Search Results

Search found 4621 results on 185 pages for 'scott lock'.

Page 10/185 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

• HP ProLiant Smart Array "lock up" code 0x11

  - by ewwhite

  I've a ProLiant DL580 G7 server that experienced a storage subsystem failure during production. The system appeared available and responded to pings, but all I/O access stalled (the system load must have been 100+). The ASR did not trigger at the specified watchdog timeout. I had to force a reboot from the ILO. During POST, I received the following error: A controller failure event occurred prior to this power-up. (Previous lock up code = 0x11) I haven't pulled the ADU report yet, but I'm curious as to what this error actually means. I was not responsible for the the installation, but can see that the firmware is very old. But if there's anything else I should know about the error, I'd like to know for the post-mortem report. edit - I should add that the server had 95 days of uptime prior to the lock up.

  Read the article

• How to lock Firefox tab to domain or URL pattern

  - by f3lix

  I know Firefox extensions that allow protecting (cannot be closed) and locking (cannot change URL) tabs. What I need is an extension that locks a tab to a certain domain or URL pattern. For example, I want to lock a tab to the domain example.com. As long as I follow links that are within this domain the tab should show normal (unlocked) behavior, but if I follow a link to another domain the link should be opened in new tab -- leaving the locked tab open with a URL within the locked domain. Even better would be the functionality to lock a tab to a URL pattern. If a URL matches the pattern it is opened in the current tab, otherwise it is opened in a new tab. Do you know something (preferably an extension for FF 8.0) that provides this kind of functionality.

  Read the article

• How to lock screen in linux before hibernating?

  - by Emanuel Ey

  So when i hibernate my laptop the screen doesn't lock automatically. To solve this i've changed /etc/acpi/powerbtn.sh to contain: su - myUsername -c "gnome-screensaver-command -l" sudo pm-hibernate exit 0 When running this file from a command line it works as intended (ie, lock the screen and then hibernate). Unfortunately, when pressing the power button, it still just hibernates without locking the screen -what am I missing? EDIT: I've added the line whoami>>~/Desktop/test.txt to verify which user is executing the /etc/acpi/powerbtn.shscript. When pressing the power button, the file test.txt is created, but is empty. From this i conclude that the script is in fact being called when pressing the power button. What i do not understand is how the output of whoami can be empty...

  Read the article

• What does drag lock do in boot camp?

  - by MacBookNewb

  In the control panel for my mac book pro I have an icon called Boot camp. Inside there and inside the trackpad tab I have an option called drag lock. It sounds useful to me as I sometimes find it awkward dragging long distances. I can't figure out how to use it though. Can someone explain how I can find out more info on drag lock? I can't find any references on google. Also even without the dragging option on I can drag.

  Read the article

• Lock System when certain hardware is removed

  - by er4z0r

  Hi all, I am working at a company where you are suppused to lock your screen whenever you leave your desk alone for a few minutes. Now I wondered if there is a nifty little tool that would lock my screen once a certain device is removed from the system. The ideal thing would of course be to have a short-range transmitter that causes the screen to be locked once it goes out of range. But for now I would also stick with removing a pen-drive from my laptop. I am pretty sure this is feasible. I just wan't to know if there are any preexistent projects.

  Read the article

• Num Lock of laptop working strangely [Dell Vostro 1710]

  - by Bakhtiyor

  My laptop model is Dell Vostro 17" and it has numeric keypad. The problem is that its Num Lock key works very strange. Sometimes when I press it the information led of Num Lock activates, but sometimes when I try to activate numeric keypad it refuses and this led doesn't activate and therefore numeric keypad doesn't work at all. Does it mean that I need to change my keyboard at all? In addition Esc key doesn't work for a long time. I think the main reason for that is my son (2year old) who started playing with my laptop from his 1st year. If I need to change the keyboard where can I buy it for a good price, because in Dell I think when I called them 2-3 months ago they offered me keyboard for about more then 50Euros. Currently I live in Spain. Thanks.

  Read the article

• How do I lock my MacBook?

  - by thelearner

  Is there no feature to lock the current logged in user like in Windows or can I only log off or switch off?

  Read the article

• Pressing zero key brings up lock/switch user screen in W7

  - by qinghua

  This issue started after my cat walked all over the keyboard... Whenever I press the "zero" key, the screen goes black and I'm taken to the lock/switch user screen. The other functions of the key work fine - it can produce ) and / like usual. Numlock is off, and as far as I know, my computer doesn't have Function Lock. If I log out of my user account and sign in as a guest, the "zero" works again, but if I create a new user profile, it doesn't work. I get the same issue when I hit "zero" using the on-screen keyboard. My keyboard layout is set to US English. I've uninstalled and reinstalled the ATK package, and updated my keyboard drivers. I have an ASUS U43JC-X1 laptop running Windows 7, and I haven't installed any new programs lately.

  Read the article

• Tab lock freezing issue in Oracle manufacturing module

  - by John

  We have several users that are having a tab lock freezing issue while in the manufacturing module in Oracle. Anyone had the same issue

  Read the article

• Tab lock freezing issue in Oracle manufacturing module

  - by John

  We have several users that are having a tab lock freezing issue while in the manufacturing module in Oracle. Anyone had the same issue

  Read the article

• lock in skype call screen

  - by Alex B.

  What is the significance of the little lock on the top of a skype call screen on Mac os X. Thanks

  Read the article

• linux thread synchronization

  - by johnnycrash

  I am new to linux and linux threads. I have spent some time googling to try to understand the differences between all the functions available for thread synchronization. I still have some questions. I have found all of these different types of synchronizations, each with a number of functions for locking, unlocking, testing the lock, etc. gcc atomic operations futexes mutexes spinlocks seqlocks rculocks conditions semaphores My current (but probably flawed) understanding is this: semaphores are process wide, involve the filesystem (virtually I assume), and are probably the slowest. Futexes might be the base locking mechanism used by mutexes, spinlocks, seqlocks, and rculocks. Futexes might be faster than the locking mechanisms that are based on them. Spinlocks dont block and thus avoid context swtiches. However they avoid the context switch at the expense of consuming all the cycles on a CPU until the lock is released (spinning). They should only should be used on multi processor systems for obvious reasons. Never sleep in a spinlock. The seq lock just tells you when you finished your work if a writer changed the data the work was based on. You have to go back and repeat the work in this case. Atomic operations are the fastest synch call, and probably are used in all the above locking mechanisms. You do not want to use atomic operations on all the fields in your shared data. You want to use a lock (mutex, futex, spin, seq, rcu) or a single atomic opertation on a lock flag when you are accessing multiple data fields. My questions go like this: Am I right so far with my assumptions? Does anyone know the cpu cycle cost of the various options? I am adding parallelism to the app so we can get better wall time response at the expense of running fewer app instances per box. Performances is the utmost consideration. I don't want to consume cpu with context switching, spinning, or lots of extra cpu cycles to read and write shared memory. I am absolutely concerned with number of cpu cycles consumed. Which (if any) of the locks prevent interruption of a thread by the scheduler or interrupt...or am I just an idiot and all synchonization mechanisms do this. What kinds of interruption are prevented? Can I block all threads or threads just on the locking thread's CPU? This question stems from my fear of interrupting a thread holding a lock for a very commonly used function. I expect that the scheduler might schedule any number of other workers who will likely run into this function and then block because it was locked. A lot of context switching would be wasted until the thread with the lock gets rescheduled and finishes. I can re-write this function to minimize lock time, but still it is so commonly called I would like to use a lock that prevents interruption...across all processors. I am writing user code...so I get software interrupts, not hardware ones...right? I should stay away from any functions (spin/seq locks) that have the word "irq" in them. Which locks are for writing kernel or driver code and which are meant for user mode? Does anyone think using an atomic operation to have multiple threads move through a linked list is nuts? I am thinking to atomicly change the current item pointer to the next item in the list. If the attempt works, then the thread can safely use the data the current item pointed to before it was moved. Other threads would now be moved along the list. futexes? Any reason to use them instead of mutexes? Is there a better way than using a condition to sleep a thread when there is no work? When using gcc atomic ops, specifically the test_and_set, can I get a performance increase by doing a non atomic test first and then using test_and_set to confirm? *I know this will be case specific, so here is the case. There is a large collection of work items, say thousands. Each work item has a flag that is initialized to 0. When a thread has exclusive access to the work item, the flag will be one. There will be lots of worker threads. Any time a thread is looking for work, they can non atomicly test for 1. If they read a 1, we know for certain that the work is unavailable. If they read a zero, they need to perform the atomic test_and_set to confirm. So if the atomic test_and_set is 500 cpu cycles because it is disabling pipelining, causes cpu's to communicate and L2 caches to flush/fill .... and a simple test is 1 cycle .... then as long as I had a better ratio of 500 to 1 when it came to stumbling upon already completed work items....this would be a win.* I hope to use mutexes or spinlocks to sparilngly protect sections of code that I want only one thread on the SYSTEM (not jsut the CPU) to access at a time. I hope to sparingly use gcc atomic ops to select work and minimize use of mutexes and spinlocks. For instance: a flag in a work item can be checked to see if a thread has worked it (0=no, 1=yes or in progress). A simple test_and_set tells the thread if it has work or needs to move on. I hope to use conditions to wake up threads when there is work. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Postgresql: Implicit lock acquisition from foreign-key constraint evaluation

  - by fennec

  So, I'm being confused about foreign key constraint handling in Postgresql. (version 8.4.4, for what it's worth). We've got a couple of tables, mildly anonymized below: device: (id, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah x 50)… primary key on id whooooole bunch of other junk device_foo: (id, device_id, left, right) Foreign key (device_id) references device(id) on delete cascade; primary key on id btree index on 'left' and 'right' So I set out with two database windows to run some queries. db1> begin; lock table device in exclusive mode; db2> begin; update device_foo set left = left + 1; The db2 connection blocks. It seems odd to me that an update of the 'left' column on device_stuff should be affected by activity on the device table. But it is. In fact, if I go back to db1: db1> select * from device_stuff for update; *** deadlock occurs *** The pgsql log has the following: blah blah blah deadlock blah. CONTEXT: SQL statement "SELECT 1 FROM ONLY "public"."device" x WHERE "id" OPERATOR(pg_catalog.=) $1 FOR SHARE OF X: update device_foo set left = left + 1; I suppose I've got two issues: the first is that I don't understand the precise mechanism by which this sort of locking occurs. I have got a couple of useful queries to query pg_locks to see what sort of locks a statement invokes, but I haven't been able to observe this particular sort of locking when I run the update device_foo command in isolation. (Perhaps I'm doing something wrong, though.) I also can't find any documentation on the lock acquisition behavior of foreign-key constraint checks. All I have is a log message. Am I to infer from this that any change to a row will acquire an update lock on all the tables which it's foreign-keyed against? The second issue is that I'd like to find some way to make it not happen like that. I'm ending up with occasional deadlocks in the actual application. I'd like to be able to run big update statements that impact all rows on device_foo without acquiring a big lock on the device table. (There's a lot of access going on in the device table, and it's kind of an expensive lock to get.)

  Read the article

• How to write my own global lock / unlock functions for PostgreSQL

  - by rafalmag

  I have postgresql (in perlu) function getTravelTime(integer, timestamp), which tries to select data for specified ID and timestamp. If there are no data or if data is old, it downloads them from external server (downloading time ~300ms). Multiple process use this database and this function. There is an error when two process do not find data and download them and try to do an insert to travel_time table (id and timestamp pair have to be unique). I thought about locks. Locking whole table would block all processes and allow only one to proceed. I need to lock only on id and timestamp. pg_advisory_lock seems to lock only in "current session". But my processes uses their own sessions. I tried to write my own lock/unlock functions. Am I doing it right? I use active waiting, how can I omit this? Maybe there is a way to use pg_advisory_lock() as global lock? My code: CREATE TABLE travel_time_locks ( id_key integer NOT NULL, time_key timestamp without time zone NOT NULL, UNIQUE (id_key, time_key) ); ------------ -- Function: mylock(integer, timestamp) DROP FUNCTION IF EXISTS mylock(integer, timestamp) CASCADE; -- Usage: SELECT mylock(1, '2010-03-28T19:45'); -- function tries to do a global lock similar to pg_advisory_lock(key, key) CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION mylock(id_input integer, time_input timestamp) RETURNS void AS $BODY$ DECLARE rows int; BEGIN LOOP BEGIN -- active waiting here !!!! :( INSERT INTO travel_time_locks (id_key, time_key) VALUES (id_input, time_input); EXCEPTION WHEN unique_violation THEN CONTINUE; END; EXIT; END LOOP; END; $BODY$ LANGUAGE 'plpgsql' VOLATILE COST 1; ------------ -- Function: myunlock(integer, timestamp) DROP FUNCTION IF EXISTS myunlock(integer, timestamp) CASCADE; -- Usage: SELECT myunlock(1, '2010-03-28T19:45'); -- function tries to do a global unlock similar to pg_advisory_unlock(key, key) CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION myunlock(id_input integer, time_input timestamp) RETURNS integer AS $BODY$ DECLARE BEGIN DELETE FROM ONLY travel_time_locks WHERE id_key=id_input AND time_key=time_input; RETURN 1; END; $BODY$ LANGUAGE 'plpgsql' VOLATILE COST 1;

  Read the article

• Silverlight Firestarter 2010 Keynote with Scott Guthrie: Silverlight has a bright future!

  - by Jim Duffy

  If you didn’t get chance to watch the Silverlight Firestart event live during the webcast it is available online to view now. If you’re a Silverlight developer or perhaps a shop actively planning on developing a Silverlight application then you’re going to want to watch this video. The Silverlight 5 feature set unveiled during the keynote is fantastic! I particularly like Scott’s approach and comments on the future of Silverlight. I appreciated his open and direct acknowledgment that there has “been a lot of angst on this topic in the last few weeks” and he took the bull by the horns and stated “Let me say up front that there is a Silverlight future, and we think it’s going to be a very bright one.” That comment drew applause from the local audience and in our local viewing event held in Raleigh, NC. Of course my first question was when can we get our grubby little hands on Silverlight 5 and start working with it. The answer unfortunately wasn’t “right now” but they did announce the Silverlight 5 beta will be available in the first half of 2011. Of course the following is pure speculation on my part but I wouldn’t be surprised if they made it available at a certain event in April 2011. Additional information about the Silverlight 5 announcement is available on Scott’s blog. Have a day.

  Read the article

• Postfix unable to create lock file, permission denied

  - by John Bowlinger

  I thought I had my postfix configuration all set up on my Amazon Ubuntu server but I guess not. I'm trying to set up an admin email account for 3 virtually hosted Apache websites. Here's my postfix main.cf file: myhostname = ip-XX-XXX-XX-XXX.us-west-2.compute.internal alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases myorigin = /etc/mailname mydestination = ip-XX-XXX-XX-XXX.us-west-2.compute.internal, localhost.us-west-2.compute.internal, , localhost relayhost = mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8 [::ffff:127.0.0.0]/104 [::1]/128 mailbox_size_limit = 0 recipient_delimiter = + inet_interfaces = all virtual_mailbox_domains = example1.com, example2.com, example3.com virtual_mailbox_base = /var/mail/vhosts virtual_mailbox_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/vmailbox virtual_minimum_uid = 100 virtual_uid_maps = static:115 virtual_gid_maps = static:115 virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtual Here's my vmailbox file: [email protected] example1.com/admin [email protected] example2.com/admin [email protected] example3.com/admin @example1.com example1.com/catchall @example2.com example2.com/catchall @example3.com example3.com/catchall And finally my virtual file: [email protected] postmaster [email protected] postmaster [email protected] postmaster When I try to send an email to through netcat to my one of my domains, I get: unable to create lock file /var/mail/vhosts/example1.com/admin.lock: Permission denied This is despite the fact that I set example1.com group to postfix and also my virtual_uid_maps and virtual_gid_maps are both set to Postfix group id of 115.

  Read the article

• fedora12, yum not releasing "lock" after performing an action

  - by James.Elsey

  Hello, This problem has been occurring quite frequently recently and I can't seem to find a way of preventing it. Whenever I perform an action with yum such as to install or remove software, it appears to execute successfully but then I'm unable to move onto the next yum command For example, I executed yum remove skype, it appeared to remove ok, but next when I try to yum search skype it appears that yum is still processing, and I have to manually kill that process via kill 1234 (or whatever the PID is) My output is as follows [root@nevada james]# yum remove skype Loaded plugins: presto, refresh-packagekit Setting up Remove Process Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package skype.i586 0:2.1.0.47-fc10 set to be erased --> Finished Dependency Resolution Dependencies Resolved ================================================================================ Package Arch Version Repository Size ================================================================================ Removing: skype i586 2.1.0.47-fc10 installed 24 M Transaction Summary ================================================================================ Remove 1 Package(s) Reinstall 0 Package(s) Downgrade 0 Package(s) Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: Running rpm_check_debug Running Transaction Test Finished Transaction Test Transaction Test Succeeded Running Transaction Erasing : skype-2.1.0.47-fc10.i586 1/1 Removed: skype.i586 0:2.1.0.47-fc10 Complete! [root@nevada james]# yum search skype Loaded plugins: presto, refresh-packagekit Existing lock /var/run/yum.pid: another copy is running as pid 3639. Another app is currently holding the yum lock; waiting for it to exit... The other application is: PackageKit Memory : 79 M RSS (372 MB VSZ) Started: Fri Dec 18 08:39:18 2009 - 00:01 ago State : Sleeping, pid: 3639 Kernel version : 2.6.31.6-166.fc12.x86_64 Any ideas how I can prevent this behaviour? Thanks

  Read the article

• HP G61 Laptop wont boot- display stays off, caps and num lock indicators blink repeatedly

  - by Benguy12

  I had my HP G61 laptop running in sleep for a while. When I came back to it about a half-hour later, it was no longer in sleep mode - the power light and the Wi-Fi indicator light were on (I keep Wi-Fi off becuase I use a wired connection) - but nothing was showing on screen. In fact, the display wasn't even turned on. So I let it sit for about 10 minutes but nothing happened. I did a force shut down and rebooted. Instead of a normal boot, the display didnt turn on, the Wi-Fi indicator was off, and the Caps Lock and Num Lock lights just blinked repeatedly. On the external keyboard i use, none of the light indicators were blinking or even on. I tried force shut-down again 10 times, then unplugged all connections except for the power cable (my laptop battery dosent hold a charge for more than 2 minutes, so I always must have a wall connection) and tried to boot again but still nothing happened. I unplugged the battery and even then nothing happened. I also tried booting with the disk drive open, and then with it closed again. On the time it was closed, I was able to successfully boot into Windows, but recieved a "Windows did not shut-down sucessfully" notice. Does anybody know why this may have happened? My PC's specs: Windows 7 Home Premium, 64-bit 4GB of physical RAM, 8GB of vRAM (on a flash drive) AMD Vision x64 processor (don't know any other specs about it) ATI Radeon graphics card, 392 MB DVD-R/W lightscribe drive 2 External hard-disks (first one is 1.5TB, second one is 1TB) custom boot-screen and boot-annimation Standard BIOS apps running before sleep: firefox 10.4 itunes 10.6 adobe photoshop extended CS5.1 rockstar games social club (running in background) microsoft powerpoint 2010 professional edition google chrome I was NOT running Aero or any fancy themes - I was using the normal windows classic theme. I have a desktop icon manager application called Stardock Fences that was also running (it runs as a service/process).

  Read the article

• Suddenly getting lock timeouts with MySQL

  - by Marc Hughes

  We've got a web app hosted on Amazon Web services. Our database is a multi-az RDS MySQL server running 5.1.57 and 3-4 app servers talk to it. Today, we started seeing a lot of errors along the lines of "Lock wait timeout exceeded; try restarting transaction" - almost 1% of POST requests are seeing this. There have been no modifications to the code running on the site. There have been no schema changes. We haven't had a big spike in traffic. I've been looking at the processes running, and none seem out of control. I tried scaling our RDS instance from a small to a large, with no effect. Two days ago, Amazon had some outages. As part of the recovery from that, our RDS server, and our app servers ended up in different availability zones, but all within the same region. But yesterday, everything was fine so I'm not convinced that's related. The lock timeouts are in different types of requests and occur in different InnoDB tables. I have noticed the number of open connections jumped when we started seeing problems, but they may be a symptom and not a cause. What are my next steps in debugging this?

  Read the article

• Boost::thread mutex issue: Try to lock, access violation

  - by user1419305

  I am currently learning how to multithread with c++, and for that im using boost::thread. I'm using it for a simple gameengine, running three threads. Two of the threads are reading and writing to the same variables, which are stored inside something i call PrimitiveObjects, basicly balls, plates, boxes etc. But i cant really get it to work, i think the problem is that the two threads are trying to access the same memorylocation at the same time, i have tried to avoid this using mutex locks, but for now im having no luck, this works some times, but if i spam it, i end up with this exception: First-chance exception at 0x00cbfef9 in TTTTT.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0xdddddded. Unhandled exception at 0x77d315de in TTTTT.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0xdddddded. These are the functions inside the object that im using for this, and the debugger is also blaming them for the exception. void PrimitiveObj::setPos(glm::vec3 in){ boost::mutex mDisposingMutex; boost::try_mutex::scoped_try_lock lock(mDisposingMutex); if ( lock) { position = in; boost::try_mutex::scoped_try_lock unlock(mDisposingMutex); } } glm::vec3 PrimitiveObj::getPos(){ boost::mutex myMutex; boost::try_mutex::scoped_try_lock lock(myMutex); if ( lock) { glm::vec3 curPos = position; boost::try_mutex::scoped_try_lock unlock(myMutex); return curPos; } return glm::vec3(0,0,0); } Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Lock statement vs Monitor.Enter method.

  - by Vokinneberg

  I suppose it is an interesting code example. We have a class, let's call it Test with Finalize method. In Main method here is two code blocks where i am using lock statement and Monitor.Enter call. Also i have two instances of class Test here. The experiment is pretty simple - nulling Test variable within locking block and try to collect it manually with GC.Collect method call. So, to see the Finilaze call i am calling GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers method. Everything is very simple as you can see. By defenition of lock statement it's opens by compiler to try{...}finally{..} block with Minitor.Enter call inside of try block and Monitor.Exit in finally block. I've tryed to implement try-finally block manually. I've expected the same behaviour in both cases. in case of using lock and in case of unsing Monitor.Enter. But, surprize, surprize - it is different as you can see below. public class Test : IDisposable { private string name; public Test(string name) { this.name = name; } ~Test() { Console.WriteLine(string.Format("Finalizing class name {0}.", name)); } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var test1 = new Test("Test1"); var test2 = new Test("Tesst2"); lock (test1) { test1 = null; Console.WriteLine("Manual collect 1."); GC.Collect(); GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers(); Console.WriteLine("Manual collect 2."); GC.Collect(); } var lockTaken = false; System.Threading.Monitor.Enter(test2, ref lockTaken); try { test2 = null; Console.WriteLine("Manual collect 3."); GC.Collect(); GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers(); Console.WriteLine("Manual collect 4."); GC.Collect(); } finally { System.Threading.Monitor.Exit(test2); } Console.ReadLine(); } } Output of this example is Manual collect 1. Manual collect 2. Manual collect 3. Finalizing class name Test2. Manual collect 4. And null reference exception in last finally block because test2 is null reference. I've was surprised and disasembly my code into IL. So, here is IL dump of Main method. .entrypoint .maxstack 2 .locals init ( [0] class ConsoleApplication2.Test test1, [1] class ConsoleApplication2.Test test2, [2] bool lockTaken, [3] bool <>s__LockTaken0, [4] class ConsoleApplication2.Test CS$2$0000, [5] bool CS$4$0001) L_0000: nop L_0001: ldstr "Test1" L_0006: newobj instance void ConsoleApplication2.Test::.ctor(string) L_000b: stloc.0 L_000c: ldstr "Tesst2" L_0011: newobj instance void ConsoleApplication2.Test::.ctor(string) L_0016: stloc.1 L_0017: ldc.i4.0 L_0018: stloc.3 L_0019: ldloc.0 L_001a: dup L_001b: stloc.s CS$2$0000 L_001d: ldloca.s <>s__LockTaken0 L_001f: call void [mscorlib]System.Threading.Monitor::Enter(object, bool&) L_0024: nop L_0025: nop L_0026: ldnull L_0027: stloc.0 L_0028: ldstr "Manual collect." L_002d: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) L_0032: nop L_0033: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::Collect() L_0038: nop L_0039: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::WaitForPendingFinalizers() L_003e: nop L_003f: ldstr "Manual collect." L_0044: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) L_0049: nop L_004a: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::Collect() L_004f: nop L_0050: nop L_0051: leave.s L_0066 L_0053: ldloc.3 L_0054: ldc.i4.0 L_0055: ceq L_0057: stloc.s CS$4$0001 L_0059: ldloc.s CS$4$0001 L_005b: brtrue.s L_0065 L_005d: ldloc.s CS$2$0000 L_005f: call void [mscorlib]System.Threading.Monitor::Exit(object) L_0064: nop L_0065: endfinally L_0066: nop L_0067: ldc.i4.0 L_0068: stloc.2 L_0069: ldloc.1 L_006a: ldloca.s lockTaken L_006c: call void [mscorlib]System.Threading.Monitor::Enter(object, bool&) L_0071: nop L_0072: nop L_0073: ldnull L_0074: stloc.1 L_0075: ldstr "Manual collect." L_007a: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) L_007f: nop L_0080: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::Collect() L_0085: nop L_0086: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::WaitForPendingFinalizers() L_008b: nop L_008c: ldstr "Manual collect." L_0091: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) L_0096: nop L_0097: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::Collect() L_009c: nop L_009d: nop L_009e: leave.s L_00aa L_00a0: nop L_00a1: ldloc.1 L_00a2: call void [mscorlib]System.Threading.Monitor::Exit(object) L_00a7: nop L_00a8: nop L_00a9: endfinally L_00aa: nop L_00ab: call string [mscorlib]System.Console::ReadLine() L_00b0: pop L_00b1: ret .try L_0019 to L_0053 finally handler L_0053 to L_0066 .try L_0072 to L_00a0 finally handler L_00a0 to L_00aa I does not see any difference between lock statement and Monitor.Enter call. So, why i steel have a reference to the instance of test1 in case of lock, and object is not collected by GC, but in case of using Monitor.Enter it is collected and finilized?

  Read the article

• Way to turn on keyboard's caps-lock light without actually turning on caps-lock?

  - by cksubs

  I'm writing a program that uses caps-lock as a toggle switch. It would be nice to set the LED of the key to show that my program is on or off, like the capslock key does naturally. I know that I could just SendInput('Capslock'); or whatever to actually turn caps-lock on and off. But my app is a typing program, and I don't want to have to deal with translating the all-caps keys that turning it on would give me into their lower/upper cases. I might go that route eventually, but not for this version. I would however be interested in just turning on the LED light WITHOUT actually turning on caps-lock. Is there any way to do that? Thank you.

  Read the article

• Acquiring Table Lock in Database - Interview Question

  - by harigm

  One of my interview Questions, if multiple users across the world are accessing the application, in which it uses a Table which has a Primary Key as Auto Increment Field. The Question how can you prevent the other user getting the Same Primary key when the other user is executing? My answer was I will obtain the Lock on the table and I will make the user to wait Until that user is released with the Primary key. But the Question How do you acquire the Table lock programmatically and implement this? If there are 1000 users coming every minute to the application, if you explicity hold the lock on the table, then the application will become slower? How do you manage this? Please suggest the possible answers for the above question

  Read the article

• Implementing a Mutex Lock in C

  - by Adam

  I'm trying to make a really mutex in C and for some reason I'm getting cases where two threads are getting the lock at the same time, which shouldn't be possible. Any ideas why it's not working? void mutexLock(mutex_t *mutexlock, pid_t owner) { int failure; while(mutexlock->mx_state == 0 || failure || mutexlock->mx_owner != owner) { failure = 1; if (mutexlock->mx_state == 0) { asm( "test:" "movl $0x01,%%eax\n\t" // move 1 to eax "xchg %%eax,%0\n\t" // try to set the lock bit "mov %%eax,%1\n\t" // export our result to a test var "test %%eax,%%eax\n\t" "jnz test\n\t" :"=r"(mutexlock->mx_state),"=r"(failure) :"r"(mutexlock->mx_state) :"%eax" ); } if (failure == 0) { mutexlock->mx_owner = owner; //test to see if we got the lock bit } } }

  Read the article

• How to show that the double-checked-lock pattern with Dictionary's TryGetValue is not threadsafe in

  - by Amir

  Recently I've seen some C# projects that use a double-checked-lock pattern on a Dictionary. Something like this: private static readonly object _lock = new object(); private static volatile IDictionary<string, object> _cache = new Dictionary<string, object>(); public static object Create(string key) { object val; if (!_cache.TryGetValue(key, out val)) { lock (_lock) { if (!_cache.TryGetValue(key, out val)) { val = new object(); // factory construction based on key here. _cache.Add(key, val); } } } return val; } This code is incorrect, since the Dictionary can be "growing" the collection in _cache.Add() while _cache.TryGetValue (outside the lock) is iterating over the collection. It might be extremely unlikely in many situations, but is still wrong. Is there a simple program to demonstrate that this code fails? Does it make sense to incorporate this into a unit test? And if so, how?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >