BackgroundWorker vs background Thread

2019-01-01 01:12发布

I have a stylistic question about the choice of background thread implementation I should use on a windows form app. Currently I have a BackgroundWorker on a form that has an infinite (while(true)) loop. In this loop I use WaitHandle.WaitAny to keep the thread snoozing until something of interest happens. One of the event handles I wait on is a "StopThread" event so that I can break out of the loop. This event is signaled when from my overridden Form.Dispose().

I read somewhere that BackgroundWorker is really intended for operations that you don't want to tie up the UI with and have an finite end - like downloading a file, or processing a sequence of items. In this case the "end" is unknown and only when the window is closed. Therefore would it be more appropriate for me to use a background Thread instead of BackgroundWorker for this purpose?

11条回答
姐姐魅力值爆表
2楼-- · 2019-01-01 02:04

From my understanding of your question, you are using a BackgroundWorker as a standard Thread.

The reason why BackgroundWorker is recommended for things that you don't want to tie up the UI thread is because it exposes some nice events when doing Win Forms development.

Events like RunWorkerCompleted to signal when the thread has completed what it needed to do, and the ProgressChanged event to update the GUI on the threads progress.

So if you aren't making use of these, I don't see any harm in using a standard Thread for what you need to do.

查看更多
弹指情弦暗扣
3楼-- · 2019-01-01 02:08

Also you are tying up a threadpool thread for the lifetime of the background worker, which may be of concern as there are only a finite number of them. I would say that if you are only ever creating the thread once for your app (and not using any of the features of background worker) then use a thread, rather than a backgroundworker/threadpool thread.

查看更多
余生无你
4楼-- · 2019-01-01 02:09

If it ain't broke - fix it till it is...just kidding :)

But seriously BackgroundWorker is probably very similar to what you already have, had you started with it from the beginning maybe you would have saved some time - but at this point I don't see the need. Unless something isn't working, or you think your current code is hard to understand, then I would stick with what you have.

查看更多
骚的不知所云
5楼-- · 2019-01-01 02:10

Some of my thoughts...

  1. Use BackgroundWorker if you have a single task that runs in the background and needs to interact with the UI. The task of marshalling data and method calls to the UI thread are handled automatically through its event-based model. Avoid BackgroundWorker if...
    • your assembly does not have or does not interact directly with the UI,
    • you need the thread to be a foreground thread, or
    • you need to manipulate the thread priority.
  2. Use a ThreadPool thread when efficiency is desired. The ThreadPool helps avoid the overhead associated with creating, starting, and stopping threads. Avoid using the ThreadPool if...
    • the task runs for the lifetime of your application,
    • you need the thread to be a foreground thread,
    • you need to manipulate the thread priority, or
    • you need the thread to have a fixed identity (aborting, suspending, discovering).
  3. Use the Thread class for long-running tasks and when you require features offered by a formal threading model, e.g., choosing between foreground and background threads, tweaking the thread priority, fine-grained control over thread execution, etc.
查看更多
深知你不懂我心
6楼-- · 2019-01-01 02:10

You know, sometimes it's just easier to work with a BackgroundWorker regardless of if you're using Windows Forms, WPF or whatever technology. The neat part about these guys is you get threading without having to worry too much about where you're thread is executing, which is great for simple tasks.

Before using a BackgroundWorker consider first if you wish to cancel a thread (closing app, user cancellation) then you need to decide if your thread should check for cancellations or if it should be thrust upon the execution itself.

BackgroundWorker.CancelAsync() will set CancellationPending to true but won't do anything more, it's then the threads responsibility to continually check this, keep in mind also that you could end up with a race condition in this approach where your user cancelled, but the thread completed prior to testing for CancellationPending.

Thread.Abort() on the other hand will throw an exception within the thread execution which enforces cancellation of that thread, you must be careful about what might be dangerous if this exception was suddenly raised within the execution though.

Threading needs very careful consideration no matter what the task, for some further reading:

Parallel Programming in the .NET Framework Managed Threading Best Practices

查看更多
登录 后发表回答