Develop Reference

Java: How to put thread back to sleep INDEFINITELY after interrupt?

I am writing Java software, that has a single thread, which listens to external buttons being pressed. If the button is pressed, the thread informs other threads, but otherwise it just sleeps.
My model is to use interrupt-driven design. Ideally I would like to make
a thread sleep as long as no button is pressed. When the button is pressed I would like the thread to do some work and go back to sleep.
Could anyone confirm / correct the following implementation?
// This is a code that interrupt-driven thread will execute
public void run() {
while (true) {
try {
Thread.sleep(1000); // Sleeps only for 1s. How to sleep indefinitely?
} catch (InterruptedException exception) {
process(exception); // Doing some work
// then going back to sleep using the while loop
}
}
}
Also, after each button click in the terminal I get a message
I/O exception raised from stop()
What does this message mean (i.e why is it printed if I catch the exception)? Can I avoid the terminal to print it?

It is generally considered a code smell if you use exceptions to control your program flow.
The correct solution to this problem is to use a BlockingQueue of events that the event handler reads from. This is commonly called a producer/consumer.
public class TwoThreads {
public static void main(String args[]) throws InterruptedException {
System.out.println("TwoThreads:Test");
new TwoThreads().test();
}
// The end of the list.
private static final Integer End = -1;
static class Producer implements Runnable {
final BlockingQueue<Integer> queue;
public Producer(BlockingQueue<Integer> queue) {
this.queue = queue;
}
#Override
public void run() {
try {
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
queue.add(i);
Thread.sleep(1);
}
// Finish the queue.
queue.add(End);
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
// Just exit.
}
}
}
static class Consumer implements Runnable {
final BlockingQueue<Integer> queue;
public Consumer(BlockingQueue<Integer> queue) {
this.queue = queue;
}
#Override
public void run() {
boolean ended = false;
while (!ended) {
try {
Integer i = queue.take();
ended = i == End;
System.out.println(i);
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
ended = true;
}
}
}
}
public void test() throws InterruptedException {
BlockingQueue<Integer> queue = new LinkedBlockingQueue<>();
Thread pt = new Thread(new Producer(queue));
Thread ct = new Thread(new Consumer(queue));
// Start it all going.
pt.start();
ct.start();
// Wait for it to finish.
pt.join();
ct.join();
}
}
Don't let yourself be confused by how much code this is - most of it is just wrapping. The core functionality is:
At start - create a BlockingQueue and share it between the two threads.
BlockingQueue<Integer> queue = new LinkedBlockingQueue<>();
Thread pt = new Thread(new Producer(queue));
Thread ct = new Thread(new Consumer(queue));
When an event happens, post to the queue.
queue.add(i);
The event handler feeds off the queue.
while (!ended) {
try {
Integer i = queue.take();
Note that take here will block until an event is posted or an interrupt occurrs.

You can use
Thread.sleep(Long.MAX_VALUE); // more than the life of your computer
or
synchronized(this) {
wait();
}
or this wake on interrupt but doesn't throw an exception
LockSupport.park();
However a more elegant solution is likely to be to use an ExecutorService is designed to be a sleeping thread pool which wakes when you give it work to do.
ExecutorsService executor = Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor();
// when you want it to do something
executor.submit(this::process);
Note: you should consider how you want to handle exceptions. In the example in your question, an exception or error will kill the thread and it will stop running. In my example it won't kill the thread pool but the actual exception could be lost. For this reason I suggest you write it like this.
executor.submit(() -> {
try {
process();
} catch(Throwable t) {
LOGGER.warning(t);
}
});
Note: instead of just calling process and it having to figure out what you want to do you can write it like this.
doSomething(string, number, pojo);
That way you can see what data you expect the background thread to work on.
For comparison, here is the TwoThread example using the current thread as a producer and an Executor Service.
public class TwoThreadsJava5 {
public static void main(String args[]) throws InterruptedException {
System.out.println("TwoThreads:Test - Java 5.0 style");
ExecutorService executor = Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
final int finalI = i;
executor.submit(() -> {
try {
System.out.println(finalI);
} catch (Throwable t) {
t.printStackTrace();
}
});
}
executor.shutdown();
executor.awaitTermination(1, TimeUnit.MINUTES);
}
}
And in Java 8 you could write
public class TwoThreadsJava8 {
public static void main(String args[]) throws InterruptedException {
System.out.println("TwoThreads:Test - Java 8 style");
IntStream.range(0, 1000)
.parallel()
.forEach(System.out::println);
}
}

JAVA pass a method from outside class to the ThreadPool.submit()

I don't have previous experience with JAVA's concurrency, but ever done the same in C#.
My task
To create a "worker" class for easy multi-threading (creating continuous threads) managing in my applications.
what i want to have as result(usage example):
Worker worker = new Worker();
worker.threadCount = 10;
worker.doWork(myMethod);
worker.Stop();
to be able to use it in any class in my app, accepting 'void' methods as 'worker.doWork(myMethod);' argument.
What did i done from my researches on question:
class Worker
package commons.Threading;
import java.io.IOException;
import java.util.concurrent.ExecutorService;
import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;
public class Worker {
static Boolean IsRunning = true;
public static int threadCount = 2;
static ExecutorService threadPool = new ErrorReportingThreadPoolExecutor(threadCount);
public void doWork(**argument method**) throws IOException, InterruptedException {
while (IsRunning) {
threadPool.submit(new Runnable() {
**argument method**
});
Thread.sleep(1000);
}
}
public static void Stop(){
IsRunning = false;
threadPool.shutdown(); // Disable new tasks from being submitted
try {
// Wait a while for existing tasks to terminate
if (!threadPool.awaitTermination(60, TimeUnit.SECONDS)) {
threadPool.shutdownNow(); // Cancel currently executing tasks
// Wait a while for tasks to respond to being cancelled
if (!threadPool.awaitTermination(60, TimeUnit.SECONDS))
System.err.println("Pool did not terminate");
}
} catch (InterruptedException ie) {
// (Re-)Cancel if current thread also interrupted
threadPool.shutdownNow();
// Preserve interrupt status
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
}
}
}
ErrorReportingThreadPoolExecutor
package commons.Threading;
import java.util.concurrent.*;
public class ErrorReportingThreadPoolExecutor extends ThreadPoolExecutor {
public ErrorReportingThreadPoolExecutor(int nThreads) {
super(nThreads, nThreads,
0, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS,
new LinkedBlockingQueue<Runnable>());
}
#Override
protected void afterExecute(Runnable task, Throwable thrown) {
super.afterExecute(task, thrown);
if (thrown != null) {
// an unexpected exception happened inside ThreadPoolExecutor
thrown.printStackTrace();
}
if (task instanceof Future<?>) {
// try getting result
// if an exception happened in the job, it'll be thrown here
try {
Object result = ((Future<?>)task).get();
} catch (CancellationException e) {
// the job get canceled (may happen at any state)
e.printStackTrace();
} catch (ExecutionException e) {
// some uncaught exception happened during execution
e.printStackTrace();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// current thread is interrupted
// ignore, just re-throw
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
}
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
// replace
// ExecutorService threadPool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(2);
// with
ExecutorService threadPool = new ErrorReportingThreadPoolExecutor(2);
while (true) {
threadPool.submit(new Runnable() {
#Override public void run() {
System.out.println("Job is running...");
if (Math.random() < 0.5) {
int q = 1 / 0;
}
System.out.println("Job finished.");
}
});
Thread.sleep(1000);
}
}
}
So, the question is - how do i pass 'void' method from outside class here threadPool.submit(new Runnable() { here });

You could pass the Runnable itself is a parameter,
public void doWork(Runnable runnable) throws IOException, InterruptedException {
while (IsRunning) {
threadPool.submit(runnable);
Thread.sleep(1000);
}
}
Runnable is a functional interface,it has a single method run that takes no-param and returns void, and hence you can use it as a function.
Runnable runnable = new Runnable(){
public void run(){
// do work
}
};
doWork(runnable);
You can express it more concisely if you are on Java 1.8
Runnable runnable = ()->{/**do work*/};
doWork(runnable);

Java execution shutdown does not terminate all threads?

I have following sample created to mimic the situation i am encountering related to ExecutionService shutdown process. It seems that it terminates only one thread out of 3 something... and i get error messages on tomcat server.
public class Test {
static final ExecutorService threadExecutor = Executors.newCachedThreadPool();
static Runnable getTask(final String name) {
return new Thread() {
#Override
public void run() {
this.setName("Thread-" + name);
while (true) {
try {
System.out.println(name + " running...[" + this.getName() + "]");
Thread.sleep(10000);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
System.out.println("InterruptedException..." + this.getName());
throw new Exception(e);
}
}
}
};
}
public static void main(String... strings) {
threadExecutor.submit(getTask("Task-1"));
threadExecutor.submit(getTask("Task-2"));
threadExecutor.submit(getTask("Task-3"));
//--
Runtime.getRuntime().addShutdownHook(new Thread() {
#Override
public void run() {
ThreadPoolExecutor tpe = (ThreadPoolExecutor) threadExecutor;
System.out.println("Active Threads=====>" + tpe.getActiveCount());
tpe.shutdown();
try {
if (!threadExecutor.awaitTermination(1000, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS)) {
System.out.println("Executor did not terminate in the specified time.");
List<Runnable> droppedTasks = tpe.shutdownNow();
System.out.println("Shutdown thread pool forecibly. " + droppedTasks.size() + " tasks will not be executed.");
}
System.out.println("Active Threads=====>" + tpe.getActiveCount());
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
});
}
}

shutdown() initiates the shutdown process within the thread pool but allows current running tasks to finish. In your example the task does not finish because of while(true).
shutdownNow() initiates the shutdown and also interrupts the currently running threads. But again your task is handling that interrupted exception and running the while(true) loop.
I think you can simply share a common boolean between your tasks and caller code from where you are calling the threadPoolExecuror.shutdown(). Use that boolean in task instead of while(true).

My Produce Consumer Hangs

Please copy the program below and try running in your IDE. It's a simple Produce Consumer implementation - it runs fine when I use one Producer and one Consumer thread but fails when using 2 each. Please let me know the reason why this program hangs or is there anything else wrong with it.
import java.util.LinkedList;
import java.util.Queue;
public class PCQueue {
private volatile Queue<Product> productQueue = new LinkedList<Product>();
public static void main(String[] args) {
PCQueue pc = new PCQueue();
Producer producer = new Producer(pc.productQueue);
Consumer consumer = new Consumer(pc.productQueue);
new Thread(producer, "Producer Thread 1").start();
new Thread(consumer, "Consumer Thread 1").start();
new Thread(producer, "Producer Thread 2").start();
new Thread(consumer, "Consumer Thread 2").start();
}
}
class Producer implements Runnable {
private Queue<Product> queue = null;
private static volatile int refSerialNumber = 0;
public Producer(Queue<Product> queue) {
this.queue = queue;
}
#Override
public void run() {
while (true) {
synchronized (queue) {
while (queue.peek() != null) {
try {
queue.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
queue.add(new Product(++refSerialNumber));
System.out.println("Produced by: "
+ Thread.currentThread().getName() + " Serial Number: "
+ refSerialNumber);
queue.notify();
}
}
}
}
class Consumer implements Runnable {
private Queue<Product> queue = null;
public Consumer(Queue<Product> queue) {
this.queue = queue;
}
#Override
public void run() {
while (true) {
synchronized (queue) {
while (queue.peek() == null) {
try {
queue.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
Product product = queue.remove();
System.out.println("Consumed by: "
+ Thread.currentThread().getName() + " Serial Number: "
+ product.getSerialNumber());
queue.notify();
}
}
}
}
class Product {
private int serialNumber;
public Product(int serialNumber) {
this.serialNumber = serialNumber;
}
public int getSerialNumber() {
return serialNumber;
}
}

The problem is that you are using queue.notify() which will only wake up a single Thread waiting on the Queue. Imagine Producer 1 calls notify() and wakes up Producer 2. Producer 2 sees that there is something in the queue so he doesn't produce anything and simply goes back to the wait() call. Now both your Producers and Consumers are all waiting to be notified and nobody is left working to notify anyone.
To solve the problem in your code, use queue.notifyAll() to wake up every Thread blocked at a wait(). This will allow your consumers to run.
As a note, your implementation limits the queue to having at most one item in it. So you won't see any benefit from the second set of producers and consumers. For a better all around implementation, I suggest you look at BlockingQueue and use an implementation which can be bounded, for instance, the ArrayBlockingQueue. Instead of synchronizing and using wait/notify, simply use BlockingQueue.offer() and BlockingQueue.take().

instead of queue.notify() use queue.notifyAll()

Handling Exceptions for ThreadPoolExecutor

I have the following code snippet that basically scans through the list of task that needs to be executed and each task is then given to the executor for execution.
The JobExecutor in turn creates another executor (for doing db stuff...reading and writing data to queue) and completes the task.
JobExecutor returns a Future<Boolean> for the tasks submitted. When one of the task fails, I want to gracefully interrupt all the threads and shutdown the executor by catching all the exceptions. What changes do I need to do?
public class DataMovingClass {
private static final AtomicInteger uniqueId = new AtomicInteger(0);
private static final ThreadLocal<Integer> uniqueNumber = new IDGenerator();
ThreadPoolExecutor threadPoolExecutor = null ;
private List<Source> sources = new ArrayList<Source>();
private static class IDGenerator extends ThreadLocal<Integer> {
#Override
public Integer get() {
return uniqueId.incrementAndGet();
}
}
public void init(){
// load sources list
}
public boolean execute() {
boolean succcess = true ;
threadPoolExecutor = new ThreadPoolExecutor(10,10,
10, TimeUnit.SECONDS, new ArrayBlockingQueue<Runnable>(1024),
new ThreadFactory() {
public Thread newThread(Runnable r) {
Thread t = new Thread(r);
t.setName("DataMigration-" + uniqueNumber.get());
return t;
}// End method
}, new ThreadPoolExecutor.CallerRunsPolicy());
List<Future<Boolean>> result = new ArrayList<Future<Boolean>>();
for (Source source : sources) {
result.add(threadPoolExecutor.submit(new JobExecutor(source)));
}
for (Future<Boolean> jobDone : result) {
try {
if (!jobDone.get(100000, TimeUnit.SECONDS) && success) {
// in case of successful DbWriterClass, we don't need to change
// it.
success = false;
}
} catch (Exception ex) {
// handle exceptions
}
}
}
public class JobExecutor implements Callable<Boolean> {
private ThreadPoolExecutor threadPoolExecutor ;
Source jobSource ;
public SourceJobExecutor(Source source) {
this.jobSource = source;
threadPoolExecutor = new ThreadPoolExecutor(10,10,10, TimeUnit.SECONDS, new ArrayBlockingQueue<Runnable>(1024),
new ThreadFactory() {
public Thread newThread(Runnable r) {
Thread t = new Thread(r);
t.setName("Job Executor-" + uniqueNumber.get());
return t;
}// End method
}, new ThreadPoolExecutor.CallerRunsPolicy());
}
public Boolean call() throws Exception {
boolean status = true ;
System.out.println("Starting Job = " + jobSource.getName());
try {
// do the specified task ;
}catch (InterruptedException intrEx) {
logger.warn("InterruptedException", intrEx);
status = false ;
} catch(Exception e) {
logger.fatal("Exception occurred while executing task "+jobSource.getName(),e);
status = false ;
}
System.out.println("Ending Job = " + jobSource.getName());
return status ;
}
}
}

When you submit a task to the executor, it returns you a FutureTask instance.
FutureTask.get() will re-throw any exception thrown by the task as an ExecutorException.
So when you iterate through the List<Future> and call get on each, catch ExecutorException and invoke an orderly shutdown.

Since you are submitting tasks to ThreadPoolExecutor, the exceptions are getting swallowed by FutureTask.
Have a look at this code
**Inside FutureTask$Sync**
void innerRun() {
if (!compareAndSetState(READY, RUNNING))
return;
runner = Thread.currentThread();
if (getState() == RUNNING) { // recheck after setting thread
V result;
try {
result = callable.call();
} catch (Throwable ex) {
setException(ex);
return;
}
set(result);
} else {
releaseShared(0); // cancel
}
}
protected void setException(Throwable t) {
sync.innerSetException(t);
}
From above code, it is clear that setException method catching Throwable. Due to this reason, FutureTask is swallowing all exceptions if you use "submit()" method on ThreadPoolExecutor
As per java documentation, you can extend afterExecute() method in ThreadPoolExecutor
protected void afterExecute(Runnable r,
Throwable t)
Sample code as per documentation:
class ExtendedExecutor extends ThreadPoolExecutor {
// ...
protected void afterExecute(Runnable r, Throwable t) {
super.afterExecute(r, t);
if (t == null && r instanceof Future<?>) {
try {
Object result = ((Future<?>) r).get();
} catch (CancellationException ce) {
t = ce;
} catch (ExecutionException ee) {
t = ee.getCause();
} catch (InterruptedException ie) {
Thread.currentThread().interrupt(); // ignore/reset
}
}
if (t != null)
System.out.println(t);
}
}
You can catch Exceptions in three ways
Future.get() as suggested in accepted answer
wrap entire run() or call() method in try{}catch{}Exceptoion{} blocks
override afterExecute of ThreadPoolExecutor method as shown above
To gracefully interrupt other Threads, have a look at below SE question:
How to stop next thread from running in a ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor
How to forcefully shutdown java ExecutorService

Subclass ThreadPoolExecutor and override its protected afterExecute (Runnable r, Throwable t) method.
If you're creating a thread pool via the java.util.concurrent.Executors convenience class (which you're not), take at look at its source to see how it's invoking ThreadPoolExecutor.