I'm running into a common pattern in the code that I'm writing, where I need to wait for all threads in a group to complete, with a timeout. The timeout is supposed to be the time required for all threads to complete, so simply doing thread.Join(timeout) for each thread won't work, since the possible timeout is then timeout * numThreads.
我正在编写我正在编写的代码中的常见模式,我需要等待组中的所有线程完成,并且超时。超时应该是所有线程完成所需的时间,因此简单地为每个线程执行thread.Join(timeout)将不起作用,因为可能的超时是超时* numThreads。
Right now I do something like the following:
现在我做类似以下的事情:
var threadFinishEvents = new List<EventWaitHandle>();
foreach (DataObject data in dataList)
{
// Create local variables for the thread delegate
var threadFinish = new EventWaitHandle(false, EventResetMode.ManualReset);
threadFinishEvents.Add(threadFinish);
var localData = (DataObject) data.Clone();
var thread = new Thread(
delegate()
{
DoThreadStuff(localData);
threadFinish.Set();
}
);
thread.Start();
}
Mutex.WaitAll(threadFinishEvents.ToArray(), timeout);
However, it seems like there should be a simpler idiom for this sort of thing.
但是,对于这种事情,似乎应该有一个更简单的习语。
9 个解决方案
#1
25
I still think using Join is simpler. Record the expected completion time (as Now+timeout), then, in a loop, do
我仍然认为使用Join更简单。记录预期的完成时间(如现在+超时),然后在循环中执行
if(!thread.Join(End-now))
throw new NotFinishedInTime();
#2
22
With .NET 4.0 I find System.Threading.Tasks a lot easier to work with. Here's spin-wait loop which works reliably for me. It blocks the main thread until all the tasks complete. There's also Task.WaitAll, but that hasn't always worked for me.
使用.NET 4.0,我发现System.Threading.Tasks更容易使用。这是旋转等待循环,对我来说可靠。它会阻塞主线程,直到完成所有任务。还有Task.WaitAll,但这对我来说并不总是有效。
for (int i = 0; i < N; i++)
{
tasks[i] = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
DoThreadStuff(localData);
});
}
while (tasks.Any(t => !t.IsCompleted)) { } //spin wait
#3
9
Since the question got bumped I will go ahead and post my solution.
由于问题得到了解决,我将继续发布我的解决方案。
using (var finished = new CountdownEvent(1))
{
for (DataObject data in dataList)
{
finished.AddCount();
var localData = (DataObject)data.Clone();
var thread = new Thread(
delegate()
{
try
{
DoThreadStuff(localData);
threadFinish.Set();
}
finally
{
finished.Signal();
}
}
);
thread.Start();
}
finished.Signal();
finished.Wait(YOUR_TIMEOUT);
}
#4
8
Off the top of my head, why don't you just Thread.Join(timeout) and remove the time it took to join from the total timeout?
在我的脑海中,为什么不只是Thread.Join(超时)并从总超时中删除加入所花费的时间?
// pseudo-c#:
TimeSpan timeout = timeoutPerThread * threads.Count();
foreach (Thread thread in threads)
{
DateTime start = DateTime.Now;
if (!thread.Join(timeout))
throw new TimeoutException();
timeout -= (DateTime.Now - start);
}
Edit: code is now less pseudo. don't understand why you would mod an answer -2 when the answer you modded +4 is exactly the same, only less detailed.
编辑:现在代码更少伪。不明白为什么你会修改答案-2当你修改的答案+4完全相同,只是不那么详细。
#5
7
This doesn't answer the question (no timeout), but I've made a very simple extension method to wait all threads of a collection:
这不回答问题(没有超时),但我做了一个非常简单的扩展方法来等待集合的所有线程:
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Threading;
namespace Extensions
{
public static class ThreadExtension
{
public static void WaitAll(this IEnumerable<Thread> threads)
{
if(threads!=null)
{
foreach(Thread thread in threads)
{ thread.Join(); }
}
}
}
}
Then you simply call:
然后你只需致电:
List<Thread> threads=new List<Thread>();
//Add your threads to this collection
threads.WaitAll();
#6
6
This may not be an option for you, but if you can use the Parallel Extension for .NET then you could use Task
s instead of raw threads and then use Task.WaitAll()
to wait for them to complete.
这可能不是您的选择,但如果您可以使用.NET的并行扩展,那么您可以使用Tasks而不是原始线程,然后使用Task.WaitAll()等待它们完成。
#7
1
I was tying to figure out how to do this but i could not get any answers from google. I know this is an old thread but here was my solution:
我想弄清楚如何做到这一点,但我无法从谷歌得到任何答案。我知道这是一个旧线程,但这是我的解决方案:
Use the following class:
使用以下类:
class ThreadWaiter
{
private int _numThreads = 0;
private int _spinTime;
public ThreadWaiter(int SpinTime)
{
this._spinTime = SpinTime;
}
public void AddThreads(int numThreads)
{
_numThreads += numThreads;
}
public void RemoveThread()
{
if (_numThreads > 0)
{
_numThreads--;
}
}
public void Wait()
{
while (_numThreads != 0)
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(_spinTime);
}
}
}
- Call Addthreads(int numThreads) before executing a thread(s).
- Call RemoveThread() after each one has completed.
- Use Wait() at the point that you want to wait for all the threads to complete before continuing
在执行线程之前调用Addthreads(int numThreads)。
每个完成后调用RemoveThread()。
在继续之前,在等待所有线程完成的位置使用Wait()
#8
1
I read the book C# 4.0: The Complete Reference of Herbert Schildt. The author use join to give a solution :
我读过C#4.0:Herbert Schildt的完整参考书。作者使用join来提供解决方案:
class MyThread
{
public int Count;
public Thread Thrd;
public MyThread(string name)
{
Count = 0;
Thrd = new Thread(this.Run);
Thrd.Name = name;
Thrd.Start();
}
// Entry point of thread.
void Run()
{
Console.WriteLine(Thrd.Name + " starting.");
do
{
Thread.Sleep(500);
Console.WriteLine("In " + Thrd.Name +
", Count is " + Count);
Count++;
} while (Count < 10);
Console.WriteLine(Thrd.Name + " terminating.");
}
}
// Use Join() to wait for threads to end.
class JoinThreads
{
static void Main()
{
Console.WriteLine("Main thread starting.");
// Construct three threads.
MyThread mt1 = new MyThread("Child #1");
MyThread mt2 = new MyThread("Child #2");
MyThread mt3 = new MyThread("Child #3");
mt1.Thrd.Join();
Console.WriteLine("Child #1 joined.");
mt2.Thrd.Join();
Console.WriteLine("Child #2 joined.");
mt3.Thrd.Join();
Console.WriteLine("Child #3 joined.");
Console.WriteLine("Main thread ending.");
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
#9
0
Possible solution:
var tasks = dataList
.Select(data => Task.Factory.StartNew(arg => DoThreadStuff(data), TaskContinuationOptions.LongRunning | TaskContinuationOptions.PreferFairness))
.ToArray();
var timeout = TimeSpan.FromMinutes(1);
Task.WaitAll(tasks, timeout);
Assuming dataList is the list of items and each item needs to be processed in a separate thread.
假设dataList是项目列表,并且每个项目都需要在单独的线程中处理。
#1
25
I still think using Join is simpler. Record the expected completion time (as Now+timeout), then, in a loop, do
我仍然认为使用Join更简单。记录预期的完成时间(如现在+超时),然后在循环中执行
if(!thread.Join(End-now))
throw new NotFinishedInTime();
#2
22
With .NET 4.0 I find System.Threading.Tasks a lot easier to work with. Here's spin-wait loop which works reliably for me. It blocks the main thread until all the tasks complete. There's also Task.WaitAll, but that hasn't always worked for me.
使用.NET 4.0,我发现System.Threading.Tasks更容易使用。这是旋转等待循环,对我来说可靠。它会阻塞主线程,直到完成所有任务。还有Task.WaitAll,但这对我来说并不总是有效。
for (int i = 0; i < N; i++)
{
tasks[i] = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
DoThreadStuff(localData);
});
}
while (tasks.Any(t => !t.IsCompleted)) { } //spin wait
#3
9
Since the question got bumped I will go ahead and post my solution.
由于问题得到了解决,我将继续发布我的解决方案。
using (var finished = new CountdownEvent(1))
{
for (DataObject data in dataList)
{
finished.AddCount();
var localData = (DataObject)data.Clone();
var thread = new Thread(
delegate()
{
try
{
DoThreadStuff(localData);
threadFinish.Set();
}
finally
{
finished.Signal();
}
}
);
thread.Start();
}
finished.Signal();
finished.Wait(YOUR_TIMEOUT);
}
#4
8
Off the top of my head, why don't you just Thread.Join(timeout) and remove the time it took to join from the total timeout?
在我的脑海中,为什么不只是Thread.Join(超时)并从总超时中删除加入所花费的时间?
// pseudo-c#:
TimeSpan timeout = timeoutPerThread * threads.Count();
foreach (Thread thread in threads)
{
DateTime start = DateTime.Now;
if (!thread.Join(timeout))
throw new TimeoutException();
timeout -= (DateTime.Now - start);
}
Edit: code is now less pseudo. don't understand why you would mod an answer -2 when the answer you modded +4 is exactly the same, only less detailed.
编辑:现在代码更少伪。不明白为什么你会修改答案-2当你修改的答案+4完全相同,只是不那么详细。
#5
7
This doesn't answer the question (no timeout), but I've made a very simple extension method to wait all threads of a collection:
这不回答问题(没有超时),但我做了一个非常简单的扩展方法来等待集合的所有线程:
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Threading;
namespace Extensions
{
public static class ThreadExtension
{
public static void WaitAll(this IEnumerable<Thread> threads)
{
if(threads!=null)
{
foreach(Thread thread in threads)
{ thread.Join(); }
}
}
}
}
Then you simply call:
然后你只需致电:
List<Thread> threads=new List<Thread>();
//Add your threads to this collection
threads.WaitAll();
#6
6
This may not be an option for you, but if you can use the Parallel Extension for .NET then you could use Task
s instead of raw threads and then use Task.WaitAll()
to wait for them to complete.
这可能不是您的选择,但如果您可以使用.NET的并行扩展,那么您可以使用Tasks而不是原始线程,然后使用Task.WaitAll()等待它们完成。
#7
1
I was tying to figure out how to do this but i could not get any answers from google. I know this is an old thread but here was my solution:
我想弄清楚如何做到这一点,但我无法从谷歌得到任何答案。我知道这是一个旧线程,但这是我的解决方案:
Use the following class:
使用以下类:
class ThreadWaiter
{
private int _numThreads = 0;
private int _spinTime;
public ThreadWaiter(int SpinTime)
{
this._spinTime = SpinTime;
}
public void AddThreads(int numThreads)
{
_numThreads += numThreads;
}
public void RemoveThread()
{
if (_numThreads > 0)
{
_numThreads--;
}
}
public void Wait()
{
while (_numThreads != 0)
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(_spinTime);
}
}
}
- Call Addthreads(int numThreads) before executing a thread(s).
- Call RemoveThread() after each one has completed.
- Use Wait() at the point that you want to wait for all the threads to complete before continuing
在执行线程之前调用Addthreads(int numThreads)。
每个完成后调用RemoveThread()。
在继续之前,在等待所有线程完成的位置使用Wait()
#8
1
I read the book C# 4.0: The Complete Reference of Herbert Schildt. The author use join to give a solution :
我读过C#4.0:Herbert Schildt的完整参考书。作者使用join来提供解决方案:
class MyThread
{
public int Count;
public Thread Thrd;
public MyThread(string name)
{
Count = 0;
Thrd = new Thread(this.Run);
Thrd.Name = name;
Thrd.Start();
}
// Entry point of thread.
void Run()
{
Console.WriteLine(Thrd.Name + " starting.");
do
{
Thread.Sleep(500);
Console.WriteLine("In " + Thrd.Name +
", Count is " + Count);
Count++;
} while (Count < 10);
Console.WriteLine(Thrd.Name + " terminating.");
}
}
// Use Join() to wait for threads to end.
class JoinThreads
{
static void Main()
{
Console.WriteLine("Main thread starting.");
// Construct three threads.
MyThread mt1 = new MyThread("Child #1");
MyThread mt2 = new MyThread("Child #2");
MyThread mt3 = new MyThread("Child #3");
mt1.Thrd.Join();
Console.WriteLine("Child #1 joined.");
mt2.Thrd.Join();
Console.WriteLine("Child #2 joined.");
mt3.Thrd.Join();
Console.WriteLine("Child #3 joined.");
Console.WriteLine("Main thread ending.");
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
#9
0
Possible solution:
var tasks = dataList
.Select(data => Task.Factory.StartNew(arg => DoThreadStuff(data), TaskContinuationOptions.LongRunning | TaskContinuationOptions.PreferFairness))
.ToArray();
var timeout = TimeSpan.FromMinutes(1);
Task.WaitAll(tasks, timeout);
Assuming dataList is the list of items and each item needs to be processed in a separate thread.
假设dataList是项目列表,并且每个项目都需要在单独的线程中处理。