I have an app which needs almost no user interaction, but requires Geofences. Can I run this entirely within a background service?
There will be an Activity when the service is first run. This Activity will start a service and register a BroadcastReceiver for BOOT_COMPLETED, so the service will start at boot. It's unlikely that this Activity will ever be run again.
The service will set an Alarm to go off periodically, which will cause an IntentService to download a list of locations from the network. This IntentService will then set up Geofences around those locations, and create PendingIntents which will fire when the locations are approached. In turn, those PendingIntents will cause another IntentService to take some action.
All this needs to happen in the background, with no user interaction apart from starting the Activity for the first time after installation. Hence, the Activity will not interact with LocationClient or any location services.
I've actually got this set up with proximityAlerts, but wish to move to the new Geofencing API for battery life reasons. However, I have heard that there can be a few problems with using LocationClient from within a service. Specifically, what I've heard (sorry, no references, just hearsay claims):
location client relies on ui availability for error handling
when called from background thread, LocationClient.connect() assumes that it is called from main ui thread (or other thread with event looper), so connection callback is never called, if we call this method from service running in background thread
When I've investigated, I can't see any reason why this would be the case, or why it would stop my doing what I want. I was hoping it would be almost a drop-in replacement for proximityAlerts...
Can anyone shed some light on things here?
The best thing would be to just try it out, right? Your strategy seems sound.
when called from background thread, LocationClient.connect() assumes that it is called from main ui thread (or other thread with event looper), so connection callback is never called, if we call this method from service running in background thread.
I know this to be not true. I have a Service that is started from an Activity, and the connection callback is called.
I dont know about proximity alerts; but I cant seem to find an API to list my GeoFences. I am worried that my database (sqlite) and the actual fences might get out of sync. That is a design flaw in my opinion.
The reason LocationClient needs UI, is that the device may not have Google Play Services installed. Google has deviced a cunning and complex mechanism that allows your app to prompt the user to download it. The whole thing is horrible and awful in my opinion. Its all "what-if what-if" programming.
(They rushed a lot of stuff out the door for google IO 2013. Not all of it are well documented, and some of it seems a bit "rough around the edges").
Related
We are developing an app(iOS) in appcelerator which has a sync contact feature in it. This calls an API which syncs contacts with server. I want this to run in background of the app. It should not make the user stop on a screen. Can anyone help me on this?
If you use the iOS background it's only when the app goes to the background and has limitation set by the OS - so if, for example it takes too long to process, or if the OS needs memory - it will shut it down.
I'm guessing (correct me if I'm wrong) that you want to do the sync while the app is running, yet not compromise the user experience by freezing the app?
First of, know the the request to the server is made async - only processing the response is made on the js thread - so to make better use of your single thread I suggest you view the following presentation: http://www.slideshare.net/ronaldtreur/titanium-making-the-most-of-your-single-thread
If you truly want a background thread to do the job, currently you would have to write your own native module to do that.
Also, this is something to look forward to in future versions: https://github.com/appcelerator/cspec-titanium-multithreading
You can use the background service for that.
But be aware, that this services will stop after a few minutes
I've successfully followed the Daemons and Service Guide - Creating XPC Services tutorial, along with the SandboxedFetch sample code and have a working Client / Service setup that is using the new NSXPCConnection class.
What still isn't entirely clear to me is how to properly self-terminate the service application once it has finished its job. I recognize that in many cases, the service is expected to remain alive, but in the use-case I have in mind, the service will be used to only to do some processing that I'd otherwise not perform in the main application. Once that processing is finished, there's no reason for the service application to remain. If the client needs another service at a later date, it can just re-create a new one.
Since the service is a lightweight, non-nibbed, NSApplication, I was trying to self-terminate it by calling invalidate from inside applicationWillTerminate, but that triggers an EXC_BAD_ACCESS exception almost every time. Calling invalidate on the service's [NSXPCListener serviceListener] generates slightly less reliable crashes, but it still crashes.
Calling invalidate from within the client application on its NSXPCConnection also generates an EXC_BAD_ACCESS exception almost every time.
So I'm curious what the correct sequence of steps is to cleanly shutdown the XPC service and then quit the service application. Ideally, the service would self-terminate after it has made its last XPC call to the client.
Attached is a small screenshot of what one of the exception's stacktrace looks like. (Yes, that's a webview that's loading in the service. Once the webview has finished loading, I want the service to self-terminate)
My first reaction is that you should not bother to terminate. When memory pressure occurs and your service is idle, launchd will kill your service. Exiting probably isn't in anyone's best interest because your service will take time to launch again. Don't terminate and you won't have to figure out why your attempt crashes.
But if for some reason you are determined to terminate, don't try so hard. Just do whatever you need to do to clean up (flush buffers, close network connections gracefully so the server doesn't suffer, whatever) and call exit. Although you seem to be using NSApplication, your service is not an application in any sense that the user cares about and there is no compelling reason to act like one in this respect. The host application needs to be able to cope with your service crashing anyway, so your deliberately exiting unceremoniously is just fine.
By the way, using NSApplication in an XPC service probably isn't the best idea because there's no supported way to declare that you want that. This might help explain why it isn't working as well as you'd like, though this paragraph should not be construed as a proper analysis of the crash. :-)
I need to track to a log when a service or application in Windows is started, stopped, and whether it exits successfully or with an error code.
I understand that many services do not log their own start and stop times, or if they exit correctly, so it seems the way to go would have to be inserting a hook into the API that will catch when services/applications request a process space and relinquish it.
My question is what function do I need to hook in order to accomplish this, and is it even possible? I need it to work on Windows XP and 7, both 64-bit.
I think your best bet is to use a device driver. See PsSetCreateProcessNotifyRoutine.
Windows Vista has NotifyServiceStatusChange(), but only for single services. On earlier versions, it's not possible other than polling for changes or watching the event log.
If you're looking for a user-space solution, EnumProcesses() will return a current list. But it won't signal you with changes, you'd have to continually poll it and act on the differences.
If you're watching for a specific application or set of applications, consider assigning them to Job Objects, which are all about allowing you to place limits on processes and manage them externally. I think you could even associate Explorer with a job object, then all tasks launched by the user would be associated with your job object automatically. Something to look into, perhaps.
I would like to create an application that will monitor apps running on my machine, and respond to situations where an application has beachballed. Is it possible (using any of the various OSX programming tools -- I'll teach myself Objective-C for this) to detect whether this has happened? If so, can someone give me a short code sample that does so?
I'm afraid I don't the actual classes or functions involved, but I can give you an outline of the process.
First, understand that every Application (perhaps every Window) has an event queue backing it. Each is serviced by a thread that just pops an event* off the queue, does some processing, and then returns to waiting for the next event. A "beachball" comes up (when forced by the system) when the event queue isn't getting serviced quickly enough. A "frozen" event queue implies that an application locked up when responding to some event in the past.
Now - outside of debugging contexts - you shouldn't be able to reach into another application and fiddle with a thread's event queue to see if its getting serviced. But what you could do instead is periodically post an event that would illicit a response, and if ever that response doesn't come you know the application is "locked up".
This constitutes polling, so be wary of the performance implications.
*Events are things like key down, key up, mouse moved, repaint, and so on.
Besides the WindowServer itself, the other system components that I know of that can detect unresponsiveness are the force quit dialog, spindump (which collects sampling profiles of applications while they are unresponsive), and Activity Monitor (presumably via its pmTool privileged subprocess). Perhaps running strings on pmTool might provide hints about what system calls to use?
Note that none of these evidently does its job by polling, because no application is ever detected as unresponsive until it fails to respond to an event — if an application hangs/does a lot of computation without checking its event queue, but it receives no events during that time, then it is not reported as unresponsive.
Why not use the Windows scheduler?
I have several applications that have to run at certain times according to business rules not the typical every weekday at 1pm.
I also need a way for the applications to provide feedback of their progress so that I can have rules that notify me when the applications are running slow or aren't even running anymore.
What Windows API should I be looking into? (like, a time version of the FileWatcher apis)
What's the best way to have the application notify the scheduler of its progress (files, sockets, windows messages, ???)?
For Vista/Win2k8, there's the nice Task Scheduler 2.0 API: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa384138(VS.85).aspx. Previous version have the Task Scheduler 1.0 API, but I've never used it.
AppControls has a CronJob component that you can use to create scheduled events. This saves your program from having to wake up every minute and check the schedule itself. Instead, just schedule the job and indicate a callback method.
I have used this component for scheduling jobs myself and have been very happy with the way that it works.
I think what you really want is a common framework for your applications that report to something (you or the system messages or tracing or perfmon, event log, whatever) and also to receive via some inter process protocol a way to receive messages and respond.
based on the reporting you can change the scheduling or make changes, etc.
So, there is some monitor app, and then each of your other apps does common reporting.
events I can think of:
- started
- stopped
- error
- normal log messages
- and of course specific things your apps do.
I think there are probably existing classes/framework that do this - you'll have to check around.
If it were me, I would make a service that could talk to all the other apps and perhaps was even an http server. It would be able to route messages to particular apps and start stop those processes and query them.
There are lots of ways to do what you want though. those were just off the top of my head.
Alternatively you might just be able to get these to be services and they handle messages sent to them. Their normal processing does nothing until they are "woken up" with some task command.
You have more questions in one. Normally you should split them. But let's overlook this and try to answer.
To schedule certain events (including running an application): Use TJvScheduledEvents from JVCL. IMHO JVCL is the best Delphi open source library around with extensive number of components, developers & support. TJvScheduledEvents is quite neat, uses threads for event scheduling and also you have in JVCL a detailed editor for your events (it needs a small hack to use it though).
To provide 'feedback' from your applications to a (remote) central point: A very very very good solution (if your requirements permit) is to log the progress of your applications in a table (let's call it LOG) on a Firebird server. In LOG you can have the following fields: COMPUTER, USERNAME, APPNAME, MSG, LOGDATE (etc. etc.). In the After Insert trigger of the LOG table you can fire an event (let's call it NEW_LOG). In your console app you can register the interest for this event and so, your application will be automatically updated with everything which happens in any of your applications, so you can do log analysis, graphs etc. Of course you can do it with IB, but IB costs.
...going on Windows API route you need headers (which probably aren't translated), you'll encounter our dearest Pointers/PChars etc. etc. Of course, building from scratch everything isn't worthwhile but when this is already done in a Delphi way, why don't use it?
Use service with a timer that is fired regulary (for example each minute). It reads the schedule and looks if some are due before the next iteration. If so, you can execute them.
You can add an interface that shows all running apps. For the feedback and query that using a desktop application.