Preventing multiple instances - but also handle the command line parameters? - delphi

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).

Related

Delphi word automation: Create Ole Object inside Dll

Does anyon know how to create word ole object in DLL.
I have one application that load a DLL which in turn create word ole object.
My application crash every time.
MSWord:= CreateOleObject('Word.Application');
Assuming that Word is installed, then the primary reason why you code might fail is that COM has not been initialized in the calling thread. That is not something that should be attempted from the DLL, because you want the DLL to be able to work with consumers that have already initialized COM.
So, the correct way to tackle this is to state as part of the DLL's interface contract that COM must be initialized by the caller. Typically by calling CoInitialize or CoInitializeEx.
One further comment, is that it if the application crashes, that suggests that you error handling is broken. All the functions in your DLL should take steps to catch any exceptions and convert into error codes to be returned to the caller. I suspect that you have not done this and are throwing a Delphi exception out of the DLL. You must never do that.
Note that I have given a broad and general answer. That matches the broad nature of the question, and the fact that there are few details in the question. If you had provided an MCVE we could have offered a more detailed response.
As DavidH points out, CoInitialize has to be called in the calling thread.
A point to watch out for in connection with the main thread of a VCL application is that whether a VCL application calls CoInitialize automatically depends on whether it uses the ComObj unit: if it does the CoInitialize is called via TApplication.Initialize and the InitComObj routine in ComObj; if it does not, you must call it (or CoInitializeEx) yourself.
The easy way to test this is to call the DLL from a TApplication-less console application - this will avoid being misled by ComObj being used some other than your main unit.
Suppose you have a DLL that contains the following exported procedure:
procedure CreateWordDoc;
var
DocText : String;
MSWord,
Document : OleVariant;
begin
MSWord := CreateOleObject('Word.Application');
MSWord.Visible := True;
Document := MSWord.Documents.Add;
DocText := 'Hello Word!';
MSWord.Selection.TypeText(DocText);
end;
then you could call it like this:
program WordCaller;
{$APPTYPE CONSOLE}
uses
SysUtils, Windows, ActiveX;
type
TWordProc = procedure;
var
LibHandle : THandle;
WordProc : TWordProc;
begin
CoInitialize(Nil);
LibHandle := LoadLibrary('WordDll.Dll');
try
if LibHandle <> 0 then begin
try
WordProc := GetProcAddress(LibHandle, 'CreateWordDoc');
if Assigned(WordProc) then
WordProc;
finally
FreeLibrary(LibHandle);
end;
end;
finally
CoUnInitialize;
Readln;
end;
end.

Delphi: Repaint form in FormShow

I open Form2.ShowModal in FormMain. I want the application to show Form2 intact while doing some database access (this is not about the new data to be shown). However, while FormShow is executed, just the outer border and some broken parts are displayed, some broken parts of FormMain show through. It's ugly.
I have not been able to find a way to make Delphi repaint the Form immediately and then doing the time-consuming MyOpenData procedure. After concluding MyOpenData everything is fine.
procedure TForm2.FormShow(Sender: TObject);
begin
Invalidate;
Refresh;
MyOpenData; { needs some seconds of database accesses }
end;
Alternative:
procedure TForm2.FormShow(Sender: TObject);
begin
Invalidate;
Refresh;
SendMessage(Handle, wm_paint, 0, 0);
PostMessage(Handle, wm_OpenMyData, 0, 0); { executes well, but no solution)
end;
This doesn't work either. I thought SendMessage() waits for the message being done. But no Paint is done before MyOpenData. The form always looks broken till the procedures finishes. Besides this, the routines are executed fine. I tried all these commands combined or separately.
What am I missing? Thanks in advance!
How do you start time-consuming routines that need to run when opening a form?
(Delphi XE7 on Windows 7 64 bit)
uses
WinApi.Windows;
const
WM_AFTER_SHOW = WM_USER + 1; // custom message
WM_AFTER_CREATE = WM_USER + 2; // custom message
private
procedure WmAfterCreate(var Msg: TMessage); message WM_AFTER_CREATE;
procedure WmAfterShow(var Msg: TMessage); message WM_AFTER_SHOW;
procedure TForm1.WmAfterCreate(var Msg: TMessage);
begin
DoSomeThingAfterCreate();
ShowMessage('WM_AFTER_CREATE received!');
end;
procedure TForm1.WmAfterShow(var Msg: TMessage);
begin
DoSomeThingAfterShow();
ShowMessage('WM_AFTER_SHOW received!');
end;
procedure TForm1.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
begin
// Some code...
PostMessage(Self.Handle, WM_AFTER_CREATE, 0, 0);
end;
procedure TForm1.FormShow(Sender: TObject);
begin
// Some Code...
PostMessage(Self.Handle, WM_AFTER_SHOW, 0, 0);
end;
There simply isn't enough information given to make any specific recommendations here, IMO.
I'm going to guess that MyOpenData() sets up some kind of data state that Form2 relies upon. If this is the case, then you probably want to call it BEFORE calling Form2.ShowModal. In no case should you be calling either invalidate or refresh inside of the OnShow handler because they both trigger OnShow.
Watch the video I made for CodeRage 9 entitled, "Have You Embraced Your Software Plumber Lately?" (search YouTube for 'coderage software plumber') as this is the exact topic I'm addressing in this video -- the whole plethora of issues involved in initializing forms and objects, along with the timing issues specific to forms.
I don't discuss issues with data-aware controls specifically, but they're pretty much the same. It can be problematic setting up the DB state from inside the form that depends upon that state in order to properly initialize itself. There's an inherent race-condition that is easily avoided by doing your dependent initialization first, then injecting that dependency into the form.
If DBs are involved, you have to inject SOMETHING into the form: either the DB reference (usually through a global variable); a table (either a global variable or a form variable); or a current record (usually a form variable). The nice part about using DB-aware controls is that the initialization is always implicit, and you don't have to inject anything. The bad part about using DB-aware controls is, the initialization is ALWAYS IMPLICIT, and you have no EXPLICIT control over initialization sequences. By doing EXPLICIT injection of DB dependencies, you side-step the timing issues. It's a little more work (not much), but you don't have to deal with stuff like this.
In any case, if the form needs a current record to initialize its fields, you can't display the form until the record has been selected, and you can't make the record selection part of the form's initialization process without risking concurrency issues. It can be done, but you're making one heck of a mess out of it.

Delphi: Passing a parameter to a running service to act on

We have a service (written in C#) running to check somethings every 10 minutes and if something new happened, then send an email to someone special.
We also have other Delphi program and want to pass a parameter to the service to act on and send email immediately (I mean regardless than 10 minutes interval).
How to do that while service is running ?
note: There is no way to migrate to C# we have to do that in Delphi.
There's also a possibility to use ControlService API to send the service a user-defined control code. (The service has to be written to respond to that specific control code.)
You need to use some form of inter process communication (IPC). There are many possibilities. Most commonly used for such a scenario are named pipes and TCP/sockets.
There are some good answers here already... and here's mine:
You could use a text file or the windows registry to flag for action. This way your Delphi service can react upon start-up should the trigger have occured while your service was not running. Any information/parameters you wish to convey can be included in the registry-key value or as file data.
Win Registry Method:
If you use a registry-key make sure that both apps can read and write to the same key.
In your Delphi Service implement the RegNotifyChangeKeyValue WinAPI which will notify when the key is added/altered. Here's an idea how you can implement the listner in Delphi: Monitoring Registry Changes
File Method:
To be notified about file changes you do not need to poll for changes. Below is code for a solution based on the FindFirstChangeNotification WinAPI. Your Delphi Service can implement the TFileWatch class. You will also need a unit with the class TDirectoryWatch class by Angus Johnson.
unit FileWatch;
interface
uses Classes,
SysUtils,
DirWatch; //by Angus Johnson: http://www.angusj.com/delphi/dirwatch.html
type TFileNotifyEventType = (feCreated, feModified, feDeleted);
TFileNotifyEvent = procedure(Sender: TObject; FileEventType : TFileNotifyEventType) of object;
TFileWatch = class(TComponent)
private
FDirWatch : TDirectoryWatch;
FFileToWatch : string;
FFileAge : integer; //if -1 then file does not exist
FFileExists : boolean;
procedure OnFolderChangeEvent(Sender: TObject);
protected
public
OnFileNotifyEvent : TFileNotifyEvent;
property Filename : string read FFileToWatch;
constructor Create(aOwner: TComponent; FileToWatch : string);
destructor Destroy();
end;
implementation
{ TFileWatch }
constructor TFileWatch.Create(aOwner: TComponent; FileToWatch: string);
begin
inherited Create(aOwner);
FDirWatch := TDirectoryWatch.Create(Self);
FDirWatch.Directory := ExtractFilePath(FileToWatch);
FDirWatch.OnChange := OnFolderChangeEvent;
FDirWatch.NotifyFilters := [nfFilename, nfLastWrite];
FDirWatch.Active := true;
FFileToWatch := FileToWatch;
FFileAge := FileAge(FFileToWatch);
FFileExists := FFileAge > -1;
end;
destructor TFileWatch.Destroy;
begin
FDirWatch.Free;
inherited Destroy;
end;
procedure TFileWatch.OnFolderChangeEvent(Sender: TObject);
var MyFileAge : integer;
MyFileExists : boolean;
FileEventType : TFileNotifyEventType;
begin
//Check to see if the event has been fired by our file in question
MyFileAge := FileAge(FFileToWatch);
if MyFileAge = FFileAge then
exit; //Nothing has happened, exit.
//Figure out if the file has been created, modified or deleted
MyFileExists := MyFileAge > -1;
if MyFileExists and not FFileExists then
FileEventType := feCreated
else if not MyFileExists and FFileExists then
FileEventType := feDeleted
else
FileEventType := feModified;
FFileAge := MyFileAge;
FFileExists := MyFileExists;
if Assigned(OnFileNotifyEvent) then
OnFileNotifyEvent(Self, FileEventType);
end;
end.
I often communicate via a database. I'd store a certain value with process X, and process Y reads it.
The nice thing about that design is that the two applications don't need to know eachother. They can easily run on different machines, and you can have multiple readers and writers, so you can easily scale things up. You also get encryption and compressed connections for free if you need it, and all sorts of complicated multi user stuff is taken care of.
I would suggest adding a WCF Service to (hosted by) your Windows service exposing the required function.

Missing functionality of added Control in another application

I have read this article how to add a button to another application. When the Button is added to the parent application, everything seems OK, but when this Button is added to another app called Labform (TLabForm), the code after click is not executed. I created also a descendant to implement simple behavior after click, but no success:
TButton2 = class (TButton)
public
procedure Click; override;
end;
procedure TButton2.Click;
begin
inherited;
MessageBox(ParentWindow, 'Hello', 'Window', MB_OK);
end;
procedure TForm1.btn1Click(Sender: TObject);
var
Button2 : TButton2 ;
Hand: THandle;
begin
// Hand:= FindWindow('TLabForm', 'Labform'); // button added, but SHOWS NO message after click
Hand:= FindWindow('TForm1', 'Form1'); // button added, and SHOWS message after click
if Hand <> 0 then
begin
Button2 := TButton2.Create(self);
Button2.ParentWindow := hand;
Button2.BringToFront;
end
else
ShowMessage('handle not found');
end;
How to solve it?
thanx
Whilst it is technically possible to do what you want, it is excruciatingly difficult. Raymond Chen wrote about this at some length. The executive summary:
Is it technically legal to have a parent/child or owner/owned relationship between windows from different processes? Yes, it is technically legal. It is also technically legal to juggle chainsaws.
So, you are attempting something with difficulty akin to juggling chainsaws. Unless you have a deep understanding of Win32 you've got no chance of succeeding.
So, if you want to modify the GUI of an existing process, and it's not tractable to do so with code in a different process, what can you do? Well, it follows that you need to execute code inside the target process.
That's easy enough to do with DLL injection. Inject a DLL into the process and modify it's UI from that DLL. Still not trivial. You'll have the best chance of success if you subclass a window by replacing the existing window procedure with one of your own. That will allow you to run your UI modification code in the UI thread.

Real-time logging of a service application

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.

Resources