I tried using the boost deadline_timer in this simple test application, but had some trouble. The goal is for the timer to trigger every 45 milliseconds using the expires_at() member function of the deadline_timer. (I need an absolute time, so I'm not considering expires_from_now(). I am also not concerned about drift at the moment). When I run the program, wait() does not wait for 45 ms! Yet, no errors are reported. Am I using the library incorrectly somehow?
Sample program:
#include <boost/asio.hpp>
#include <boost/thread.hpp>
#include <boost/bind.hpp>
#include <boost/date_time/posix_time/posix_time.hpp>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
boost::asio::io_service Service;
boost::shared_ptr<boost::thread> Thread;
boost::asio::io_service::work RunForever(Service);
Thread = boost::shared_ptr<boost::thread>(new boost::thread(boost::bind(&boost::asio::io_service::run, &Service)));
boost::shared_ptr<boost::asio::deadline_timer> Timer(new boost::asio::deadline_timer(Service));
while(1)
{
boost::posix_time::time_duration Duration;
Duration = boost::posix_time::microseconds(45000);
boost::posix_time::ptime Start = boost::posix_time::microsec_clock::local_time();
boost::posix_time::ptime Deadline = Start + Duration;
boost::system::error_code Error;
size_t Result = Timer->expires_at(Deadline, Error);
cout << Result << ' ' << Error << ' ';
Timer->wait(Error);
cout << Error << ' ';
boost::posix_time::ptime End = boost::posix_time::microsec_clock::local_time();
(cout << "Duration = " << (End - Start).total_milliseconds() << " milliseconds" << endl).flush();
}
return 0;
}
You are mixing local time with system time. The time that asio is comparing your local time to is most likely some number of hours after the time that you want your deadline set to so wait returns immediately (depending on where you live; this same code could wait for several hours as well). To avoid this point of confusion, absolute times should be derived from asio::time_traits.
#include <boost/asio.hpp>
#include <boost/asio/time_traits.hpp>
#include <boost/thread.hpp>
#include <boost/bind.hpp>
#include <boost/date_time/posix_time/posix_time.hpp>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
typedef boost::asio::time_traits<boost::posix_time::ptime> time_traits_t;
int main() {
boost::asio::io_service Service;
boost::shared_ptr<boost::thread> Thread;
boost::asio::io_service::work RunForever(Service);
Thread = boost::shared_ptr<boost::thread>(new boost::thread(boost::bind(&boost::asio::io_service::run, &Service)));
boost::shared_ptr<boost::asio::deadline_timer> Timer(new boost::asio::deadline_timer(Service));
while(1)
{
boost::posix_time::time_duration Duration;
Duration = boost::posix_time::microseconds(45000);
boost::posix_time::ptime Start = time_traits_t::now();
boost::posix_time::ptime Deadline = Start + Duration;
boost::system::error_code Error;
size_t Result = Timer->expires_at(Deadline, Error);
cout << Result << ' ' << Error << ' ';
Timer->wait(Error);
cout << Error << ' ';
boost::posix_time::ptime End = boost::posix_time::microsec_clock::local_time();
(cout << "Duration = " << (End - Start).total_milliseconds() << " milliseconds" << endl).flush();
}
return 0;
}
That should work out for you in this case.
You are mixing asynchronous methods io_service::run with synchronous methods deadline_timer::wait. This will not work. Either use deadline_timer::async_wait with io_service::run, or skip the io_service::run and just use deadline_timer::wait. You also don't need a thread to invoke io_service:run if you go the asynchronous route, one thread will do just fine. Both concepts are explained in detail in the Basic Skills section of the Asio tutorial.
void print(const boost::system::error_code& /*e*/)
{
std::cout << "Hello, world!\n";
}
int main()
{
boost::asio::io_service io;
boost::asio::deadline_timer t(io, boost::posix_time::seconds(5));
t.async_wait(print);
io.run();
return 0;
}
Note you will need to give some work for your io_service to service prior to invoking run(). In this example, async_wait is that work.
Potentially unrelated: 45ms is quite a small delta. In my experience the smallest time for any handler to make it through the Asio epoll reactor queue is around 30 ms, this can be considerably longer at higher loads. Though it all largely depends on your application.
Related
I'm working on some comms code for which I need a regular timer for monitoring. I'm using boost ASIO for the comms so I decided to use a deadline timer for the timing and put it on the same IO service.
Everything works great the first time the code is run but it goes wrong once the comms (in my case a serial port) is stopped and restarted. The timer begins to malfunction and the comms break down. I believe the two are related so I'm just focusing on the timer for this question.
Consider the code below. This should start a timer and let it run for 10 seconds, stop the timer, and then start it again for another 10 seconds. What actually happens though is that when the timer is restarted it fires continuously, ie without any delay between firing.
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <boost/bind.hpp>
#include <boost/asio.hpp>
boost::posix_time::ptime timer_start_;
void CallbackTimerFunc(boost::asio::deadline_timer* timer) {
auto time_since_start = timer->expires_at() - timer_start_;
std::cout << "It's been " << time_since_start.total_seconds() << " seconds." << std::endl;
// Sleep is here to prevent spamming when timer starts malfunctioning.
usleep(20000);
timer->expires_at(timer->expires_at() + boost::posix_time::milliseconds(1000));
timer->async_wait(boost::bind(&CallbackTimerFunc, timer));
}
int main(int /*argc*/, char** /*args*/) {
// Start
boost::asio::io_service io_service_;
boost::asio::deadline_timer deadline_timer_(io_service_);
deadline_timer_.expires_from_now(boost::posix_time::milliseconds(1000));
timer_start_ = deadline_timer_.expires_at();
deadline_timer_.async_wait(boost::bind(&CallbackTimerFunc, &deadline_timer_));
std::thread io_thread_(boost::bind(&boost::asio::io_service::run, &io_service_));
// Stop
sleep(10);
io_service_.stop();
while (!io_service_.stopped()) usleep(10000);
deadline_timer_.cancel();
io_thread_.join();
std::cout << "******************************" << std::endl;
// Restart
io_service_.restart();
deadline_timer_.expires_from_now(boost::posix_time::milliseconds(1000));
timer_start_ = deadline_timer_.expires_at();
deadline_timer_.async_wait(boost::bind(&CallbackTimerFunc, &deadline_timer_));
io_thread_ = std::thread(boost::bind(&boost::asio::io_service::run, &io_service_));
// Stop
sleep(10);
io_service_.stop();
while (!io_service_.stopped()) usleep(10000);
deadline_timer_.cancel();
io_thread_.join();
return 0;
}
Expected output is for the timer to count to 10 (well in reality from 0 to 8) twice. The actual output is that it counts to 10 once, and then just goes haywire claiming that hundreds of seconds are passing.
I can make this code work by creating a brand new IO service and timer but that seems like it should be unnecessary given that they are supposed to be reusable.
If anyone can tell me what's going on here or at least reproduce my results I'd appreciate it.
Thanks to #tkausl for putting me on the right track. Here is the corrected code. Note the extra check at the top of CallbackTimerFunc.
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <boost/bind.hpp>
#include <boost/asio.hpp>
boost::posix_time::ptime timer_start_;
void CallbackTimerFunc(const boost::system::error_code& error, boost::asio::deadline_timer* timer) {
if (error.value() == boost::asio::error::operation_aborted) {
std::cout << "Abort was sent on the first firing. Because of course it would be. Ignoring it will fix the problem. Because of course it will." << std::endl;
return;
}
auto time_since_start = timer->expires_at() - timer_start_;
std::cout << "It's been " << time_since_start.total_seconds() << " seconds." << std::endl;
// Sleep is here to prevent spamming when timer starts malfunctioning.
usleep(20000);
timer->expires_at(timer->expires_at() + boost::posix_time::milliseconds(1000));
timer->async_wait(boost::bind(&CallbackTimerFunc, boost::asio::placeholders::error, timer));
}
int main(int /*argc*/, char** /*args*/) {
// Start
boost::asio::io_service io_service_;
boost::asio::deadline_timer deadline_timer_(io_service_);
deadline_timer_.expires_from_now(boost::posix_time::milliseconds(1000));
timer_start_ = deadline_timer_.expires_at();
deadline_timer_.async_wait(boost::bind(CallbackTimerFunc, boost::asio::placeholders::error, &deadline_timer_));
std::thread io_thread_(boost::bind(&boost::asio::io_service::run, &io_service_));
// Stop
sleep(10);
io_service_.stop();
while (!io_service_.stopped()) usleep(10000);
deadline_timer_.cancel();
io_thread_.join();
std::cout << "******************************" << std::endl;
// Restart
io_service_.restart();
deadline_timer_.expires_from_now(boost::posix_time::milliseconds(1000));
timer_start_ = deadline_timer_.expires_at();
deadline_timer_.async_wait(boost::bind(CallbackTimerFunc, boost::asio::placeholders::error, &deadline_timer_));
io_thread_ = std::thread(boost::bind(&boost::asio::io_service::run, &io_service_));
// Stop
sleep(10);
io_service_.stop();
while (!io_service_.stopped()) usleep(10000);
deadline_timer_.cancel();
io_thread_.join();
return 0;
}
void sendCommand(float t,char* cmd)
{
std::clock_t endwait;
double endwait = clock () + t * CLOCKS_PER_SEC ;
while (clock() < endwait) {}
if( clock() < endwait)
printf("\nThe waited command is =%s",cmd);
}
void Main()
{
sendCommand(3.0,"Command1");
sendCommand(2.0,"Command2");
printf("\nThe first value")
return 0;
}
i want to delay a function but my application should keep on running.
In the above code i want The first value to be printed first.
than i want Command2 to be printed and Command1 should be the last to be printed.
I prefer std::async for this.
#include <chrono>
#include <thread>
#include <future>
#include <iostream>
void sendCommand(std::chrono::seconds delay, std::string cmd)
{
std::this_thread::sleep_for( delay );
std::cout << "\nThe waited command is =" << cmd;
}
int main()
{
auto s1 = std::async(std::launch::async, sendCommand, std::chrono::seconds(3),"Command1");
auto s2 = std::async(std::launch::async, sendCommand, std::chrono::seconds(2),"Command2");
std::cout << "\nThe first value" << std::flush;
s1.wait();
s2.wait();
return 0;
}
However, for a real design, I would create a scheduler (or preferably use an existing one) which manages a priority queue sorted by the delay time. Spawning a new thread for every command will quickly become a problem. Since you flagged the question for MS VIsual C++, take a look the PPL which implements task-based parallelism.
And as it a C++ question, I would stay away from the C stuff and not use printf, CLOCK_PER_SEC, char*, clock etc. You will quickly get into problems even with this simple example when you start using strings instead of the "Command1" literals. std::string will help you here.
I think you need threads. You can do it like this:
#include <thread>
#include <chrono>
#include <iostream>
void sendCommand(float t, char const* cmd)
{
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(int(t * 1000)));
std::cout << "\nThe waited command is = " << cmd << '\n';
}
int main()
{
// each function call on a new thread
std::thread t1(sendCommand, 3.0, "Command1");
std::thread t2(sendCommand, 2.0, "Command2");
// join the threads so we don't exit before they finish.
t1.join();
t2.join();
}
You can do it in many ways depending upon your actual logic.
Examles;:
1.you can you a global flag variable and check its state , when third print will complete you can set flag to 1,so next call will execute.
2.you can use a STACK .push all the function pointers in a STACK . and after that pop and execute.
3.MultiThreading. You can use it with proper synchronized way, but it will be complex. It depends upon your requirement.
Thanks !!!
boost::asio is nice because it doesn't require the overhead of multiple threads.
#include <iostream>
#include <boost/asio.hpp>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
boost::asio::io_service svc;
boost::asio::deadline_timer t0{svc};
boost::asio::deadline_timer t1{svc};
boost::asio::deadline_timer t2{svc};
t0.expires_from_now(boost::posix_time::seconds{1});
t1.expires_from_now(boost::posix_time::seconds{2});
t2.expires_from_now(boost::posix_time::seconds{3});
t2.async_wait([] (const boost::system::error_code& ec) { if(!ec) std::cout << "Greetings from t2!\n";});
t1.async_wait([] (const boost::system::error_code& ec) { if(!ec) std::cout << "Greetings from t1!\n";});
t0.async_wait([] (const boost::system::error_code& ec) { if(!ec) std::cout << "Greetings from t0!\n";});
svc.post([] () { std::cout << "I'm number one!\n";});
svc.run();
return 0;
}
Gives the output:
I'm number one!
Greetings from t0!
Greetings from t1!
Greetings from t2!
I'm using a deadline_timer as an asynchronous event and I'm running into a situation where, after some time, the thread waiting on the event never seems to be woken up (despite more calls to cancel()). I've been able to reproduce this using some sample code that I've pasted below; it's not exactly consistent but I have seen what I think is the same issue I'm experiencing.
boost::asio::io_service io_service;
boost::asio::deadline_timer timer(io_service);
timer.expires_at(boost::posix_time::pos_infin);
int num_events = 0;
auto waiter = [&timer, &num_events](boost::asio::yield_context context) {
while (true) {
std::cout << "waiting on event" << std::endl;
boost::system::error_code e;
timer.async_wait(context[e]);
std::cout << "got event (" << e << ")" << std::endl;
++num_events;
}
};
boost::asio::spawn(io_service, std::move(waiter));
boost::thread thread(boost::bind(&boost::asio::io_service::run, &io_service));
for (auto i = 0; i < 500000; ++i) {
timer.cancel();
std::cout << i << std::endl;
}
Am I doing something here that's unsupported and inadvertently hitting some race condition? The error code from the wait() never looks troublesome (even on the very last time it's woken up before it never seems to again). EDIT: I've also noticed the original bug on 3 different platforms (Windows, Mac and Linux) but the above test I've been using to reproduce has been on Windows.
The deadline_timer object is not threadsafe.
You're canceling it from another thread than the one that's posting the async_wait. This means the calls can race.
I'm not sure how this can completely inhibit the callback, in your sample. It seems to me that the program should /just/ quit because the tight loop to 500000 finishes quickly (doing many redundant cancels that never get processed, because the coroutine would e.g. not even have posted the new async_wait).
So maybe you mean, "why don't I get 500000 events".
UPDATE
After the comment, here's a trivial transformation that shows how you are gonna be fine calling members on the timer from within an actor. Note: this critically hinges on the idea that the io_service is run from a single thread only!
#include <boost/asio.hpp>
#include <boost/asio/spawn.hpp>
#include <boost/make_shared.hpp>
#include <boost/thread.hpp>
#include <iostream>
using boost::thread;
using boost::asio::io_service;
int main() {
boost::asio::io_service io_service;
boost::asio::deadline_timer timer(io_service);
timer.expires_at(boost::posix_time::pos_infin);
boost::atomic_bool shutdown(false);
int num_events = 0;
auto waiter = [&timer, &num_events, &shutdown](boost::asio::yield_context context) {
while (!shutdown) {
std::cout << "waiting on event" << std::endl;
boost::system::error_code e;
timer.async_wait(context[e]);
std::cout << "got event (" << e.message() << ")" << std::endl;
++num_events;
}
};
boost::asio::spawn(io_service, std::move(waiter));
boost::thread thread(boost::bind(&boost::asio::io_service::run, &io_service));
for (auto i = 0; i < 5000; ++i) {
io_service.post([&timer, i]{
std::cout << i << std::endl;
timer.cancel();
});
}
io_service.post([&]{
shutdown = true;
timer.cancel();
});
thread.join();
std::cout << "Check: " << num_events << " events counted\n";
}
Also, it looks like you just wanted to signal a background task. As given you can simplify the program like:
See it Live On Coliru
#include <boost/asio.hpp>
#include <boost/thread.hpp>
#include <boost/make_shared.hpp>
#include <iostream>
using boost::thread;
using boost::asio::io_service;
int main() {
io_service svc;
int num_events = 0;
auto work = boost::make_shared<io_service::work>(svc); // keep svc running
boost::thread thread(boost::bind(&io_service::run, &svc));
for (auto i = 0; i < 500000; ++i) {
svc.post([&num_events,i]{
std::cout << "got event (" << i << ")" << std::endl;
++num_events;
});
}
work.reset();
thread.join();
std::cout << "Check: " << num_events << " events counted\n";
}
This does print all 500000 events:
got event (0)
got event (1)
got event (3)
...
got event (499998)
got event (499999)
Check: 500000 events counted
I have a c++ class that allocates a lot of memory. It does this by calling a third-party library that is designed to crash if it cannot allocate the memory, and sometimes my application creates several instances of my class in parallel threads. With too many threads I have a crash.
My best idea for a solution is to make sure that there are never, say, more than three instances running at the same time. (Is this a good idea?)
And my current best idea for implementing that is to use a boost mutex. Something along the lines of the following pseudo-code,
MyClass::MyClass(){
my_thread_number = -1; //this is a class variable
while (my_thread_number == -1)
for (int i=0; i < MAX_PROCESSES; i++)
if(try_lock a mutex named i){
my_thread_number = i;
break;
}
//Now I know that my thread has mutex number i and it is allowed to run
}
MyClass::~MyClass(){
release mutex named my_thread_number
}
As you see, I am not quite sure of the exact syntax for mutexes here.. So summing up, my questions are
Am I on the right track when I want to solve my memory error by limiting the number of threads?
If yes, Should I do it with mutexes or by other means?
If yes, Is my algorithm sound?
Is there a nice example somewhere of how to use try_lock with boost mutexes?
Edit: I realized I am talking about threads, not processes.
Edit: I am involved in building an application that can run on both linux and Windows...
UPDATE My other answer addresses scheduling resources among threads (after the question was clarified).
It shows both a semaphore approach to coordinate work among (many) workers, and a thread_pool to limit workers in the first place and queue the work.
On linux (and perhaps other OSes?) you can use a lock file idiom (but it's not supported with some file-systems and old kernels).
I would suggest to use Interprocess synchronisation objects.
E.g., using a Boost Interprocess named semaphore:
#include <boost/interprocess/sync/named_semaphore.hpp>
#include <boost/thread.hpp>
#include <cassert>
int main()
{
using namespace boost::interprocess;
named_semaphore sem(open_or_create, "ffed38bd-f0fc-4f79-8838-5301c328268c", 0ul);
if (sem.try_wait())
{
std::cout << "Oops, second instance\n";
}
else
{
sem.post();
// feign hard work for 30s
boost::this_thread::sleep_for(boost::chrono::seconds(30));
if (sem.try_wait())
{
sem.remove("ffed38bd-f0fc-4f79-8838-5301c328268c");
}
}
}
If you start one copy in the back ground, new copies will "refuse" to start ("Oops, second instance") for about 30s.
I have a feeling it might be easier to reverse the logic here. Mmm. Lemme try.
some time passes
Hehe. That was more tricky than I thought.
The thing is, you want to make sure that the lock doesn't remain when your application is interrupted or killed. In the interest of sharing the techniques for portably handling the signals:
#include <boost/interprocess/sync/named_semaphore.hpp>
#include <boost/thread.hpp>
#include <cassert>
#include <boost/asio.hpp>
#define MAX_PROCESS_INSTANCES 3
boost::interprocess::named_semaphore sem(
boost::interprocess::open_or_create,
"4de7ddfe-2bd5-428f-b74d-080970f980be",
MAX_PROCESS_INSTANCES);
// to handle signals:
boost::asio::io_service service;
boost::asio::signal_set sig(service);
int main()
{
if (sem.try_wait())
{
sig.add(SIGINT);
sig.add(SIGTERM);
sig.add(SIGABRT);
sig.async_wait([](boost::system::error_code,int sig){
std::cerr << "Exiting with signal " << sig << "...\n";
sem.post();
});
boost::thread sig_listener([&] { service.run(); });
boost::this_thread::sleep_for(boost::chrono::seconds(3));
service.post([&] { sig.cancel(); });
sig_listener.join();
}
else
{
std::cout << "More than " << MAX_PROCESS_INSTANCES << " instances not allowed\n";
}
}
There's a lot that could be explained there. Let me know if you're interested.
NOTE It should be quite obvious that if kill -9 is used on your application (forced termination) then all bets are off and you'll have to either remove the Name Semaphore object or explicitly unlock it (post()).
Here's a testrun on my system:
sehe#desktop:/tmp$ (for a in {1..6}; do ./test& done; time wait)
More than 3 instances not allowed
More than 3 instances not allowed
More than 3 instances not allowed
Exiting with signal 0...
Exiting with signal 0...
Exiting with signal 0...
real 0m3.005s
user 0m0.013s
sys 0m0.012s
Here's a simplistic way to implement your own 'semaphore' (since I don't think the standard library or boost have one). This chooses a 'cooperative' approach and workers will wait for each other:
#include <boost/thread.hpp>
#include <boost/phoenix.hpp>
using namespace boost;
using namespace boost::phoenix::arg_names;
void the_work(int id)
{
static int running = 0;
std::cout << "worker " << id << " entered (" << running << " running)\n";
static mutex mx;
static condition_variable cv;
// synchronize here, waiting until we can begin work
{
unique_lock<mutex> lk(mx);
cv.wait(lk, phoenix::cref(running) < 3);
running += 1;
}
std::cout << "worker " << id << " start work\n";
this_thread::sleep_for(chrono::seconds(2));
std::cout << "worker " << id << " done\n";
// signal one other worker, if waiting
{
lock_guard<mutex> lk(mx);
running -= 1;
cv.notify_one();
}
}
int main()
{
thread_group pool;
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
pool.create_thread(bind(the_work, i));
pool.join_all();
}
Now, I'd say it's probably better to have a dedicated pool of n workers taking their work from a queue in turns:
#include <boost/thread.hpp>
#include <boost/phoenix.hpp>
#include <boost/optional.hpp>
using namespace boost;
using namespace boost::phoenix::arg_names;
class thread_pool
{
private:
mutex mx;
condition_variable cv;
typedef function<void()> job_t;
std::deque<job_t> _queue;
thread_group pool;
boost::atomic_bool shutdown;
static void worker_thread(thread_pool& q)
{
while (auto job = q.dequeue())
(*job)();
}
public:
thread_pool() : shutdown(false) {
for (unsigned i = 0; i < boost::thread::hardware_concurrency(); ++i)
pool.create_thread(bind(worker_thread, ref(*this)));
}
void enqueue(job_t job)
{
lock_guard<mutex> lk(mx);
_queue.push_back(std::move(job));
cv.notify_one();
}
optional<job_t> dequeue()
{
unique_lock<mutex> lk(mx);
namespace phx = boost::phoenix;
cv.wait(lk, phx::ref(shutdown) || !phx::empty(phx::ref(_queue)));
if (_queue.empty())
return none;
auto job = std::move(_queue.front());
_queue.pop_front();
return std::move(job);
}
~thread_pool()
{
shutdown = true;
{
lock_guard<mutex> lk(mx);
cv.notify_all();
}
pool.join_all();
}
};
void the_work(int id)
{
std::cout << "worker " << id << " entered\n";
// no more synchronization; the pool size determines max concurrency
std::cout << "worker " << id << " start work\n";
this_thread::sleep_for(chrono::seconds(2));
std::cout << "worker " << id << " done\n";
}
int main()
{
thread_pool pool; // uses 1 thread per core
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
pool.enqueue(bind(the_work, i));
}
PS. You can use C++11 lambdas instead boost::phoenix there if you prefer.
I require a heartbeat signal every 10 seconds or so. To implement this I have produced a class with the following constructor:
HeartBeat::HeartBeat (int Seconds, MessageQueue * MsgQueue)
{
TimerSeconds = Seconds;
pQueue = MsgQueue;
isRunning = true;
assert(!m_pHBThread);
m_pHBThread = shared_ptr<thread>(new thread(boost::bind(&HeartBeat::TimerStart,this)));
}
Which calls the following method in a new thread:
void HeartBeat::TimerStart ()
{
while (1)
{
cout << "heartbeat..." << endl;
boost::this_thread::sleep(boost::posix_time::seconds (TimerSeconds));
addHeartBeat();
}
}
This produces a heartbeat with out any issues. However I would like to be able to reset the sleep timer back to zero. Is there a simple way of doing this, or should I use something other than
boost::this_thread::sleep
for my sleep?
OS: Redhat
IDE: Eclipse
Code language: C++
EDIT:
I have looked at using
m_pHBThread->interrupt();
And it seems to be what I'm after, so thank you!
This sounds exactly like what asynchronous timer does. Since you're using boost already, perhaps it makes sense to use boost's own async timers in the long run?
#include <iostream>
#include <boost/thread.hpp>
#include <boost/date_time.hpp>
#include <boost/asio.hpp>
boost::posix_time::ptime now()
{
return boost::posix_time::microsec_clock::local_time();
}
class HeartBeat {
boost::asio::io_service ios;
boost::asio::deadline_timer timer;
boost::posix_time::time_duration TimerSeconds;
boost::thread thread;
public:
HeartBeat(int Seconds) : ios(), timer(ios),
TimerSeconds(boost::posix_time::seconds(Seconds))
{
reset(); // has to start timer before starting the thread
thread = boost::thread(boost::bind(&boost::asio::io_service::run,
&ios));
}
~HeartBeat() {
ios.stop();
thread.join();
}
void reset()
{
timer.expires_from_now(TimerSeconds);
timer.async_wait(boost::bind(&HeartBeat::TimerExpired,
this, boost::asio::placeholders::error));
}
void TimerExpired(const boost::system::error_code& ec)
{
if (ec == boost::asio::error::operation_aborted) {
std::cout << "[" << now() << "] timer was reset" << std::endl;
} else {
std::cout << "[" << now() << "] heartbeat..." << std::endl;
reset();
}
}
};
int main()
{
std::cout << "[" << now() << "] starting up.\n";
HeartBeat hb(10);
sleep(15);
std::cout << "[" << now() << "] Resetting the timer\n";
hb.reset();
sleep(15);
}
test run:
~ $ ./test
[2011-Sep-07 12:08:17.348625] starting up.
[2011-Sep-07 12:08:27.348944] heartbeat...
[2011-Sep-07 12:08:32.349002] Resetting the timer
[2011-Sep-07 12:08:32.349108] timer was reset
[2011-Sep-07 12:08:42.349160] heartbeat...
Perhaps you can use interrupt() to do this.
Well, it is not very efficient to launch a new thread every time you have an heart beat...
I'd do it instead with a single thread and a sleep inside it.
If you need to change the heart beat frequency then you can kill the current thread and start a new one with a new sleep time. You can use the boost::thread and the interrupt signal for this.
EDIT: look here for info on boost threads: boost thread management
if you want to reset the time to zero and execute your code immediately then call it inside the catch for boost::thread_interrupted...
EDIT2: I didn't look properly to the code and I assumed that the common error of launching a new thread for each heart beat was there... sorry, my mistake... I guess I don't like the fact that the thread's name is: TimerStart()
Anyway I think that using the interrupt() and catching it should work if you need to execute the heart beat right away.