Search Results

Search found 11675 results on 467 pages for 'parallel testing'.

Page 12/467 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • How to write automated tests for SQL queries?

    - by James
    The current system we are adopting at work is to write some extremely complex queries which perform multiple calculations and have multiple joins / sub-queries. I don't think I am experienced enough to say if this is correct or not so I am agreeing and attempting to function with this system as it has clear benefits. The problem we are having at the moment is that the person writing the queries makes a lot of mistakes and assumes everything is correct. We have now assigned a tester to analyse all of the queries but this still proves extremely time consuming and stressful. I would like to know how we could create an automated procedure (without specifically writing it with code if possible as I can work out how to do that the long way) to verify a set of 10+ different inputs, verify the output data and say if the calculations are correct. I know I could write a script using specific data in the database and create a script using c# (the db is SQL Server) and verify all the values coming out but I would like to know what the official "standard" is as my experience is lacking in this area and I would like to improve. I am happy to add more information if required, add a comment if necessary. Thank you. Edit: I am using c#

    Read the article

  • What does well written, readable tests look like?

    - by Industrial
    Doing unit testing for the first time at a large scale, I find myself writing a lot of repetitive unit tests for my business logic. Sure, to create complete test suites I need to test all possibilities but readability feels compromised doing what I do - as shown in the psuedocode below. How would a well written, readable test suit look like? describe "UserEntity" -> it "valid name validates" ... it "invalid name doesnt validate" ... it "valid list of followers validate" ..

    Read the article

  • In parallel.for share value more then one.

    - by user347918
    Here is problem. long sum = 0; Parallel.For(1, 10000, y => { sum1 += y;} ); Solution is .. Parallel.For<int>(0, result.Count, () => 0, (i, loop, subtotal) => { subtotal += result[i]; return subtotal; }, (x) => Interlocked.Add(ref sum, x) ); if there are two parameters in this code. For example long sum1 = 0; long sum2 = 0; Parallel.For(1, 10000, y => { sum1 += y; sum2=sum1*y; } ); what will we do ? i am guessing that have to use array ! int[] s=new int[2]; Parallel.For<int[]>(0, result.Count, () => s, (i, loop, subtotal) => { subtotal[0] += result[i]; subtotal[1] -= result[i]; return subtotal; }, (x) => Interlocked.Add(ref sum1, x[0]) //but how about sum1 i tried several way but it doesn't work. //for example like that //(x[0])=> Interlocked.Add (ref sum1, x[0]) //(x[1])=> Interlocked.Add (ref sum2, x[1]));

    Read the article

  • Parallel doseq for Clojure

    - by andrew cooke
    I haven't used multithreading in Clojure at all so am unsure where to start. I have a doseq whose body can run in parallel. What I'd like is for there always to be 3 threads running (leaving 1 core free) that evaluate the body in parallel until the range is exhausted. There's no shared state, nothing complicated - the equivalent of Python's multiprocessing would be just fine. So something like: (dopar 3 [i (range 100)] ; repeated 100 times in 3 parallel threads... ...) Where should I start looking? Is there a command for this? A standard package? A good reference? So far I have found pmap, and could use that (how do I restrict to 3 at a time? looks like it uses 32 at a time - no, source says 2 + number of processors), but it seems like this is a basic primitive that should already exist somewhere. clarification: I really would like to control the number of threads. I have processes that are long-running and use a fair amount of memory, so creating a large number and hoping things work out OK isn't a good approach (example which uses a significant chunk available mem). update: Starting to write a macro that does this, and I need a semaphore (or a mutex, or an atom i can wait on). Do semaphores exist in Clojure? Or should I use a ThreadPoolExecutor? It seems odd to have to pull so much in from Java - I thought parallel programming in Clojure was supposed to be easy... Maybe I am thinking about this completely the wrong way? Hmmm. Agents?

    Read the article

  • .NET 4 ... Parallel.ForEach() question

    - by CirrusFlyer
    I understand that the new TPL (Task Parallel Library) has implemented the Parallel.ForEach() such that it works with "expressed parallelism." Meaning, it does not guarantee that your delegates will run in multiple threads, but rather it checks to see if the host platform has multiple cores, and if true, only then does it distribute the work across the cores (essentially 1 thread per core). If the host system does not have multiple cores (getting harder and harder to find such a computer) then it will run your code sequenceally like a "regular" foreach loop would. Pretty cool stuff, frankly. Normally I would do something like the following to place my long running operation on a background thread from the ThreadPool: ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem( new WaitCallback(targetMethod), new Object2PassIn() ); In a situation whereby the host computer only has a single core does the TPL's Parallel.ForEach() automatically place the invocation on a background thread? Or, should I manaully invoke any TPL calls from a background thead so that if I am executing from a single core computer at least that logic will be off of the GUI's dispatching thread? My concern is if I leave the TPL in charge of all this I want to ensure if it determines it's a single core box that it still marshalls the code that's inside of the Parallel.ForEach() loop on to a background thread like I would have done, so as to not block my GUI. Thanks for any thoughts or advice you may have ...

    Read the article

  • Parallel features in .Net 4.0

    - by Jonathan.Peppers
    I have been going over the practicality of some of the new parallel features in .Net 4.0. Say I have code like so: foreach (var item in myEnumerable) myDatabase.Insert(item.ConvertToDatabase()); Imagine myDatabase.Insert is performing some work to insert to a SQL database. Theoretically you could write: Parallel.ForEach(myEnumerable, item => myDatabase.Insert(item.ConvertToDatabase())); And automatically you get code that takes advantage of multiple cores. But what if myEnumerable can only be interacted with by a single thread? Will the Parallel class enumerate by a single thread and only dispatch the result to worker threads in the loop? What if myDatabase can only be interacted with by a single thread? It would certainly not be better to make a database connection per iteration of the loop. Finally, what if my "var item" happens to be a UserControl or something that must be interacted with on the UI thread? What design pattern should I follow to solve these problems? It's looking to me that switching over to Parallel/PLinq/etc is not exactly easy when you are dealing with real-world applications.

    Read the article

  • SQL University: What and why of database testing

    - by Mladen Prajdic
    This is a post for a great idea called SQL University started by Jorge Segarra also famously known as SqlChicken on Twitter. It’s a collection of blog posts on different database related topics contributed by several smart people all over the world. So this week is mine and we’ll be talking about database testing and refactoring. In 3 posts we’ll cover: SQLU part 1 - What and why of database testing SQLU part 2 - What and why of database refactoring SQLU part 2 – Tools of the trade With that out of the way let us sharpen our pencils and get going. Why test a database The sad state of the industry today is that there is very little emphasis on testing in general. Test driven development is still a small niche of the programming world while refactoring is even smaller. The cause of this is the inability of developers to convince themselves and their managers that writing tests is beneficial. At the moment they are mostly viewed as waste of time. This is because the average person (let’s not fool ourselves, we’re all average) is unable to think about lower future costs in relation to little more current work. It’s orders of magnitude easier to know about the current costs in relation to current amount of work. That’s why programmers convince themselves testing is a waste of time. However we have to ask ourselves what tests are really about? Maybe finding bugs? No, not really. If we introduce bugs, we’re likely to write test around those bugs too. But yes we can find some bugs with tests. The main point of tests is to have reproducible repeatability in our systems. By having a code base largely covered by tests we can know with better certainty what a small code change can break in other parts of the system. By having repeatability we can make code changes with confidence, since we know we’ll see what breaks in other tests. And here comes the inability to estimate future costs. By spending just a few more hours writing those tests we’d know instantly what broke where. Imagine we fix a reported bug. We check-in the code, deploy it and the users are happy. Until we get a call 2 weeks later about a certain monthly process has stopped working. What we don’t know is that this process was developed by a long gone coworker and for some reason it relied on that same bug we’ve happily fixed. There’s no way we could’ve known that. We say OK and go in and fix the monthly process. But what we have no clue about is that there’s this ETL job that relied on data from that monthly process. Now that we’ve fixed the process it’s giving unexpected (yet correct since we fixed it) data to the ETL job. So we have to fix that too. But there’s this part of the app we coded that relies on data from that exact ETL job. And just like that we enter the “Loop of maintenance horror”. With the loop eventually comes blame. Here’s a nice tip for all developers and DBAs out there: If you make a mistake man up and admit to it. All of the above is valid for any kind of software development. Keeping this in mind the database is nothing other than just a part of the application. But a big part! One reason why testing a database is even more important than testing an application is that one database is usually accessed from multiple applications and processes. This makes it the central and vital part of the enterprise software infrastructure. Knowing all this can we really afford not to have tests? What to test in a database Now that we’ve decided we’ll dive into this testing thing we have to ask ourselves what needs to be tested? The short answer is: everything. The long answer is: read on! There are 2 main ways of doing tests: Black box and White box testing. Black box testing means we have no idea how the system internals are built and we only have access to it’s inputs and outputs. With it we test that the internal changes to the system haven’t caused the input/output behavior of the system to change. The most important thing to test here are the edge conditions. It’s where most programs break. Having good edge condition tests we can be more confident that the systems changes won’t break. White box testing has the full knowledge of the system internals. With it we test the internal system changes, different states of the application, etc… White and Black box tests should be complementary to each other as they are very much interconnected. Testing database routines includes testing stored procedures, views, user defined functions and anything you use to access the data with. Database routines are your input/output interface to the database system. They count as black box testing. We test then for 2 things: Data and schema. When testing schema we only care about the columns and the data types they’re returning. After all the schema is the contract to the out side systems. If it changes we usually have to change the applications accessing it. One helpful T-SQL command when doing schema tests is SET FMTONLY ON. It tells the SQL Server to return only empty results sets. This speeds up tests because it doesn’t return any data to the client. After we’ve validated the schema we have to test the returned data. There no other way to do this but to have expected data known before the tests executes and comparing that data to the database routine output. Testing Authentication and Authorization helps us validate who has access to the SQL Server box (Authentication) and who has access to certain database objects (Authorization). For desktop applications and windows authentication this works well. But the biggest problem here are web apps. They usually connect to the database as a single user. Please ensure that that user is not SA or an account with admin privileges. That is just bad. Load testing ensures us that our database can handle peak loads. One often overlooked tool for load testing is Microsoft’s OSTRESS tool. It’s part of RML utilities (x86, x64) for SQL Server and can help determine if our database server can handle loads like 100 simultaneous users each doing 10 requests per second. SQL Profiler can also help us here by looking at why certain queries are slow and what to do to fix them.   One particular problem to think about is how to begin testing existing databases. First thing we have to do is to get to know those databases. We can’t test something when we don’t know how it works. To do this we have to talk to the users of the applications accessing the database, run SQL Profiler to see what queries are being run, use existing documentation to decipher all the object relationships, etc… The way to approach this is to choose one part of the database (say a logical grouping of tables that go together) and filter our traces accordingly. Once we’ve done that we move on to the next grouping and so on until we’ve covered the whole database. Then we move on to the next one. Database Testing is a topic that we can spent many hours discussing but let this be a nice intro to the world of database testing. See you in the next post.

    Read the article

  • Regression testing for firewall changes

    - by James C
    We have a number of firewalls in place around our organisation and in some cases packets can pass through four levels of firewall limiting the flow TCP traffic. A concept that I'm used to from software testing is regression testing, allowing you to run a test suite against a changed application to verify that the new changes haven't affected any old features. Does anyone have any experience or an offer any solutions to being able to perform the same type of thing with firewall changes and network testing? The problem becomes a lot more complicated because you'd ideally want to be originating (and testing receipt) of packets across many machines.

    Read the article

  • Verfication vs validation again, does testing belong to verification? If so, which?

    - by user970696
    I have asked before and created a lot of controversy so I tried to collect some data and ask similar question again. E.g. V&V where all testing is only validation: http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/4-5-2005-68117.asp According to ISO 12207, testing is done in validation: •Prepare Test Requirements,Cases and Specifications •Conduct the Tests In verification, it mentiones. The code implements proper event sequence, consistent interfaces, correct data and control flow, completeness, appropriate allocation timing and sizing budgets, and error definition, isolation, and recovery. and The software components and units of each software item have been completely and correctly integrated into the software item Not sure how to verify without testing but it is not there as a technique. From IEEE: Verification: The process of evaluating software to determine whether the products of a given development phase satisfy the conditions imposed at the start of that phase. [IEEE-STD-610]. Validation: The process of evaluating software during or at the end of the development process to determine whether it satisfies specified requirements. [IEEE-STD-610] At the end of development phase? That would mean UAT.. So the question is, what testing (unit, integration, system, uat) will be considered verification or validation? I do not understand why some say dynamic verification is testing, while others that only validation. An example: I am testing an application. System requirements say there are two fields with max. lenght of 64 characters and Save button. Use case say: User will fill in first and last name and save. When checking the fields and Save button presence, I would say its verification. When I follow the use case, its validation. So its both together, done on the system as a whole.

    Read the article

  • How to verify the code that could take a substantial time to compile? [on hold]

    - by user18404
    As a follow up to my prev question: What is the best aproach for coding in a slow compilation environment To recap: I am stuck with a large software system with which a TDD ideology of "test often" does not work. And to make it even worse the features like pre-compiled headers/multi-threaded compilation/incremental linking, etc is not available to me - hence I think that the best way out would be to add the extensive logging into the system and to start "coding in large chunks", which I understand as code for a two-three hours first (as opposed to 15-20 mins in TDD) - thoroughly eyeball the code for a 15 minutes and only after all that do the compilation and run the tests. As I have been doing TDD for a quite a while, my code eyeballing / code verification skills got rusty (you don't really need this that much if you can quickly verify what you've done in 5 seconds by running a test or two) - so I am after a recommendations on how to learn these source code verification/error spotting skills again. I know I was able to do that easily some 5-10 years ago when I din't have much support from the compiler/unit testing tools I had until recently, thus there should be a way to get back to the basics.

    Read the article

  • How can I test linkable/executable files that require re-hosting or retargeting?

    - by hagubear
    Due to data protection, I cannot discuss fine details of the work itself so apologies PROBLEM CASE Sometimes my software projects require merging/integration with third party (customer or other suppliers) software. these software are often in linkable executables or object code (requires that my source code is retargeted and linked with it). When I get the executables or object code, I cannot validate its operation fully without integrating it with my system. My initial idea is that executables are not meant to be unit tested, they are meant to be linkable with other system, but what is the guarantee that post-linkage and integration behaviour will be okay? There is also no sufficient documentation available (from the customer) to indicate how to go about integrating the executables or object files. I know this is philosophical question, but apparently not enough research could be found at this moment to conclude to a solution. I was hoping that people could help me go to the right direction by suggesting approaches. To start, I have found out that Avionics OEM software is often rehosted and retargeted by third parties e.g. simulator makers. I wonder how they test them. Surely, the source code will not be supplied due to IPR rgulations. UPDATE I have received reasonable and very useful suggestions regarding this area. My current struggle has shifted into testing 3rd party OBJECT code that needs to be linked with my own source code (retargeted) on my host machine. How can I even test object code? Surely, I need to link them first to even think about doing anything. Is it the post-link behaviour that needs to be determined and scripted (using perl,Tcl, etc.) so that inputs and outputs could be verified? No clue!! :( thanks,

    Read the article

  • Does Parallel.ForEach require AsParallel()

    - by dkackman
    ParallelEnumerable has a static member AsParallel. If I have an IEnumerable<T> and want to use Parallel.ForEach does that imply that I should always be using AsParallel? e.g. Are both of these correct (everything else being equal)? without AsParallel: List<string> list = new List<string>(); Parallel.ForEach<string>(GetFileList().Where(file => reader.Match(file)), f => list.Add(f)); or with AsParallel? List<string> list = new List<string>(); Parallel.ForEach<string>(GetFileList().Where(file => reader.Match(file)).AsParallel(), f => list.Add(f));

    Read the article

  • Parallel Haskell in order to find the divisors of a huge number

    - by Dragno
    I have written the following program using Parallel Haskell to find the divisors of 1 billion. import Control.Parallel parfindDivisors :: Integer->[Integer] parfindDivisors n = f1 `par` (f2 `par` (f1 ++ f2)) where f1=filter g [1..(quot n 4)] f2=filter g [(quot n 4)+1..(quot n 2)] g z = n `rem` z == 0 main = print (parfindDivisors 1000000000) I've compiled the program with ghc -rtsopts -threaded findDivisors.hs and I run it with: findDivisors.exe +RTS -s -N2 -RTS I have found a 50% speedup compared to the simple version which is this: findDivisors :: Integer->[Integer] findDivisors n = filter g [1..(quot n 2)] where g z = n `rem` z == 0 My processor is a dual core 2 duo from Intel. I was wondering if there can be any improvement in above code. Because in the statistics that program prints says: Parallel GC work balance: 1.01 (16940708 / 16772868, ideal 2) and SPARKS: 2 (1 converted, 0 overflowed, 0 dud, 0 GC'd, 1 fizzled) What are these converted , overflowed , dud, GC'd, fizzled and how can help to improve the time.

    Read the article

  • parallel.foreach with custom collection

    - by SchwartzE
    I am extending the System.Net.Mail.MailAddress class to include an ID field, so I created a new custom MailAddress class that inherited from the existing class and a new custom MailAddressCollection class. I then overrode the existing System.Net.Mail.MailMessage.To to use my new collection. I would like to process the recipients in parallel, but I can't get the syntax right. This is the syntax I am using. Parallel.ForEach(EmailMessage.To, (MailAddress address) => { emailService.InsertRecipient(emailId, address.DisplayName, address.Address, " "); }); I get the following errors: The best overloaded method match for 'System.Threading.Tasks.Parallel.ForEach(System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable, System.Action)' has some invalid arguments Argument 1: cannot convert from 'EmailService.MailAddressCollection' to 'System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable' What syntax do I need to use custom collections?

    Read the article

  • Parallelism in .NET – Part 10, Cancellation in PLINQ and the Parallel class

    - by Reed
    Many routines are parallelized because they are long running processes.  When writing an algorithm that will run for a long period of time, its typically a good practice to allow that routine to be cancelled.  I previously discussed terminating a parallel loop from within, but have not demonstrated how a routine can be cancelled from the caller’s perspective.  Cancellation in PLINQ and the Task Parallel Library is handled through a new, unified cooperative cancellation model introduced with .NET 4.0. Cancellation in .NET 4 is based around a new, lightweight struct called CancellationToken.  A CancellationToken is a small, thread-safe value type which is generated via a CancellationTokenSource.  There are many goals which led to this design.  For our purposes, we will focus on a couple of specific design decisions: Cancellation is cooperative.  A calling method can request a cancellation, but it’s up to the processing routine to terminate – it is not forced. Cancellation is consistent.  A single method call requests a cancellation on every copied CancellationToken in the routine. Let’s begin by looking at how we can cancel a PLINQ query.  Supposed we wanted to provide the option to cancel our query from Part 6: double min = collection .AsParallel() .Min(item => item.PerformComputation()); .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } We would rewrite this to allow for cancellation by adding a call to ParallelEnumerable.WithCancellation as follows: var cts = new CancellationTokenSource(); // Pass cts here to a routine that could, // in parallel, request a cancellation try { double min = collection .AsParallel() .WithCancellation(cts.Token) .Min(item => item.PerformComputation()); } catch (OperationCanceledException e) { // Query was cancelled before it finished } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } Here, if the user calls cts.Cancel() before the PLINQ query completes, the query will stop processing, and an OperationCanceledException will be raised.  Be aware, however, that cancellation will not be instantaneous.  When cts.Cancel() is called, the query will only stop after the current item.PerformComputation() elements all finish processing.  cts.Cancel() will prevent PLINQ from scheduling a new task for a new element, but will not stop items which are currently being processed.  This goes back to the first goal I mentioned – Cancellation is cooperative.  Here, we’re requesting the cancellation, but it’s up to PLINQ to terminate. If we wanted to allow cancellation to occur within our routine, we would need to change our routine to accept a CancellationToken, and modify it to handle this specific case: public void PerformComputation(CancellationToken token) { for (int i=0; i<this.iterations; ++i) { // Add a check to see if we've been canceled // If a cancel was requested, we'll throw here token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested(); // Do our processing now this.RunIteration(i); } } With this overload of PerformComputation, each internal iteration checks to see if a cancellation request was made, and will throw an OperationCanceledException at that point, instead of waiting until the method returns.  This is good, since it allows us, as developers, to plan for cancellation, and terminate our routine in a clean, safe state. This is handled by changing our PLINQ query to: try { double min = collection .AsParallel() .WithCancellation(cts.Token) .Min(item => item.PerformComputation(cts.Token)); } catch (OperationCanceledException e) { // Query was cancelled before it finished } PLINQ is very good about handling this exception, as well.  There is a very good chance that multiple items will raise this exception, since the entire purpose of PLINQ is to have multiple items be processed concurrently.  PLINQ will take all of the OperationCanceledException instances raised within these methods, and merge them into a single OperationCanceledException in the call stack.  This is done internally because we added the call to ParallelEnumerable.WithCancellation. If, however, a different exception is raised by any of the elements, the OperationCanceledException as well as the other Exception will be merged into a single AggregateException. The Task Parallel Library uses the same cancellation model, as well.  Here, we supply our CancellationToken as part of the configuration.  The ParallelOptions class contains a property for the CancellationToken.  This allows us to cancel a Parallel.For or Parallel.ForEach routine in a very similar manner to our PLINQ query.  As an example, we could rewrite our Parallel.ForEach loop from Part 2 to support cancellation by changing it to: try { var cts = new CancellationTokenSource(); var options = new ParallelOptions() { CancellationToken = cts.Token }; Parallel.ForEach(customers, options, customer => { // Run some process that takes some time... DateTime lastContact = theStore.GetLastContact(customer); TimeSpan timeSinceContact = DateTime.Now - lastContact; // Check for cancellation here options.CancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested(); // If it's been more than two weeks, send an email, and update... if (timeSinceContact.Days > 14) { theStore.EmailCustomer(customer); customer.LastEmailContact = DateTime.Now; } }); } catch (OperationCanceledException e) { // The loop was cancelled } Notice that here we use the same approach taken in PLINQ.  The Task Parallel Library will automatically handle our cancellation in the same manner as PLINQ, providing a clean, unified model for cancellation of any parallel routine.  The TPL performs the same aggregation of the cancellation exceptions as PLINQ, as well, which is why a single exception handler for OperationCanceledException will cleanly handle this scenario.  This works because we’re using the same CancellationToken provided in the ParallelOptions.  If a different exception was thrown by one thread, or a CancellationToken from a different CancellationTokenSource was used to raise our exception, we would instead receive all of our individual exceptions merged into one AggregateException.

    Read the article

  • Ideas for student parallel programming project

    - by chi42
    I'm looking to do a parallel programming project in C (probably using pthreads or maybe OpenMP) for a class. It will done by a group of about four students, and should take about 4 weeks. I was thinking it would be interesting to attack some NP-complete problem with a more complex algorithm like a genetic algo with simulated annealing, but I'm not sure if it would be a big enough project. Anyone knew of any cool problems that could benefit from a parallel approach?

    Read the article

  • Understanding VS2010 C# parallel profiling results

    - by Haggai
    I have a program with many independent computations so I decided to parallelize it. I use Parallel.For/Each. The results were okay for a dual-core machine - CPU utilization of about 80%-90% most of the time. However, with a dual Xeon machine (i.e. 8 cores) I get only about 30%-40% CPU utilization, although the program spends quite a lot of time (sometimes more than 10 seconds) on the parallel sections, and I see it employs about 20-30 more threads in those sections compared to serial sections. Each thread takes more than 1 second to complete, so I see no reason for them to work in parallel - unless there is a synchronization problem. I used the built-in profiler of VS2010, and the results are strange. Even though I use locks only in one place, the profiler reports that about 85% of the program's time is spent on synchronization (also 5-7% sleep, 5-7% execution, under 1% IO). The locked code is only a cache (a dictionary) get/add: bool esn_found; lock (lock_load_esn) esn_found = cache.TryGetValue(st, out esn); if(!esn_found) { esn = pData.esa_inv_idx.esa[term_idx]; esn.populate(pData.esa_inv_idx.datafile); lock (lock_load_esn) { if (!cache.ContainsKey(st)) cache.Add(st, esn); } } lock_load_esn is a static member of the class of type Object. esn.populate reads from a file using a separate StreamReader for each thread. However, when I press the Synchronization button to see what causes the most delay, I see that the profiler reports lines which are function entrance lines, and doesn't report the locked sections themselves. It doesn't even report the function that contains the above code (reminder - the only lock in the program) as part of the blocking profile with noise level 2%. With noise level at 0% it reports all the functions of the program, which I don't understand why they count as blocking synchronizations. So my question is - what is going on here? How can it be that 85% of the time is spent on synchronization? How do I find out what really is the problem with the parallel sections of my program? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Parallel For Loop - Problems when adding to a List - Possible .Net Bugs

    - by Kevin Crowell
    I am having some issues involving Parallel for loops and adding to a List. The problem is, the same code may generate different output at different times. I have set up some test code below. In this code, I create a List of 10,000 int values. 1/10th of the values will be 0, 1/10th of the values will be 1, all the way up to 1/10th of the values being 9. After setting up this List, I setup a Parallel for loop that iterates through the list. If the current number is 0, I add a value to a new List. After the Parallel for loop completes, I output the size of the list. The size should always be 1,000. Most of the time, the correct answer is given. However, I have seen 3 possible incorrect outcomes occur: The size of the list is less than 1,000 An IndexOutOfRangeException occurs @ doubleList.Add(0.0); An ArgumentException occurs @ doubleList.Add(0.0); The message for the ArgumentException given was: Destination array was not long enough. Check destIndex and length, and the array's lower bounds. What could be causing the errors? Is this a .Net bug? Is there something I can do to prevent this from happening? Please try the code for yourself. If you do not get an error, try it a few times. Please also note that you probably will not see any errors using a single-core machine. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Threading.Tasks; namespace ParallelTest { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { List<int> intList = new List<int>(); List<double> doubleList = new List<double>(); for (int i = 0; i < 250; i++) { intList.Clear(); doubleList.Clear(); for (int j = 0; j < 10000; j++) { intList.Add(j % 10); } Parallel.For(0, intList.Count, j => { if (intList[j] == 0) { doubleList.Add(0.0); } }); if (doubleList.Count != 1000) { Console.WriteLine("On iteration " + i + ": List size = " + doubleList.Count); } } Console.WriteLine("\nPress any key to exit."); Console.ReadKey(); } } }

    Read the article

  • parallel java libraries

    - by jetru
    I'm looking for Java libraries/applications which are parallel and feature objects that can be queried in parallel. That is, there is/are objects in which multiple types of operations can be made from different threads and these will be synchronized. It would be helpful if someone could ideas of where I could find such applications as well. EDIT: Actually, language doesn't matter so much, so C++, Python, anything is welcome

    Read the article

  • Parallel For Loop - Problems when adding to a List

    - by Kevin Crowell
    I am having some issues involving Parallel for loops and adding to a List. The problem is, the same code may generate different output at different times. I have set up some test code below. In this code, I create a List of 10,000 int values. 1/10th of the values will be 0, 1/10th of the values will be 1, all the way up to 1/10th of the values being 9. After setting up this List, I setup a Parallel for loop that iterates through the list. If the current number is 0, I add a value to a new List. After the Parallel for loop completes, I output the size of the list. The size should always be 1,000. Most of the time, the correct answer is given. However, I have seen 3 possible incorrect outcomes occur: The size of the list is less than 1,000 An IndexOutOfRangeException occurs @ doubleList.Add(0.0); An ArgumentException occurs @ doubleList.Add(0.0); The message for the ArgumentException given was: Destination array was not long enough. Check destIndex and length, and the array's lower bounds. What could be causing the errors? Is this a .Net bug? Is there something I can do to prevent this from happening? Please try the code for yourself. If you do not get an error, try it a few times. Please also note that you probably will not see any errors using a single-core machine. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Threading.Tasks; namespace ParallelTest { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { List<int> intList = new List<int>(); List<double> doubleList = new List<double>(); for (int i = 0; i < 250; i++) { intList.Clear(); doubleList.Clear(); for (int j = 0; j < 10000; j++) { intList.Add(j % 10); } Parallel.For(0, intList.Count, j => { if (intList[j] == 0) { doubleList.Add(0.0); } }); if (doubleList.Count != 1000) { Console.WriteLine("On iteration " + i + ": List size = " + doubleList.Count); } } Console.WriteLine("\nPress any key to exit."); Console.ReadKey(); } } }

    Read the article

  • White-box testing in Javascript - how to deal with privacy?

    - by Max Shawabkeh
    I'm writing unit tests for a module in a small Javascript application. In order to keep the interface clean, some of the implementation details are closed over by an anonymous function (the usual JS pattern for privacy). However, while testing I need to access/mock/verify the private parts. Most of the tests I've written previously have been in Python, where there are no real private variables (members, identifiers, whatever you want to call them). One simply suggests privacy via a leading underscore for the users, and freely ignores it while testing the code. In statically typed OO languages I suppose one could make private members accessible to tests by converting them to be protected and subclassing the object to be tested. In Javascript, the latter doesn't apply, while the former seems like bad practice. I could always wall back to black box testing and simply check the final results. It's the simplest and cleanest approach, but unfortunately not really detailed enough for my needs. So, is there a standard way of keeping variables private while still retaining some backdoors for testing in Javascript?

    Read the article

  • MS DPM 2007: Testing the Recovery for a Production Domain

    - by NewToDPM
    Hi everybody! MS DPM 2007 is a new technology in my company, and so am I to the product. We have a classic Microsoft domain with two DCs, Exchange 2007 and a couple Web/MS SQL servers. I have deployed DPM one month ago on the domain, and after fixing the various issues I got with the replicas inconsistence and adapting the schedule and retention range to the server storage pool size, I can say the backup system is working correctly (no errors) as of today. However, there is one problem: we did not attempt to restore from the backups yet, which is a big no-no of course. I'm not sure about the way I should handle this, my main concern being Exchange and the System State of the DCs. From my understanding, DPM can only protect AND restore data on a server which is part of the same domain as the backup server. If I restore the System State (containing Active Directory) and the Exchange Storage Groups on a testing server, I am afraid it would completely disturb the domain functioning (for example, having two primary DCs on the domain). I am thinking about building a second DPM server on a testing separate domain which would mirror the replicas and then restore it on testing servers from this new domain. Is it the right way to handle the data recovery testing? How did you do on your domain when you first deployed DPM? I'd be grateful for any link/documentation or advice. Thank you in advance for your help! EDIT: Two options seem possible so far: i. Create another DC/Exchange server in the alternate location; ii. Create a separate domain in the alternate location and setup a trust between this domain and the production one. The option i is certainly the best but implies setting up a secondary Exchange server, with a dedicated public IP address so that if Exchange #1 dies, we can still send emails with Exchange #2. I don't know how complex this can be and would need to discuss it with my colleagues. The option ii would only fit the testing purposes. My only question regarding this is: if my production and DPM servers are part of domain A, and there is a trust between domains A and B, can I restore a domain A content to any domain B server?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >