I've found this method to work with background thread. My question is that I've run a whole process in background thread which include number of methods. Frist method calls the second one and the the second one makes some data and pass it to the third one.
-(void)firstMethod
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue( DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^(void){
if(someCondition == 0)
{
[self secondMethod:myArray];
}
}
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^(void){
[self.navigationController popViewControllerAnimated:YES];
});
});
}
-(void)secondMethod:(NSArray *)array {
a= a+3;
[self thirdMethod:array[a];
}
So you get the general idea right? So do I have to put the functionality of second and third method in background thread too? Or how this whole process will take place?
Related
I implemented login method in this way:
[KVNProgress show];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
//some error handling like:
if ([_usernameField.text length] < 4) {
[KVNProgress showErrorWithStatus:#"Username too short!"];
_passwordField.text = #"";
return;
}
//Then I call login web service synchronously here:
result = [ServerRequests login];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
if(!result)
{
[KVNProgress showErrorWithStatus:#"problem!" completion:NULL];
_passwordField.text = #"";
}
else if([result.successful boolValue])
{
[KVNProgress showSuccessWithStatus:result.message];
}
});
});
It crashed mostly and by surrounding blocks with only Main Queue (no priority default one) that solved! but the problem is:KVNProgress is only showing in error handling area not the next part that we call web service. It's not user friendly at all! Any idea is welcomed :)
You MUST call methods that update the user interface in any way from the main thread, as per the UIKit documentation:
For the most part, use UIKit classes only from your app’s main thread. This is particularly true for classes derived from UIResponder or that involve manipulating your app’s user interface in any way.
I suggest you try to limit the number of callbacks you make to the main thread, so therefore you want to batch as much user interface updates together as you can.
Then all you have to do, as you correctly say, is to use a dispatch_async to callback to your main thread whenever you need to update the UI, from within your background processing.
Because it's asynchronous, it won't interrupt your background processing, and should have a minimal interruption on the main thread itself as updating values on most UIKit components is fairly cheap, they'll just update their value and trigger their setNeedsDisplay so that they'll get re-drawn at the next run loop.
From your code, it looks like your issue is that you're calling this from the background thread:
if ([_usernameField.text length] < 4) {
[KVNProgress showErrorWithStatus:#"Username too short!"];
_passwordField.text = #"";
return;
}
This is 100% UI updating code, and should therefore take place on the main thread.
Although, I have no idea about the thread safety of KVNProgress, I assume it should also be called on the main thread as it's presenting an error to the user.
Your code therefore should look something like this (assuming it's taking place on the main thread to begin with):
[KVNProgress show];
//some error handling like:
if ([_usernameField.text length] < 4) {
[KVNProgress showErrorWithStatus:#"Username too short!"];
_passwordField.text = #"";
return;
}
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
//Then I call login web service synchronously here:
result = [ServerRequests login];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
if(!result) {
[KVNProgress showErrorWithStatus:#"problem!" completion:NULL];
_passwordField.text = #"";
} else if([result.successful boolValue]) {
[KVNProgress showSuccessWithStatus:result.message];
}
});
});
I have two methods as loadTopicPostsFromDB and loadTopicPosts. In the loadTopicPostsFromDB method I am updating the value of a global NSString called strLastTimeStamp which should use in the loadTopicPosts. Thus, I want to execute loadTopicPostsFromDB first and after it finished(global string updated) I want to execute loadTopicPosts method.
This is how I did it. But, currently loadTopicPosts method executes before updating the global strLastTimeStamp, so always I get a wrong strLastTimeStamp.
dispatch_queue_t queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0);
dispatch_group_t group = dispatch_group_create();
dispatch_group_async(group, queue, ^{
[self performSelectorOnMainThread:#selector(loadTopicPostsFromDB) withObject:nil waitUntilDone:NO];
});
dispatch_group_notify(group, queue, ^{
NSLog(#"LoadDBCompleted");
[self loadTopicPosts];
});
How can I do this, please advice me on what is the wrong in this implementation.
performSelectorOnMainThread: is finished as soon as iOS has put the task into a queue. The selector has most likely not even started running when the call returns. And really, you shouldn't be using performSelectorOnMainThread at all - the function isn't available in Swift, for good reason. The solution is a lot easier (fix the problems yourself):
dispatch_async (dispatch_get_main_queue (), ^{
[self loadTopicsFromDB];
[self loadTopicPosts];
});
You probably want to perform loadTopicsFromDB on a background thread though.
When you are doing something using network connection I advice you to use blocks to handle the endpoint of the call.
It is pretty simple to write in this code
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
[self loadTopicsFromDB: ^(BOOL success, NSError *error) {
[self loadTopicPosts];
}];
});
I'm struggling with GCD and blocks. I'm trying to create a series of methods that require data from a previous one. I was thinking about 2 different ways to achieve it.
dispatch_sync serial queue
nested completion blocks
Don't you think the following 2 options return the same value? AS far as I read in Apple's dispatch queues, DISPATCH_QUEUE_SERIAL runs in FIFO order. So both options should return identical values.
What am I doing wrong here? and which one is the best approach?
Thanks for your help!
//Option 1
dispatch_queue_t delete_queue = dispatch_queue_create("delete_queue", DISPATCH_QUEUE_SERIAL);
dispatch_sync(delete_queue, ^{
[self dosomething];
});
dispatch_sync(delete_queue, ^{
[self dosomething2];
});
dispatch_sync(delete_queue, ^{
[self dosomething3];
});
//Option 2
-(void)dosomething1:(dispatch_block_t)completion;
-(void)dosomething2:(dispatch_block_t)completion;
-(void)dosomething3:(dispatch_block_t)completion;
[self dosomething:^{
[self dosomething2:^{
[self dosomething3:^{}];
}];
}];
-(void)dosomething:(dispatch_block_t)completion {
/*method logic here*/
completion();
}
-(void)dosomething2:(dispatch_block_t)completion {
/*method logic here*/
completion();
}
-(void)dosomething3:(dispatch_block_t)completion {
/*method logic here*/
completion();
}
Both code samples you have shown are equivalent to just:
[self dosomething];
[self dosomething2];
[self dosomething3];
In other words, both ways execute the methods synchronously, in order, and block the thread until they are done.
Also, as Ken Thomases said, none of your methods "return" anything, so your question about returning doesn't make sense.
It doesn't really make sense to do three separate calls to dispatch_sync() here:
dispatch_sync(delete_queue, ^{
[self dosomething];
});
dispatch_sync(delete_queue, ^{
[self dosomething2];
});
dispatch_sync(delete_queue, ^{
[self dosomething3];
});
You should instead just do them all in a single block:
dispatch_sync(delete_queue, ^{
[self dosomething];
[self dosomething2];
[self dosomething3];
});
As for the use of completion blocks, you can certainly obtain a similar result, except that the completion-handler result would need to be asynchronous.
I think you need to take a step back and explain what kind of API you are trying to design in order to determine how you want to use the tools of the system and language to achieve that API design.
I am trying to process method asynchronously, as per requirements, once the first method has completed, only then the second method should start executing. The Problem is first method itself has code that runs on background thread.
I tried dispatch_semaphore_wait, but that didnt work either.
dispatch_queue_t queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_HIGH, 0);
dispatch_group_t group = dispatch_group_create();
dispatch_group_async(group, queue, ^{
[self firstMethod];
NSLog(#"firstMethod Done");
});
dispatch_group_notify(group, queue, ^ {
NSLog(#"1st method completed");
NSLog(#"2nd method starting");
[self secondMethod];
});
FirstMethod itself runs on another worker thread like this
-(void)firstMethod
{
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_HIGH, 0), ^{
//processing here.....
}];
What is the best way to achieve it, I cannot change the definition of firstMethod as it provided by some 3rd party and also changing it means changing lots of existing code from where this method is being called
You can use a completion block. You just need to modify firstMethod this way:
- (void)firstMethodWithOnComplete:(void (^)(void))onComplete {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_HIGH, 0), ^{
//processing here.....
onComplete();
});
}
And then use it this way:
[self firstMethodWithOnComplete:^{
[self secondMethod];
}];
Dispatch a Single Queue and call your Methods in order
dispatch_group_async(group, queue, ^{
[self firstMethod];
NSLog(#"firstMethod Done");
[self secondmethod];
});
Or you might dispatch a group of 3 concurrent queues(This is a Wild guess)
I have a method like:
- (BOOL)shouldDoSomeWork {
BOOL result = // here I need do hard work with data in background thread and return result, so main thread should wait until the data is calculated and then return result;
return result;
}
How to implement that?
Are you looking for this:
-(void) startWork
{
//Show activity indicator
[NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:#selector(doSomeWork) toTarget:self withObject:nil];
}
-(void) doSomeWork
{
NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [NSAutoreleasePool new];
//Do your work here
[pool release];
[self performSelectorOnMainThread:#selector(doneWork) withObject:nil waitUntilDone:NO];
}
-(void) doneWork
{
//Hide activity indicator
}
Example how to do it with GCD:
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
// Your hard code here
// ...
//BOOL result = ...
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(),^{
[self callbackWithResult:result]; // Call some method and pass the result back to main thread
});
});
That's not typically how you would do it. You need something structured more like this:
- (void)doSomeWorkAndThen:(^void)block {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(0, 0), ^ {
// do
// some
// work
dispatch_sync(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^ {
block();
});
});
That is, you keep the request and what you do afterwards in one place.
Common advice is to use the highest level of abstraction available to you to perform a task. As such NSThread should be relatively low down in the list of things you can do to execute work in the background.
The order you investigate APIs should be like this:
NSOperation / NSOperationQueue
Grand Central Dispatch (libdispatch)
NSThread
POSIX threads
With the first two you write your code as a "unit of work" and then put this work on a queue to be executed at some point. The system takes care of creating and destroying threads for you and the APIs are easy to work with. Here's an example using NSOperationQueue.
NSBlockOperation * blockOperation = [NSBlockOperation blockOperationWithBlock:^{
//Do work
//update your UI on the main thread.
[self performSelectorOnMainThread:#selector(workDone:) withObject:workResults waitUntilDone:NO];
}];
[self.operationQueue addOperation:blockOperation];
easy as that.