Search Results

Search found 5945 results on 238 pages for 'green threads'.

Page 117/238 | < Previous Page | 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124  | Next Page >

  • sql server 2008 takes alot of memory?

    - by Ahmed Said
    I making stress test on my database which is hosted on sqlserver 2008 64bit running on 64bit machine 10 GB of RAM. I have 400 threads each thread query the database for every second but the query time does not take time as the sql profiler says that, but after 18 hours sql takes 7.2 GB RAM and 7.2 on virtual memroy. Does is this normal behavior? and how can I adjust sql to clean up not in use memory?

    Read the article

  • C# multiple asynchronous HttpRequest with one callback

    - by aepheus
    I want to make 10 asynchronous http requests at once and only process the results when all have completed and in a single callback function. I also do not want to block any threads using WaitAll (it is my understanding that WaitAll blocks until all are complete). I think I want to make a custom IAsyncResult which will handle multiple calls. Am I on the right track? Are there any good resources or examples out there that describe handling this?

    Read the article

  • Implementing coroutines in Java

    - by JUST MY correct OPINION
    This question is related to my question on existing coroutine implementations in Java. If, as I suspect, it turns out that there is no full implementation of coroutines currently available in Java, what would be required to implement them? As I said in that question, I know about the following: You can implement "coroutines" as threads/thread pools behind the scenes. You can do tricksy things with JVM bytecode behind the scenes to make coroutines possible. The so-called "Da Vinci Machine" JVM implementation has primitives that make coroutines doable without bytecode manipulation. There are various JNI-based approaches to coroutines also possible. I'll address each one's deficiencies in turn. Thread-based coroutines This "solution" is pathological. The whole point of coroutines is to avoid the overhead of threading, locking, kernel scheduling, etc. Coroutines are supposed to be light and fast and to execute only in user space. Implementing them in terms of full-tilt threads with tight restrictions gets rid of all the advantages. JVM bytecode manipulation This solution is more practical, albeit a bit difficult to pull off. This is roughly the same as jumping down into assembly language for coroutine libraries in C (which is how many of them work) with the advantage that you have only one architecture to worry about and get right. It also ties you down to only running your code on fully-compliant JVM stacks (which means, for example, no Android) unless you can find a way to do the same thing on the non-compliant stack. If you do find a way to do this, however, you have now doubled your system complexity and testing needs. The Da Vinci Machine The Da Vinci Machine is cool for experimentation, but since it is not a standard JVM its features aren't going to be available everywhere. Indeed I suspect most production environments would specifically forbid the use of the Da Vinci Machine. Thus I could use this to make cool experiments but not for any code I expect to release to the real world. This also has the added problem similar to the JVM bytecode manipulation solution above: won't work on alternative stacks (like Android's). JNI implementation This solution renders the point of doing this in Java at all moot. Each combination of CPU and operating system requires independent testing and each is a point of potentially frustrating subtle failure. Alternatively, of course, I could tie myself down to one platform entirely but this, too, makes the point of doing things in Java entirely moot. So... Is there any way to implement coroutines in Java without using one of these four techniques? Or will I be forced to use the one of those four that smells the least (JVM manipulation) instead?

    Read the article

  • Which is more robust and scalable method?

    - by Dhruv Arya
    I am implementing a distributed chat system, in this system we have the following options : Make the client and server running at each node run as separate threads. The server acting as the receiver will be running as the daemon thread and the client taking the user input as a normal thread. Fork two processes one for the client and one for the server. I am not able to reason out with which one to proceed. Any insight would be great !

    Read the article

  • Asynchronous IO in Java?

    - by thr
    What options for async io (socket-based) are there in java other then java.nio? Also does java.nio use threads in the backround (as I think .NET's async-socket-library does, maybe it's been changed) or is it "true" async io using a proper select call?

    Read the article

  • Abnormally disconnected TCP sockets and write timeout

    - by James
    Hello I will try to explain the problem in shortest possible words. I am using c++ builder 2010. I am using TIdTCPServer and sending voice packets to a list of connected clients. Everything works ok untill any client is disconnected abnormally, For example power failure etc. I can reproduce similar disconnect by cutting the ethernet connection of a connected client. So now we have a disconnected socket but as you know it is not yet detected at server side so server will continue to try to send data to that client too. But when server try to write data to that disconnected client ...... Write() or WriteLn() HANGS there in trying to write, It is like it is wating for somekind of Write timeout. This hangs the hole packet distribution process as a result creating a lag in data transmission to all other clients. After few seconds "Socket Connection Closed" Exception is raised and data flow continues. Here is the code try { EnterCriticalSection(&SlotListenersCriticalSection); for(int i=0;i<SlotListeners->Count;i++) { try { //Here the process will HANG for several seconds on a disconnected socket ((TIdContext*) SlotListeners->Objects[i])->Connection->IOHandler->WriteLn("Some DATA"); }catch(Exception &e) { SlotListeners->Delete(i); } } }__finally { LeaveCriticalSection(&SlotListenersCriticalSection); } Ok i already have a keep alive mechanism which disconnect the socket after n seconds of inactivity. But as you can imagine, still this mechnism cant sync exactly with this braodcasting loop because this braodcasting loop is running almost all the time. So is there any Write timeouts i can specify may be through iohandler or something ? I have seen many many threads about "Detecting disconnected tcp socket" but my problem is little different, i need to avoid that hangup for few seconds during the write attempt. So is there any solution ? Or should i consider using some different mechanism for such data broadcasting for example the broadcasting loop put the data packet in some kind of FIFO buffer and client threads continuously check for available data and pick and deliver it to themselves ? This way if one thread hangs it will not stop/delay the over all distribution thread. Any ideas please ? Thanks for your time and help. Regards Jams

    Read the article

  • How do I create a thread-safe write-once read-many value in Java?

    - by Software Monkey
    This is a problem I encounter frequently in working with more complex systems and which I have never figured out a good way to solve. It usually involves variations on the theme of a shared object whose construction and initialization are necessarily two distinct steps. This is generally because of architectural requirements, similar to applets, so answers that suggest I consolidate construction and initialization are not useful. By way of example, let's say I have a class that is structured to fit into an application framework like so: public class MyClass { private /*ideally-final*/ SomeObject someObject; MyClass() { someObject=null; } public void startup() { someObject=new SomeObject(...arguments from environment which are not available until startup is called...); } public void shutdown() { someObject=null; // this is not necessary, I am just expressing the intended scope of someObject explicitly } } I can't make someObject final since it can't be set until startup() is invoked. But I would really like it to reflect it's write-once semantics and be able to directly access it from multiple threads, preferably avoiding synchronization. The idea being to express and enforce a degree of finalness, I conjecture that I could create a generic container, like so: public class WoRmObject<T> { private T object; WoRmObject() { object=null; } public WoRmObject set(T val) { object=val; return this; } public T get() { return object; } } and then in MyClass, above, do: private final WoRmObject<SomeObject> someObject; MyClass() { someObject=new WoRmObject<SomeObject>(); } public void startup() { someObject.set(SomeObject(...arguments from environment which are not available until startup is called...)); } Which raises some questions for me: Is there a better way, or existing Java object (would have to be available in Java 4)? Is this thread-safe provided that no other thread accesses someObject.get() until after it's set() has been called. The other threads will only invoke methods on MyClass between startup() and shutdown() - the framework guarantees this. Given the completely unsynchronized WoRmObject container, it is ever possible under either JMM to see a value of object which is neither null nor a reference to a SomeObject? In other words, does has the JMM always guaranteed that no thread can observe the memory of an object to be whatever values happened to be on the heap when the object was allocated.

    Read the article

  • How safe is apache Commons-javaflow while using jasperreports

    - by Nayn
    Hi, I am using jasperreport and trying to pass an alternate report runner. • net.sf.jasperreports.engine.fill.JRThreadSubreportRunner: The initial thread-based implementation • net.sf.jasperreports.engine.fill.JRContinuationSubreportRunner: A Javaflow-based implementation I am using the second one (for the reason, it runs on tomcat server, and creating threads wouldn't be good while writing subreports). The second one depends on commons-javaflow which is a sandbox version. Not sure if I should use it, Could somebody suggest a better way. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to quit / terminate / stop a j2me midlet?

    - by hsmit
    Surprisingly terminating a midlet doesn't work in my application. Maybe it is because I'm using Threads, but destroyApp() and notifyDestroyed() are not sufficient. Take for example the following code: protected void destroyApp(boolean arg0) throws MIDletStateChangeException { System.out.println("destroying"); notifyDestroyed(); } protected void startApp() throws MIDletStateChangeException { try { // init modules controller.initialize(); }catch (Exception e) { viewer.showAlert("error in startApp() init controller"); destroyApp(true); } }

    Read the article

  • Production debugging: Is there a less intrusive way than WinDbg?

    - by Alex
    Hi, I was wondering if there is a less intrusive way to analyze a running, managed process in production environments. Less intrusive meaning: No delay of execution when attaching the debugger. No delay of execution when getting basic stats like running threads. In the Java world there is a such a tool part of the JDK. I was wondering if there're similar tools in the .NET world. Any ideas? Alex

    Read the article

  • Sockets and multithreading

    - by V0idExp
    Hi to all! I have an interesting (to me) problem... There are two threads, one for capturing data from std input and sending it through socket to server, and another one which receives data from blocking socket. So, when there's no reply from server, recv() call waits indefenitely, right? But instead of blocking only its calling thread, it blocks the overall process! Why this thing occurs?

    Read the article

  • Is it multitasking?

    - by Newbie
    Consider the below program myThread = new Thread( new ThreadStart( delegate { Method1(); Method2(); } ) ); Is it that 2 threads are getting called parallely(multitasking) or a single thread is calling the methods sequentially? It's urgent.

    Read the article

  • how do i know how many clients are calling my WCF service function

    - by ZhengZhiren
    i am writing a program to test WCF service performance in high concurrency circumstance. On client side, i start many threads to call a WCF service function which returns a long list of data object. On server side, in that function called by my client, i need to know the number of clients calling the function. For doing that, i set a counter variable. In the beginning of the function, i add the counter by 1, but how can i decrease it after the funtion has returned the result? int clientCount=0; public DataObject[] GetData() { Interlocked.Increment(ref clientCount); List<DataObject> result = MockDb.GetData(); return result.ToArray(); Interlocked.Decrement(ref clientCount); //can't run to here... } i have seen a way in c++. Create a new class named counter. In the constructor of the counter class, increase the variable. And decrease it in the destructor. In the function, make a counter object so that its constructor will be called. And after the function returns, its destructor will be called. Like this: class counter { public: counter(){++clientCount; /* not simply like this, need to be atomic*/} ~counter(){--clientCount; /* not simply like this, need to be atomic*/} }; ... myfunction() { counter c; //do something return something; } In c# i think i can do so with the following codes, but not for sure. public class Service1 : IService1 { static int clientCount = 0; private class ClientCounter : IDisposable { public ClientCounter() { Interlocked.Increment(ref clientCount); } public void Dispose() { Interlocked.Decrement(ref clientCount); } } public DataObject[] GetData() { using (ClientCounter counter = new ClientCounter()) { List<DataObject> result = MockDb.GetData(); return result.ToArray(); } } } i write a counter class implement the IDisposable interface. And put my function codes into a using block. But it seems that it doesn't work so good. No matter how many threads i start, the clientCount variable is up to 3. Any advise would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • .NET threading: how can I capture an abort on an unstarted thread?

    - by Groxx
    I have a chunk of threads I wish to run in order, on an ASP site running .NET 2.0 with Visual Studio 2008 (no idea how much all that matters, but there it is), and they may have aborted-clean-up code which should be run regardless of how far through their task they are. So I make a thread like this: Thread t = new Thread(delegate() { try { /* do things */ System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("try"); } catch (ThreadAbortException) { /* cleanup */ System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("catch"); } }); Now, if I wish to abort the set of threads part way through, the cleanup may still be desirable later on down the line. Looking through MSDN implies you can .Abort() a thread that has not started, and then .Start() it, at which point it will receive the exception and perform normally. Or you can .Join() the aborted thread to wait for it to finish aborting. Presumably you can combine them. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ty8d3wta(v=VS.80).aspx To wait until a thread has aborted, you can call the Join method on the thread after calling the Abort method, but there is no guarantee the wait will end. If Abort is called on a thread that has not been started, the thread will abort when Start is called. If Abort is called on a thread that is blocked or is sleeping, the thread is interrupted and then aborted. Now, when I debug and step through this code: t.Abort(); // ThreadState == Unstarted | AbortRequested t.Start(); // throws ThreadStartException: "Thread failed to start." // so I comment it out, and t.Join(); // throws ThreadStateException: "Thread has not been started." At no point do I see any output, nor do any breakpoints on either the try or catch block get reached. Oddly, ThreadStartException is not listed as a possible throw of .Start(), from here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/a9fyxz7d(v=VS.80).aspx (or any other version) I understand this could be avoided by having a start parameter, which states if the thread should jump to cleanup code, and foregoing the Abort call (which is probably what I'll do). And I could .Start() the thread, and then .Abort() it. But as an indeterminate amount of time may pass between .Start and .Abort, I'm considering it unreliable, and the documentation seems to say my original method should work. Am I missing something? Is the documentation wrong? edit: ow. And you can't call .Start(param) on a non-parameterized Thread(Start). Is there a way to find out if a thread is parameterized or not, aside from trial and error? I see a private m_Delegate, but nothing public...

    Read the article

  • OpenMP implementations in VC++ 2008, 2010

    - by John
    Depending on implementation, OMP can be quite useful to parallelize fairly arbitrary bits of code - e.g a parallel section inside a method that calls two independent methods - or it can be bad. It depends on how threads are created/cached, I think. How does the VC++ 2008 implementation work? And is the 2010 implementation significantly different in terms of features and performance/flexibility?

    Read the article

  • timeout stringwithcontentsofurl

    - by sergiobuj
    Hi, I have this call to stringwithcontentsofurl: [NSString stringWithContentsOfURL:url usedEncoding:NSASCIIStringEncoding error:nil]; How can I give that a simple timeout? I don't want to use threads or operation queues (the content of the url is about 100 characters), I just don't want to wait too long when the connection is slow.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124  | Next Page >