My impression, not well investigated, is that your service is NOT likely to be killed while it is actually running on the main thread doing processing. I'm guessing you're doing this on a separate thread? Your process may be killed, but is less likely to be killed, if you start the service, and make it sticky. Perhaps that's the compromise you seek?
Finally -- does it work to set down the thread priority? Does Android even do anything with thread priority? On Apr 12, 2:04 pm, Mariano Kamp <mariano.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > 1) CPU is not a problem per se. My process can happily be starved of CPU, > but as it needs to do xml parsing it does task the CPU albeit at it's lowest > prio. > 2) As I said I rely on an external API that doesn't understand incremental > updates. > > Anyway, I think there is no good solution and the usefulness of this thread > is nearing zero now, so I will stop before I waste anymore of everybody's > time. Thanks so far. > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Mark Murphy <mmur...@commonsware.com>wrote: > > > > > Mariano Kamp wrote: > > > > Quoting myself: > > > > And you have done so wonderfully. > > > > What is it your trying to say though? > > > > That it is ok to raise the priority when I don't want my process to be > > > killed. > > > I'm saying what Ms. Hackborn confirmed in her reply to my post -- > > startForeground() elevates the service's process to the foreground > > priority class. The not-too-unreasonable assumption the SDK makes is > > that something that is supposed to be in the foreground is supposed to > > be in the foreground. I mean, "foreground" is in the method's name. > > There's no question the documentation could be stronger, though. > > > That being said, your choices are: > > > 1. Continue using startForeground() and either live with the complaints > > or modify your service to be less CPU-intensive, or > > > 2. Stop using startForeground() and modify your architecture to better > > support the service being shut down > > > Since Android applications have to support their services being shut > > down (via task killers, the Services screen in Settings, etc.), I would > > think #2 would be the better answer, but that's your call. > > > -- > > Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy) > >http://commonsware.com|http://twitter.com/commonsguy > > > Android Training in NYC: 4-6 June 2010:http://guruloft.com > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "Android Developers" group. > > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<android-developers%2Bunsubs > > cr...@googlegroups.com> > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en > > > To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
