCancelled { print("canceled \(queryString)"); return }
print(" \(queryString): \(i)")
heavyWork()
}
print("finished \(queryString)")
}
func heavyWork() {
Thread.sleep(forTimeInterval: 0.5)
}
}
Because that's in an Operation subclass, isCancelled is implicitly referencing itself rather than some ivar, avoiding any confusion about what it's checking. And your "start a new query" code can just say "cancel anything currently on the the relevant operation queue and add a new operation onto that queue":
private var searchQueue: OperationQueue = {
let queue = OperationQueue()
// queue.maxConcurrentOperationCount = 1 // make it serial if you want
queue.name = Bundle.main.bundleIdentifier! + ".backgroundQueue"
return queue
}()
func performSearch(for queryString: String) {
searchQueue.cancelAllOperations()
let operation = SearchOperation(queryString: queryString)
searchQueue.addOperation(operation)
}
I recommend this approach as you end up with a small cohesive object, the operation, that nicely encapsulates a block of work that you want to do, in the spirit of the Single Responsibility Principle.
While the following is less elegant, technically you can also use BlockOperation, which is block-based, but for which which you can decouple the creation of the operation, and the adding of the closure to the operation. Using this technique, you can actually pass a reference to the operation to its own closure:
private weak var lastOperation: Operation?
func performSearch(for queryString: String) {
lastOperation?.cancel()
let operation = BlockOperation()
operation.addExecutionBlock { [weak operation, weak self] in
print("starting \(identifier)")
for i in 0 ... 10 {
if operation?.isCancelled ?? true { print("canceled \(identifier)"); return }
print(" \(identifier): \(i)")
self?.heavyWork()
}
print("finished \(identifier)")
}
searchQueue.addOperation(operation)
lastOperation = operation
}
func heavyWork() {
Thread.sleep(forTimeInterval: 0.5)
}
I only mention this for the sake of completeness. I think the Operation subclass approach is frequently a better design. I'll use BlockOperation for one-off sort of stuff, but as soon as I want more sophisticated cancelation logic, I think the Operation subclass approach is better.
I should also mention that, in addition to more elegant cancelation capabilities, Operation objects offer all sorts of other sophisticated capabilities (e.g. asynchronously manage queue of tasks that are, themselves, asynchronous; constrain degree of concurrency; etc.). This is all beyond the scope of this question.

Answer 2

you wrote
Ideally, I'd like to provide the newly-created DispatchWorkItem as an
additional parameter
you are wrong, to be able to cancel running task, you need a reference to it, not to the next which is ready to dispatch.
cancel() doesn't cancel running task, it only set internal "isCancel" flag by the thread-safe way, or remove the task from the queue before execution. Once executed, checking isCancel give you a chance to finish the job (early return).
import PlaygroundSupport
import Foundation
PlaygroundPage.current.needsIndefiniteExecution = true
let queue = DispatchQueue.global(qos: .background)
let prq = DispatchQueue(label: "print.queue")
var task: DispatchWorkItem?
func work(task: DispatchWorkItem?) {
sleep(1)
var d = Date()
if task?.isCancelled ?? true {
prq.async {
print("cancelled", d)
}
return
}
sleep(3)
d = Date()
prq.async {
print("finished", d)
}
}
for _ in 0..<3 {
task?.cancel()
let item = DispatchWorkItem {
work(task: task)
}
item.notify(queue: prq) {
print("done")
}
queue.asyncAfter(deadline: .now() + 0.5, execute: item)
task = item
sleep(1) // comment this line
}
in this example, only the very last job is really fully executed
cancelled 2018-12-17 23:49:13 +0000
done
cancelled 2018-12-17 23:49:14 +0000
done
finished 2018-12-17 23:49:18 +0000
done
try to comment the last line and it prints
done
done
finished 2018-12-18 00:07:28 +0000
done
the difference is, that first two execution never happened. (were removed from the dispatch queue before execution)