I have a service application which I will be soon implementing a log file. Before I start writing how it saves the log file, I have another requirement that a small simple form application should be available to view the log in real-time. In other words, if the service writes something to the log, not only should it save it to the file, but the other application should immediately know and display what was logged.
A dirty solution would be for this app to constantly open this file and check for recent changes, and load anything new. But this is very sloppy and heavy. On the other hand, I could write a server/client socket pair and monitor it through there, but it's a bit of an overload I think to use TCP/IP for sending one string. I'm thinking of using the file method, but how would I make this in a way that wouldn't be so heavy? In other words, suppose the log file grows to 1 million lines. I don't want to load the entire file, I just need to check the end of the file for new data. I'm also OK with a delay of up to 5 seconds, but that would contradict the "Real-time".
The only methods of reading/writing a file which I am familiar with consist of keeping file open/locked and reading all contents of the file, and I have no clue how to only read portions from the end of a file, and to protect it from both applications attempting to access it.
What you are asking for is exactly what I do in one of my company's projects.
It has a service that hosts an out-of-process COM object so all of our apps can write messages to a central log file, and then a separate viewer app that uses that same COM object to receive notifications directly from the service whenever the log file changes. The COM object lets the viewer know where the log file is physically located so the viewer can open the file directly when needed.
For each notification that is received, the viewer checks the new file size and then reads only the new bytes that have been written since the last notification (the viewer keeps track of what the previous file size was). In an earlier version, I had the service actually push each individual log entry to the viewer directly, but under heavy load that is a lot of traffic to sift through, so I ended up taking that feature out and let the viewer handle reading the data instead, that way it can read multiple log entries at one time more efficiently.
Both the service and the viewer have the log file open at the same time. When the service creates/opens the log file, it sets the file to read/write access with read-only sharing. When the viewer opens the file, it sets the file to read-only access with read/write sharing (so the service can still write to it).
Needless to say, both service and viewer are run on the same machine so they can access the same local file (no remote files are used). Although the service does have a feature that forwards log entries via TCP/IP to a remote instance of the service running on another machine (then the viewer running on that machine can see them).
Our Open Source TSynLog class matches most of your needs - it's already stable and proven (used in real world applications, including services).
It features mainly fast logging (with a set of levels, not a hierarchy of level), exception interception with stack trace, and custom logging (including serialization of objects as JSON within the log).
You have even some additional features, like customer-side method profiler, and a log viewer.
Log files are locked during generation: you can read them, not modify them.
Works from Delphi 5 up to XE2, fully Open Source and with daily updates.
This may sound like a completely nutty answer but..
I use Gurock Softwares Smart Inspect.. http://www.gurock.com/smartinspect/
its great because you can send pictures, variables whatever and it logs them all, so while you want text atm, its a great for watching your app real time even on remote machines.. it can send it to a local file..
It maybe a useful answer to your problem, or a red herring - its a little unconventional but the additional features it has you may feel worth incorporating later (such as its great for capturing info should something go horribly wrong)
Years ago I wrote a circular buffer binary-file trace logging system, that avoided the problem of an endlessly growing file, while giving me the capabilities that I wanted, such as being able to see a problem if I wanted to, but otherwise, being able to just ignore the trace buffer.
However, if you want a continuous online system, then I would not use files at all.
I used files because I really did want file-like persistence and no listener app to have to be running. I simply wanted the file solution because I wanted the logging to happen whether anybody was around to "listen" right now, or not, but didn't use an endlessly growing text log because I was worried about using up hundreds of megs on log files, and filling up my 250 megabyte hard drive. One hardly has concerns like that in the era of 1 tb hard disks.
As David says, the client server solution is best, and is not complex really.
But you might prefer files, as I did, in my case way back. I only launched my viewer app as a post-mortem tool that I ran AFTER a crash. This was before there was MadExcept or anything like it, so I had some apps that just died, and I wanted to know what had happened.
Before my circular buffer, I would use a debug view tool like sys-internals DebugView and OutputDebugString, but that didn't help me when the crash happened before I launched DebugView.
File-based logging (binary) is one of the few times I allowed myself to create binary files. I normally hate hate hate binary files. But you just try to make a circular buffer without using a fixed length binary record.
Here's a sample unit. If I was writing this now instead of in 1997, I would have not used a "File of record", but hey, there it is.
To extend this unit so it could be used to be the realtime viewer, I would suggest that you simply check the datetime stamp on the binary file and refresh every 1-5 seconds (your choice) but only when the datetime stamp on the binary trace file has changed. Not hard, and not exactly a heavy load on the system.
This unit is used for the logger and for the viewer, it is a class that can read from, and write to, a circular buffer binary file on disk.
unit trace;
{$Q-}
{$I-}
interface
uses Classes;
const
traceBinMsgLength = 255; // binary record message length
traceEOFMARKER = $FFFFFFFF;
type
TTraceRec = record
index: Cardinal;
tickcount: Cardinal;
msg: array[0..traceBinMsgLength] of AnsiChar;
end;
PTraceBinRecord = ^TTraceRec;
TTraceFileOfRecord = file of TTraceRec;
TTraceBinFile = class
FFilename: string;
FFileMode: Integer;
FTraceFileInfo: string;
FStorageSize: Integer;
FLastIndex: Integer;
FHeaderRec: TTraceRec;
FFileRec: TTraceRec;
FAutoIncrementValue: Cardinal;
FBinaryFileOpen: Boolean;
FBinaryFile: TTraceFileOfRecord;
FAddTraceMessageWhenClosing: Boolean;
public
procedure InitializeFile;
procedure CloseFile;
procedure Trace(msg: string);
procedure OpenFile;
procedure LoadTrace(traceStrs: TStrings);
constructor Create;
destructor Destroy; override;
property Filename: string read FFilename write FFilename;
property TraceFileInfo: string read FTraceFileInfo write FTraceFileInfo;
// Default 1000 rows.
// change storageSize to the size you want your circular file to be before
// you create and write it. Remember to set the value to the same number before
// trying to read it back, or you'll have trouble.
property StorageSize: Integer read FStorageSize write FStorageSize;
property AddTraceMessageWhenClosing: Boolean
read FAddTraceMessageWhenClosing write FAddTraceMessageWhenClosing;
end;
implementation
uses SysUtils;
procedure SetMsg(pRec: PTraceBinRecord; msg: ansistring);
var
n: Integer;
begin
n := length(msg);
if (n >= traceBinMsgLength) then
begin
msg := Copy(msg, 1, traceBinMsgLength);
n := traceBinMsgLength;
end;
StrCopy({Dest} pRec^.msg, {Source} PAnsiChar(msg));
pRec^.msg[n] := Chr(0); // ensure nul char termination
end;
function IsBlank(var aRec: TTraceRec): Boolean;
begin
Result := (aRec.msg[0] = Chr(0));
end;
procedure TTraceBinFile.CloseFile;
begin
if FBinaryFileOpen then
begin
if FAddTraceMessageWhenClosing then
begin
Trace('*END*');
end;
System.CloseFile(FBinaryFile);
FBinaryFileOpen := False;
end;
end;
constructor TTraceBinFile.Create;
begin
FLastIndex := 0; // lastIndex=0 means blank file.
FStorageSize := 1000; // default.
end;
destructor TTraceBinFile.Destroy;
begin
CloseFile;
inherited;
end;
procedure TTraceBinFile.InitializeFile;
var
eofRec: TTraceRec;
t: Integer;
begin
Assert(FStorageSize > 0);
Assert(Length(FFilename) > 0);
Assign(FBinaryFile, Filename);
FFileMode := fmOpenReadWrite;
Rewrite(FBinaryFile);
FBinaryFileOpen := True;
FillChar(FHeaderRec, sizeof(TTraceRec), 0);
FillChar(FFileRec, sizeof(TTraceRec), 0);
FillChar(EofRec, sizeof(TTraceRec), 0);
FLastIndex := 0;
FHeaderRec.index := FLastIndex;
FHeaderRec.tickcount := storageSize;
SetMsg(#FHeaderRec, FTraceFileInfo);
Write(FBinaryFile, FHeaderRec);
for t := 1 to storageSize do
begin
Write(FBinaryFile, FFileRec);
end;
SetMsg(#eofRec, 'EOF');
eofRec.index := traceEOFMARKER;
Write(FBinaryFile, eofRec);
end;
procedure TTraceBinFile.Trace(msg: string);
// Write a trace message in circular file.
begin
if (not FBinaryFileOpen) then
exit;
if (FFileMode = fmOpenRead) then
exit; // not open for writing!
Inc(FLastIndex);
if (FLastIndex > FStorageSize) then
FLastIndex := 1; // wrap around to 1 not zero! Very important!
Seek(FBinaryFile, 0);
FHeaderRec.index := FLastIndex;
Write(FBinaryFile, FHeaderRec);
FillChar(FFileRec, sizeof(TTraceRec), 0);
Seek(FBinaryFile, FLastIndex);
Inc(FAutoIncrementValue);
if FAutoIncrementValue = 0 then
FAutoIncrementValue := 1;
FFileRec.index := FAutoIncrementValue;
SetMsg(#FFileRec, msg);
Write(FBinaryFile, FFileRec);
end;
procedure TTraceBinFile.OpenFile;
begin
if FBinaryFileOpen then
begin
System.CloseFile(FBinaryFile);
FBinaryFileOpen := False;
end;
if FileExists(FFilename) then
begin
// System.FileMode :=fmOpenRead;
FFileMode := fmOpenRead;
AssignFile(FBinaryFile, FFilename);
System.Reset(FBinaryFile); // open in current mode
System.Seek(FBinaryFile, 0);
Read(FBinaryFile, FHeaderRec);
FLastIndex := FHeaderRec.index;
FTraceFileInfo := string(FHeaderRec.Msg);
FBinaryFileOpen := True;
end
else
begin
InitializeFile; // Creates the file.
end;
end;
procedure TTraceBinFile.LoadTrace(traceStrs: TStrings);
var
ReadAtIndex: Integer;
Safety: Integer;
procedure NextReadIndex;
begin
Inc(ReadAtIndex);
if (ReadAtIndex > FStorageSize) then
ReadAtIndex := 1; // wrap around to 1 not zero! Very important!
end;
begin
Assert(Assigned(traceStrs));
traceStrs.Clear;
if not FBinaryFileOpen then
begin
OpenFile;
end;
ReadAtIndex := FLastIndex;
NextReadIndex;
Safety := 0; // prevents endless looping.
while True do
begin
if (ReadAtIndex = FLastIndex) or (Safety > FStorageSize) then
break;
Seek(FBinaryFile, ReadAtIndex);
Read(FBinaryFIle, FFileRec);
if FFileRec.msg[0] <> chr(0) then
begin
traceStrs.Add(FFileRec.msg);
end;
Inc(Safety);
NextReadIndex;
end;
end;
end.
Look at this article.
TraceTool 12.4: The Swiss-Army Knife of Trace
My suggestion would be to implement your logging in such a way that the log file "rolls over" on a daily basis. E.g. at midnight, your logging code renames your log file (e.g. MyLogFile.log) to a dated/archive version (e.g. MyLogFile-30082012.log), and starts a new empty "live" log (e.g. again MyLogFile.log).
Then it's simply a question of using something like BareTail to monitor your "live"/daily log file.
I accept this may not be the most network-efficient approach, but it's reasonably simple and meets your "live" requirement.
Related
I had an issue where a file kept deleting on startup and I couldn't track down the code responsible. I wound up adding Vcl.Dialogs to all the units and creating an initialization section that looked like this:
initialization
begin
ShowMessage('Inside [Unit Name Here]');
end;
This was quite a pain. Is there an easy way to generate a list of forms/units in the order in which they fire off?
UPDATE: 2019-08-01 (Helpful MAP links)
Here are two links that may assist in understanding DELPHI map files
http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/Rio/en/API_%28%2A.map%29
Understanding Delphi MAP File
You really didn't need to go to all that trouble modifying your source units. I think you'll find that using the method below will find the misbehaving unit
much more quickly than somehow generating a list of units and then ploughing
your way through it.
If you look in System.Pas, you'll find a procedure InitUnits like this (from D7).
procedure InitUnits;
var
Count, I: Integer;
Table: PUnitEntryTable;
P: Pointer;
begin
if InitContext.InitTable = nil then
exit;
Count := InitContext.InitTable^.UnitCount;
I := 0;
Table := InitContext.InitTable^.UnitInfo;
[...]
try
while I < Count do
begin
P := Table^[I].Init;
Inc(I);
InitContext.InitCount := I;
if Assigned(P) then
begin
TProc(P)();
end;
end;
except
FinalizeUnits;
raise;
end;
end;
This is the code which causes the initialization code of each unit to be called. It works its way through the units and calls the initialization section (if any)
of each unit via the call
TProc(P)();
You can inspect the value of Count prior to the loop; don't be surprised if its upwards
of a couple of hundreds even for a relatively simple project.
Put a breakpoint on the TProc(P)(); line and right-click and set the PassCount to
half the value of Count. Run your app and when the breakpoint trips, check whether
the file has been deleted.
You can then do a binary search through the values of
Count (by continuing the current run if the file is still there, or resetting the app
and halving the Pass Count) to establish exactly which unit causes the file to be deleted.
Because you can use a binary search to do this, it will rapidly converge on the
unit which is deleting the file. Of course, you can trace into the unit's
initialization code (if it has been compiled with debug info) when the breakpoint
trips by pressing F7 on TProc(P)();
You can inspect the segments section of the map file. The entries with C=ICODE are those units with initialization parts in the order they are executed.
I need to wait until a mapped network folder (\HostName\NetworkPath) become empty. What I mean is that program flow cannot continue until that network folder is empty.
So far I have the following logic in place but I noticed that it takes time before FindFirst notices that the network folder become empty.
If I keep observing an opened explorer windows, pointing to that network folder, I notice that it become empty far before FindFirst notices it.
I used Sleep(5000) to introduce some delay in calling again CheckNetworkFolderIsEmpty in my while loop, otherwise it is being called too often. But maybe that folder will become empty far before 5 seconds, so 5 seconds is an arbitrary time delay that may results in an unnecessary dealy in program execution, in the event that the folder become empty before.
What can be the culprit, what can be a better alternative?
Also I do not know what else to use instead of a simple Sleep.
while not CheckRawFolderIsEmpty do begin
Sleep(5000);
end;
function TForm1.CheckNetworkFolderIsEmpty: Boolean;
begin
Result := (CountFilesInFolder('\\HostName\NetworkPath', '*.txt') = 0);
end;
function CountFilesInFolder(const aPath, aFileMask: string): Integer;
var
Path: string;
SearchRec: TSearchRec;
begin
Path := IncludeTrailingPathDelimiter(aPath);
Result := 0;
if FindFirst(Path + aFileMask, faAnyFile and not faDirectory, SearchRec) = 0 then begin
repeat
Inc(Result);
until FindNext(SearchRec) <> 0;
FindClose(SearchRec);
end;
end;
Observing file system changes like you do is inefficient (FindFirst, FindNext) and inacurate as you've learned. Windows provides API FindFirstChangeNotification for that purpose as J... has pointed out in the comment under your question.
Good news is that you don't need to start studying the API from scratch, because some other people did the hard work for you. Check out some freeware wrappers for Delphi around the API:
https://torry.net/pages.php?id=252
http://www.angusj.com/delphi/dirwatch.html
...
I have been looking for a way to open a file saved to my computer via a Delphi app with its appropriate application. The file is stored in a Varbinary field in a SQL database, and is loaded into a memory stream and then saved via the TMemoryStream's SavetoFile method. What I would like to accomplish is to open the saved file in its appropriate application without knowing the filepath to that application's executable. I have had some success using ShellExecuteEx, but certain applications don't return an HProcess (Windows Live Photo Gallery, for example), so I can't (or at least don't know how to) wait for the application to close before moving on when a handle isn't returned. Is there a way to ensure I receive a handle when calling ShellExecuteEx? If this is not the best way how should I go about doing this?
I only need to know the external app's status because I plan on deleting the file after it closes, and I only need to write it because I'm fairly certain I can't load the file stored in the SQL table into memory (by way of a MemoryStream, FileStream, etc.) and launch its associated program directly from my Delphi app. (I've asked about that separately.)
Trying to detect that the displaying process has closed is brittle and fraught with problems, as you learnt in your previous question. Often times, it's hard to find the process that is used to view the file, and even if you can, there's no certainty the closing the view of the file will close the process. The process may be used to view other files which the user leaves open. I think the lesson that you should take from that is that the system does not want you to do what you are trying to do.
So, what's the better way to solve the problem? I think the best you can do is to create the temporary files in the temporary directory and not attempt to delete them when the user has finished with them. You could:
Remember the files you created and when you create, say the 21st file, delete the first one you made. Then delete the 2nd when you create the 22nd and so on.
Or, delete all temporary files on startup. This would remove files from a previous session.
Or run a separate tidy up thread that, every ten minutes, say, deleted files that were created more than an hour ago.
You get the idea. The point is that it is an intractable problem to detect when the viewer has finished with the file, in full generality. So you need to think creatively. Find a different way around the road block.
Hers a snip from a unit I use for a similar purpose. I found these functions online somewhere over the the years so I take no credit and make no promises.
I personally use the WaitExec() function to launch a pdf (retrieved from a database) in Acrobat for editing and then re-save it to our database when done.
I have used the two other functions at other times as well so I know they all work to one degree or another but I think WaitExec() worked best in an interactive mode, while Launch() worked better from a thread or non-interactive mode.
The IsFileInUse function can tell you if the file you created is in use by any other processes and may be a viable option as well.
uses SysUtils, Windows, ShellAPI, Forms, Registry, Classes, Messages, Printers,
PSAPI, TlHelp32, SHFolder;
function IsFileInUse(fName: string): boolean;
var
HFileRes: HFILE;
begin
Result := False;
if not FileExists(fName) then
Exit;
HFileRes := CreateFile(pchar(fName), GENERIC_READ or GENERIC_WRITE,
0 {this is the trick!}, nil, OPEN_EXISTING,
FILE_ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL, 0);
Result := (HFileRes = INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE);
if not Result then
CloseHandle(HFileRes);
end;
function Launch(sCommandLine: string; bWait: Boolean; AppHandle: HWND): Boolean;
var
SEI: TShellExecuteInfo;
Mask: Longint;
begin
Mask := SEE_MASK_NOCLOSEPROCESS;
FillChar(SEI, Sizeof(SEI), #0);
SEI.cbsize := Sizeof(SEI);
SEI.wnd := AppHandle;
SEI.fmask := Mask;
//if FExeStyleString<>'' then SEI.LPVERB:=pchar(FExeStyleString);
SEI.LPFile := pchar(sCommandline);
//SEI.LPParameters := pchar(FExeParameters);
//SEI.LPDirectory := pchar(FExepath);
SEI.nshow := SW_SHOWNORMAL; // SW_SHOWMINIMIZED, SW_SHOWMAXIMIZED
ShellexecuteEx(#SEI);
if bWait then
WaitforSingleObject(SEI.hProcess, INFINITE);
Result := True;
end;
function WaitExec(const CmdLine:AnsiString;const DisplayMode:Integer):Integer;
{Execute an app, wait for it to terminate then return exit code. Returns -1
if execution fails. DisplayMode is usually either sw_ShowNormal or sw_Hide.}
var
S:TStartupInfo;
P:TProcessInformation;
M:TMsg;
R:DWord;
begin
FillChar(P,SizeOf(P),#0);
FillChar(S,Sizeof(S),#0);
S.cb := Sizeof(S);
S.dwFlags := STARTF_USESHOWWINDOW;
S.wShowWindow := DisplayMode;
if not CreateProcess(nil,
PChar(CmdLine), { pointer to command line string }
nil, { pointer to process security attributes }
nil, { pointer to thread security attributes }
False, { handle inheritance flag }
CREATE_NEW_CONSOLE or { creation flags }
NORMAL_PRIORITY_CLASS,
nil, { pointer to new environment block }
nil, { pointer to current directory name }
S, { pointer to STARTUPINFO }
P) { pointer to PROCESS_INF }
then begin
ShowMessage('Create Process failed. Save this message for IT: ' + CmdLine);
Result:=-1
end
else begin
// WaitforSingleObject(P.hProcess,INFINITE);
// The following replacement better satisfies DDE requirements
repeat
R := MsgWaitForMultipleObjects(1, // One event to wait for
P.hProcess, // The array of events
FALSE, // Wait for 1 event
INFINITE, // Timeout value
QS_ALLINPUT); // Any message wakes up
if R>WAIT_OBJECT_0 then begin
M.Message := 0;
while PeekMessage(M,0,0,0,PM_REMOVE) do begin
TranslateMessage(M);
DispatchMessage(M);
end
end;
until R=WAIT_OBJECT_0;
// put value into Result.... non zero = success
GetExitCodeProcess(P.hProcess,DWord(Result));
CloseHandle(P.hProcess);
CloseHandle(P.hThread);
P.hProcess:=0;
P.hThread:=0;
end;
end;
I am handling from my Application associated extension files from Windows. So when you double click a file from Windows it will execute my program, and I handle the file from there, something like:
procedure TMainForm.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
var
i: Integer;
begin
for i := 0 to ParamCount -1 do
begin
if SameText(ExtractFileExt(ParamStr(i)), '.ext1') then
begin
// handle my file..
// break if needed
end else
if SameText(ExtractFileExt(ParamStr(i)), '.ext2') then
begin
// handle my file..
// break if needed
end else
end;
end;
That works pretty much how I want it to, but when I was testing I realised it does not consider using only one instance of my program.
So for example, if I selected several Files from Windows and opened them all at the same time, this will create the same number of instances of my program with the number of Files being opened.
What would be a good way to approach this, so that instead of several instances of my program being opened, any additional Files from Windows being opened will simply focus back to the one and only instance, and I handle the Files as normal?
Thanks
UPDATE
I found a good article here: http://www.delphidabbler.com/articles?article=13&part=2 which I think is what I need, and shows how to work with the Windows API as mentioned by rhooligan. I am going to read through it now..
Here is some simple example code that gets the job done. I hope it is self-explanatory.
program StartupProject;
uses
SysUtils,
Messages,
Windows,
Forms,
uMainForm in 'uMainForm.pas' {MainForm};
{$R *.res}
procedure Main;
var
i: Integer;
Arg: string;
Window: HWND;
CopyDataStruct: TCopyDataStruct;
begin
Window := FindWindow(SWindowClassName, nil);
if Window=0 then begin
Application.Initialize;
Application.MainFormOnTaskbar := True;
Application.CreateForm(TMainForm, MainForm);
Application.Run;
end else begin
FillChar(CopyDataStruct, Sizeof(CopyDataStruct), 0);
for i := 1 to ParamCount do begin
Arg := ParamStr(i);
CopyDataStruct.cbData := (Length(Arg)+1)*SizeOf(Char);
CopyDataStruct.lpData := PChar(Arg);
SendMessage(Window, WM_COPYDATA, 0, NativeInt(#CopyDataStruct));
end;
SetForegroundWindow(Window);
end;
end;
begin
Main;
end.
unit uMainForm;
interface
uses
Windows, Messages, SysUtils, Classes, Controls, Forms, StdCtrls;
type
TMainForm = class(TForm)
ListBox1: TListBox;
procedure FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
protected
procedure CreateParams(var Params: TCreateParams); override;
procedure WMCopyData(var Message: TWMCopyData); message WM_COPYDATA;
public
procedure ProcessArgument(const Arg: string);
end;
var
MainForm: TMainForm;
const
SWindowClassName = 'VeryUniqueNameToAvoidUnexpectedCollisions';
implementation
{$R *.dfm}
{ TMainForm }
procedure TMainForm.CreateParams(var Params: TCreateParams);
begin
inherited;
Params.WinClassName := SWindowClassName;
end;
procedure TMainForm.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
var
i: Integer;
begin
for i := 1 to ParamCount do begin
ProcessArgument(ParamStr(i));
end;
end;
procedure TMainForm.ProcessArgument(const Arg: string);
begin
ListBox1.Items.Add(Arg);
end;
procedure TMainForm.WMCopyData(var Message: TWMCopyData);
var
Arg: string;
begin
SetString(Arg, PChar(Message.CopyDataStruct.lpData), (Message.CopyDataStruct.cbData div SizeOf(Char))-1);
ProcessArgument(Arg);
Application.Restore;
Application.BringToFront;
end;
end.
The logic goes something like this. When you start your application, you iterate through the list of running processes and see if your application is already running. If it is running, you need to activate the window of that instance and then exit.
Everything you need to do this is in the Windows API. I found this sample code on CodeProject.com that deals with processes:
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/system/Win32Process.aspx
On finding and activating a window, the basic approach is to find the window of interest using the window class name then activate it.
http://www.vb6.us/tutorials/activate-window-api
Hopefully this gives you a good starting point.
There are many answers here that show how to implement this. I want to show why NOT to use the FindWindow approach.
I am using FindWindow (something similar with the one shown by David H) and I have seen it failed starting with Win10 - I don't know what they changed in Win10.
I think the gap between the time when the app starts and the time when we set the unique ID via CreateParams is too big so another instance has somehow time to run in this gap/interval.
Imagine two instances started at only 1ms distance (let's say that the user click the EXE file and then presses enter and keeps it pressed by accident for a short while). Both instances will check to see if a window with that unique ID exists, but none of them had the chance to set the flag/unique ID because creating the form is slow and the unique ID is set only when the form is constructed. So, both instances will run.
So, I would recommend the CreateSemaphore solution instead:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/460480/46207
Marjan V already proposed this solution but didn't explained why it is better/safer.
I'd use mutexes. You create one when your program starts.
When the creation fails it means another instance is already running. You then send this instance a message with your command line parameters and close. When your app receives a message with a command line, it can parse the parameters like you are already doing, check to see whether it already has the file(s) open and proceed accordingly.
Processing this app specific message ia also the place to get your app to the front if it isn't already. Please do this politely (SetForegroundWindow) without trying to force your app in front of all others.
function CreateMutexes(const MutexName: String): boolean;
// Creates the two mutexes to see if the program is already running.
// One of the mutexes is created in the global name space (which makes it
// possible to access the mutex across user sessions in Windows XP); the other
// is created in the session name space (because versions of Windows NT prior
// to 4.0 TSE don't have a global name space and don't support the 'Global\'
// prefix).
var
SecurityDesc: TSecurityDescriptor;
SecurityAttr: TSecurityAttributes;
begin
// By default on Windows NT, created mutexes are accessible only by the user
// running the process. We need our mutexes to be accessible to all users, so
// that the mutex detection can work across user sessions in Windows XP. To
// do this we use a security descriptor with a null DACL.
InitializeSecurityDescriptor(#SecurityDesc, SECURITY_DESCRIPTOR_REVISION);
SetSecurityDescriptorDacl(#SecurityDesc, True, nil, False);
SecurityAttr.nLength := SizeOf(SecurityAttr);
SecurityAttr.lpSecurityDescriptor := #SecurityDesc;
SecurityAttr.bInheritHandle := False;
if (CreateMutex(#SecurityAttr, False, PChar(MutexName)) <> 0 )
and (CreateMutex(#SecurityAttr, False, PChar('Global\' + MutexName)) <> 0 ) then
Result := True
else
Result := False;
end;
initialization
if not CreateMutexes('MyAppNameIsRunningMutex') then
//Find and SendMessage to running instance
;
end.
Note: above code is adapted from an example on the InnoSetup site. InnoSetup creates installer applications and uses this approach in the installer to check whether (a previous version of) the application being installed is already running.
Finding the other instance and sending it a message, I'll leave for another question (or you can use the WM_COPYDATA approach from David's answer). Actually, there is a StackOverflow question that deals exactly with this: How to get the process thread that owns a mutex Getting the process/thread that owns the mutex may be a bit of a challenge, but the answers to this question do address ways to get the information from one instance to the other.
Windows has different ways to handle file associations to executable.
The "command line" approach is only the simplest one, but also the most limited one.
It also supports DDE (it still works although officially deprecated) and COM (see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/cc144171(v=vs.85).aspx).
If I recall correctly both DDE and COM will let your application receive the whole list of selected files.
I used window/message approach by myself with addition of events for tracking if the other instance is running:
Try to create event "Global\MyAppCode" (the "Global" namespace is used for handling various user sessions as I needed single instance system-wide; in your case you'll probably prefer "Local" namespace which is set by default)
If CreateEvent returned error and GetLastError = ERROR_ALREADY_EXISTS then the instance is running already.
FindWindow/WM_COPYDATA to transfer data to that instance.
But the drawbacks with messages/windows are more than significant:
You must always keep your window's Caption constant. Otherwise you'll have to list all the windows in the system and loop through them for partial occurrence of some constant part. Moreover the window's caption could be easily changed by a user or 3rd part app so the search would fail.
Method requires a window to be created so no console/service apps, or they must create a window and perform message loop especially for handling the single instance.
I'm not sure FindWindow could find a window that is opened in another user session
For me, WM_COPYDATA is rather awkward method.
So currently I'm a fan of named pipe approach (haven't implemented it yet though).
On launch, app tries to connect to "Global\MyAppPipe". If successed, other instance is running. If failed, it creates this pipe and finishes instance check.
2nd instance writes the required data to pipe and exits.
1st instance receives data and does some stuff.
It works through all user sessions (with namespace "Global") or just a current session; it doesn't depend on strings used by UI (no localization and modification issues); it works with console and service apps (you'll need to implement pipe reading in a separate thread/message loop though).
I have written a program that does the following...
Monitors a folder for the creation of a new file with a specific filename that will eventually be created in a sub folder.
On creation of the file, the sub folders path is added to a queue in the form of a TList.
The files must be processed in the creation order.
A procedure is called to process all the files (images in this case) in the subfolder which involves moving the files to a network location.
The subfolder path is removed from the queue (TList).
If any more paths exist in the queue, the next path is passed to the processing procedure.
The problem I am having is that the time to copy the files to a network location varies depending on the number and size of the images so...
Is there a way to get Delphi to wait for procedure of file operation to finish?
I tried a while loop that waited for a boolean value to change (changed when the last file to be copied was found on the network) but that hung the application (even with application.processMessage) and the dirMonitor component failed to add the next sub folder to the TList.
Any suggestions would be most appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Thanks for the replys...
I had a look at OmniThread which looks ideal... although I only have access to Delphi 7 so its a no go.
The problem Im having is that the folders take varying amounts of time to transfer due to differing sizes and network traffic etc... When a folder with a lot of images is followed by a folder with only a few images, the smaller of the two is reaching the network destination first. The network desination being a third party print spooler so the prints come off in the wrong order.
The simplified code:
procedure TForm1.programTimerTimer(Sender: TObject);
begin
if (fileOperationInProgress = false) AND (programPaused = false) then
begin
processOrderQueue;
end;
end;
procedure TForm1.processOrderQueue;
begin
// gets folder paths from queue
// processes images
// copy to print spooler (network location)
copyFolder(fromPath, toPath);
// remove temp files
end;
procedure TForm1.copyFolder(copyFrom : String; copyTo : String);
var
fos : TSHFileOpStruct;
begin
fileOperationInProgress := True;
ZeroMemory(#fos, SizeOf(fos));
with fos do
begin
wFunc := FO_COPY;
fFlags := FOF_FILESONLY or FOF_SILENT;
pFrom := PChar(copyFrom);
pTo := PChar(copyTo)
end;
ShFileOperation(fos);
fileOperationInProgress := False;
end;
Think I've come up with the answer... I'm going to do all file operationions in a single thread and set a global 'busy' boolean when it starts and change it again on completion.
That way the shell monitor won't miss messages when any file operations are in progress.
You could implement a file system watch. Essentially, you create a file handle with the following flags:
CreateFile(PChar(FDirectoryToWatch), FILE_LIST_DIRECTORY or GENERIC_READ,
FILE_SHARE_READ or FILE_SHARE_WRITE or FILE_SHARE_DELETE, nil, OPEN_EXISTING,
FILE_FLAG_BACKUP_SEMANTICS or FILE_FLAG_OVERLAPPED, 0);
and then create a loop to call ReadDirectoryChangesW.
Linked is an example class:
Why does ReadDirectoryChangesW omit events?
The only thing I would do differently is provide an event in the creation of the class to notify of changes (remembering that when calling the event in the Execute procedure it probably needs to be Synchronized).