Reactive Extensions vs FileSystemWatcher
Posted
by Joel Mueller
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by Joel Mueller
Published on 2010-04-20T19:19:50Z
Indexed on
2010/04/20
19:23 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 1588
system.reactive
|rx
One of the things that has long bugged me about the FileSystemWatcher is the way it fires multiple events for a single logical change to a file. I know why it happens, but I don't want to have to care - I just want to reparse the file once, not 4-6 times in a row. Ideally, there would be an event that only fires when a given file is done changing, rather than every step along the way.
Over the years I've come up with various solutions to this problem, of varying degrees of ugliness. I thought Reactive Extensions would be the ultimate solution, but there's something I'm not doing right, and I'm hoping someone can point out my mistake.
I have an extension method:
public static IObservable<IEvent<FileSystemEventArgs>> GetChanged(this FileSystemWatcher that)
{
return Observable.FromEvent<FileSystemEventArgs>(that, "Changed");
}
Ultimately, I would like to get one event per filename, within a given time period - so that four events in a row with a single filename are reduced to one event, but I don't lose anything if multiple files are modified at the same time. BufferWithTime
sounds like the ideal solution.
var bufferedChange = watcher.GetChanged()
.Select(e => e.EventArgs.FullPath)
.BufferWithTime(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1))
.Where(e => e.Count > 0)
.Select(e => e.Distinct());
When I subscribe to this observable, a single change to a monitored file triggers my subscription method four times in a row, which rather defeats the purpose. If I remove the Distinct()
call, I see that each of the four calls contains two identical events - so there is some buffering going on. Increasing the TimeSpan passed to BufferWithTime
seems to have no effect - I went as high as 20 seconds without any change in behavior.
This is my first foray into Rx, so I'm probably missing something obvious. Am I doing it wrong? Is there a better approach? Thanks for any suggestions...
© Stack Overflow or respective owner