Search Results

Search found 10883 results on 436 pages for 'thread timeout'.

Page 135/436 | < Previous Page | 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142  | Next Page >

• Is my way of doing threads in Android correct?

  - by Charlie

  Hi, I'm writing a live wallpaper, and I'm forking off two separate threads in my main wallpaper service. One updates, and the other draws. I was under the impression that once you call thread.start(), it took care of everything for you, but after some trial and error, it seems that if I want my update and draw threads to keep running, I have to manually keep calling their run() methods? In other words, instead of calling start() on both threads and forgetting, I have to manually set up a delayed handler event that calls thread.run() on both the update and draw threads every 16 milliseconds. Is this the correct way of having a long running thread? Also, to kill threads, I'm just setting them to be daemons, then nulling them out. Is this method ok? Most examples I see use some sort of join() / interrupt() in a while loop...I don't understand that one...

  Read the article

• Help understanding this stack trace

  - by user80632

  Hi I have health monitoring turned on, and i have the following error i'm trying to understand: Exception: Exception information: Exception type: System.InvalidCastException Exception message: Specified cast is not valid. Thread information: Thread ID: 5 Thread account name: NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE Is impersonating: False Stack trace: at _Default.Repeater1_ItemDataBound(Object sender, RepeaterItemEventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.WebControls.Repeater.CreateControlHierarchy(Boolean useDataSource) at System.Web.UI.WebControls.Repeater.OnDataBinding(EventArgs e) at _Default.up1_Load() at _Default.Timer1_Tick(Object sender, EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Timer.OnTick(EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(IPostBackEventHandler sourceControl, String eventArgument) at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint) I'm just trying to figure out exactly where the problem is happening and what it is - is it happening in the Repeater1_ItemDataBound sub routine, or in the Timer1_Tick sub routine? Is the last thing that happened before the error occured at the top or bottom of the trace? any help much appreciated thanks

  Read the article

• How to keep a .NET console app running?

  - by intoorbit

  Consider a Console application that starts up some services in a separate thread. All it needs to do is wait for the user to press Ctrl+C to shut it down. Which of the following is the better way to do this? static ManualResetEvent _quitEvent = new ManualResetEvent(false); static void Main() { Console.CancelKeyPress += delegate { _quitEvent.Set(); }; // kick off asynchronous stuff _quitEvent.WaitOne(); // cleanup/shutdown and quit } Or this, using Thread.Sleep(1): static bool _quitFlag = false; static void Main() { Console.CancelKeyPress += delegate { _quitFlag = true; }; // kick off asynchronous stuff while (!_quitFlag) { Thread.Sleep(1); } // cleanup/shutdown and quit }

  Read the article

• How to stop Interruptible Threads in Java

  - by Dr.Lesh

  I have a Java application that I CAN'T EDIT that starts a Thread wich has this run method: public void run(){ while(true){ System.out.println("Something"); } } And at a certain moment I wanna stop it, but if I use thread.interrupt(); it won't work. If I use thread.stop(); it works, but this method is deprecated and its use is discouraged because soon it will be removed from JVM. Does anyone knows how to do it? Thank you.

  Read the article

• C# Asynchronous Sockets questions.

  - by ccppjava

  Based on my reading and testing, with asynchronous sockets, the socket itself can be passed using state object (IAsyncResult result), also if store the socket as a private field, it would be captured by the callback methods. I am wondering how the IAysnResult is kepted between the BeginXXX and ReceiveXXX? It looks to me that after the BeginXXX call and the method ends, the state object would be disposed by GC if there is no reference to it. In the case of private field, how the private field is shared between threads? (As far as I know, a callback is executed using a thread from the default thread pool, which would be considered as a new thread.) Many thanks, hope the questions themselves are clear.

  Read the article

• How do I ensure data consistency in this concurrent situation?

  - by MalcomTucker

  The problem is this: I have multiple competing threads (100+) that need to access one database table Each thread will pass a String name - where that name exists in the table, the database should return the id for the row, where the name doesn't already exist, the name should be inserted and the id returned. There can only ever be one instance of name in the database - ie. name must be unique How do I ensure that thread one doesn't insert name1 at the same time as thread two also tries to insert name1? In other words, how do I guarantee the uniqueness of name in a concurrent environment? This also needs to be as efficient as possible - this has the potential to be a serious bottleneck. I am using MySQL and Java. Thanks

  Read the article

• Suspend TimerTask until the next execution

  - by user1052518

  I am using a TimerTask to run some periodic tasks, the task being processing a set of files. I have a requirement where if the number of files to be processed exceeds a pre-determined limit, the thread suspends execution and waits till the next cycle to start processing the files again. Is there a way to suspend the TimerTask until the next execution period or do I have to extend the TimerTask class to achieve this functionality? I saw there is a TimerTask.cancel method, but this will cancel all further executions of this thread. I don't want this to happen. I just want the thread to be suspended until the next execution period. I don't have the luxury of moving to any of the other concurrent classes in Java as our framework uses TimerTask, and I have to stick with it. Any suggestions, pointers or tips are greatly appreciated. thanks, Asha

  Read the article

• Parallelism on two duo-core processor system

  - by Qin

  I wrote a Java program that draw the Mandelbrot image. To make it interesting, I divided the for loop that calculates the color of each pixel into 2 halves; each half will be executed as a thread thus parallelizing the task. On a two core one cpu system, the performance of using two thread approach vs just one main thread is nearly two fold. My question is on a two dual-core processor system, will the parallelized task be split among different processor instead of just utilize the two core on one processor? I suppose the former scenario will be slower than the latter one simply because the latency of communicating between 2 CPU over the motherboard wires. Any ideas? Thanks

  Read the article

• Debug.writeline locks

  - by Carra

  My program frequently stops with a deadlock. When I do a break-all and look at the threads I see that three threads are stuck in our logging function: public class Logging { public static void WriteClientLog(LogLevel logLevel, string message) { #if DEBUG System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine(String.Format("{0} {1}", DateTime.Now.ToString("HH:mm:ss"), message)); //LOCK #endif //...Log4net logging } } If I let the program continue the threads are still stuck on that line. I can't see where this can lock. The debug class, string class & datetime class seem to be thread safe. The error goes away when I remove the "#if DEBUG System... #endif" code but I'm curious why this behavior happens. Thread one: public void CleanCache() { Logging.WriteClientLog(LogLevel.Debug, "Start clean cache.");//Stuck } Thread two: private void AliveThread() { Logging.WriteClientLog(LogLevel.Debug, "Check connection");//Stuck }

  Read the article

• C++: static function member shared between threads, can block all?

  - by mhambra

  Hi all, I have a class, which has static function defined to work with C-style extern C { static void callback(foo bar) { } }. // static is defined in header. Three objects (each in separate pthread) are instantiated from this class, each of them has own loop (in class constructor), which can receive the callback. The pointer to function is passed as: x = init_function(h, queue_id, &callback, NULL); while(1) { loop_function(x); } So each thread has the same pointer to &callback. Callback function can block for minutes. Each thread object, excluding the one which got the blocking callback, can call callback again. If the callback function exists only once, then any thread attempting to callback will also block. This would give me an undesired bug, circa is interesting to ask: can anything in C++ become acting this way? Maybe, due to extern { } or some pointer usage?

  Read the article

• Volatile keyword

  - by Tiyoal

  Say I have two threads and an object. One thread assigns the object: public void assign(MyObject o) { myObject = o; } Another thread uses the object: public void use() { myObject.use(); } Does the variable myObject have to be declared as volatile? I am trying to understand when to use volatile and when not, and this is puzzling me. Is it possible that the second thread keeps a reference to an old object in its local memory cache? If not, why not? Thanks a lot.

  Read the article

• How to debug ConcurrentModificationException?

  - by Dani

  I encountered ConcurrentModificationException and by looking at it I can't see the reason why it's happening; the area throwing the exception and all the places modifying the collection are surrounded by synchronized (this.locks.get(id)) { ... } // locks is a HashMap<String, Object>; I tried to catch the the pesky thread but all I could nail (by setting a breakpoint in the exception) is that the throwing thread owns the monitor while the other thread (there are two threads in the program) sleeps. How should I proceed? What do you usually do when you encounter similar threading issues?

  Read the article

• strange bug - how to pause a java program?

  - by TerraNova993

  I'm trying to: display a text in a jLabel, wait for two seconds, then write a new text in the jLabel this should be simple, but I get a strange bug: the first text is never written, the application just waits for 2 seconds and then displays the final text. here is the example code: private void testButtonActionPerformed(java.awt.event.ActionEvent evt) { displayLabel.setText("Clicked!"); // first method with System timer /* long t0= System.currentTimeMillis(); long t1= System.currentTimeMillis(); do{ t1 = System.currentTimeMillis(); } while ((t1 - t0) < (2000)); */ // second method with thread.sleep() try { Thread.currentThread().sleep(2000); } catch (InterruptedException e) {} displayLabel.setText("STOP"); } with this code, the text "Clicked!" is never displayed. I just get a 2 seconds - pause and then the "STOP" text. I tried to use System timer with a loop, or Thread.sleep(), but both methods give the same result.

  Read the article

• C++11: thread_local or array of OpenCL 1.2 cl_kernel objects?

  - by user926918

  I need to run several C++11 threads (GCC 4.7.1) parallely in host. Each of them needs to use a device, say a GPU. As per OpenCL 1.2 spec (p. 357): All OpenCL API calls are thread-safe75 except clSetKernelArg. clSetKernelArg is safe to call from any host thread, and is safe to call re-entrantly so long as concurrent calls operate on different cl_kernel objects. However, the behavior of the cl_kernel object is undefined if clSetKernelArg is called from multiple host threads on the same cl_kernel object at the same time. An elegant way would be to use thread_local cl_kernel objects and the other way I can think of is to use an array of these objects such that i'th thread uses i'th object. As I have not implemented these earlier I was wondering if any of the two are good or are there better ways of getting things done. TIA, S

  Read the article

• isAlive problem..Help to understand how it works

  - by max

  I get this error: "non-static method isAlive() cannot be referenced from a static context" what's wrong with this code..please. I'd like to detect if the thread is alive... Any help in terms of code will be highly appreciated..thanks max class RecThread extends Thread { public void run() { recFile = new File("recorded_track.wav"); // Output file type AudioFileFormat.Type fileType = null; fileType = AudioFileFormat.Type.WAVE; // if rcOn =1 thread is alive int rcOn; try { // starts recording targetDataLine.open(audioFormat); targetDataLine.start(); AudioSystem.write(new AudioInputStream(targetDataLine), fileType, recFile); if (RecThread.isAlive() == true) { rcOn =1; } else { rcOn =0; } } catch (Exception e) { showException(e); } // update actions recAction.setEnabled(true); stopRecAction.setEnabled(false); } }

  Read the article

• Is it possible to creating a Service without starting it?

  - by ThaMe90

  Hello all, I wonder, is it possible to create a Service, set some data, and then start it? I haven't come across a thread specific to this problem, so I would like to know if it is possible (if it is known of course). My problem is that I have a Service which listens to a DatagramSocket, but the socket in question needs to be set after creation, but before the start of the Service. The setting of the socket happens through the use of a Broadcast (I broadcast 2 Strings which hold the IP-Address & Port and the BroadcastReceiver then constructs a socket for me). When the Service is started, a Thread will start to run and listen to the supposedly created socket. This, sadly, doesn't happen. The socket will remain null and I can't set it when the Thread is running (This is another issue I hope to tackle in the future, if anybody got any ideas about this, please notify me). So, is what I want possible, or should I come up with another construct for achieving this goal?

  Read the article

• The Scala way to use one actor per socket connection

  - by Stefan

  I am wondering how it is possible to avoid one socket connection pr. thread in Scala. I have thought a lot about it, but I always end up with some code which is listening for incoming data for each client connection. The problem is that I want to develop an application which should simultanously handle perhaps a couple of thousand connections. However I will of course not want to create a thread for each connection because of the lack of scalability and context switching. What would be the "right" way to do this. In my world it should be possible to have one actor for each connection without the need to block one thread per actor.

  Read the article

• Multithreaded update of multiple ProgressBars

  - by ClaudeS

  I have developped an application that can process data (in my case image algorithms performed on videos). I have developed different ProcessingMethods. Sometimes several videos are processed in parallel. Each process runs in a seperate thread. I have a GUI with several ProgressBars, one for each thread that is processing data. What is a good way to update the ProgressBar? Today my GUI is creating all the processing threads and one progressBars for each thread. Then I pass those progressBars to the threads, which pass them to the ProcessingMethod. The ProcessingMethod will then update the progressbar (using Invoke(..)). I have different processingMethods. Within each of these methods I have copy-paste code to update the progressBar. Although I am a new to programming, I know copy-paste is not good. What is a good way to make it better?

  Read the article

• Detect response from Modem?

  - by GoodBoyNYC

  I'm working with a Teltonika G10 GSM modem and wrote up a basic program to send out SMS. I put a 1.5 second timer between each AT command to allow the modem to simulate the wait for the "OK" from the modem. This works for now but I'd rather use a branching statement wait for an actual response such as "OK" or "ERROR" rather than using a timer. SerialPort1.Write("AT+CMGD=1,4" & vbCrLf) Thread.Sleep(1250) SerialPort1.Write("AT+CMGF=1" & vbCrLf) Thread.Sleep(1250) SerialPort1.Write("AT+CMGS=" & Chr(34) & "3475558223" & Chr(34) & vbCrLf) Thread.Sleep(1250) SerialPort1.Write(":|" & Chr(26))

  Read the article

• assignment from incompatible pointer type

  - by Hristo

  I have set up the following struct: typedef struct _thread_node_t { pthread_t thread; struct thread_node_t *next; } thread_node_t; ... and then I have defined: // create thread to for incoming connection thread_node_t *thread_node = (thread_node_t*) malloc(sizeof(thread_node_t)); pthread_create(&(thread_node->thread), NULL, client_thread, &csFD); thread_node->next = thread_arr; // assignment from incompatible pointer type thread_arr = thread_node; where thread_arr is thread_node_t *thread_arr = NULL; I don't understand why the compiler is complaining. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something.

  Read the article

• [C++] Run codes for only 60 times each second.

  - by djzmo

  Hello there, I'm creating a directx application that relies on the system time (because it must be accurate), and I need to run lines of code for 60 times each second in the background (in a thread created by boost::thread). that's equal to 60 FPS (frame per second), but without depending on the main application frame rate. //................. void frameThread() { // I want to run codes inside this loop for *exactly* 60 times in a second. // In other words, every 16.67 (1000/60) milliseconds for(;;) { DoWork(); //......... } } int WINAPI WinMain(HINSTANCE hInstance, HINSTANCE hPrevInstance, LPSTR lpCmdLine, int nShowCmd) { initialize(); //.....stuffs boost::thread framethread(frameThread); //...... } Is there a way to do this? Any kind of help would be appreciated :)

  Read the article

• What's the most performance effective way to have a webbrowser inside a class library ?

  - by Xaqron

  I'm developing a class library. Need some data from internet and this cannot be done with HttpWebRequest in my case so I wanna use WebBrowser component. WebBrowser is used for opening a single page and fetch some data from it, so WebBrowser life-time is very short. Running thread is MTA and no message pump or STA thread is available by default (class library is used by an ASP.NET application). How to create a WebBrowser object, run it with a STA thread, fetch data from a web page and finally dispose it with the least performance impact on the application ? I just need the idea/concept and will find details myself. Thanks guys

  Read the article

• Java concurrency - Should block or yield?

  - by teto

  Hi, I have multiple threads each one with its own private concurrent queue and all they do is run an infinite loop retrieving messages from it. It could happen that one of the queues doesn't receive messages for a period of time (maybe a couple seconds), and also they could come in big bursts and fast processing is necessary. I would like to know what would be the most appropriate to do in the first case: use a blocking queue and block the thread until I have more input or do a Thread.yield()? I want to have as much CPU resources available as possible at a given time, as the number of concurrent threads may increase with time, but also I don't want the message processing to fall behind, as there is no guarantee of when the thread will be reescheduled for execution when doing a yield(). I know that hardware, operating system and other factors play an important role here, but setting that aside and looking at it from a Java (JVM?) point of view, what would be the most optimal?

  Read the article

• Queues And Wait Handles in C#

  - by Michael Covelli

  I've had the following code in my application for some years and have never seen an issue from it. while ((PendingOrders.Count > 0) || (WaitHandle.WaitAny(CommandEventArr) != 1)) { lock (PendingOrders) { if (PendingOrders.Count > 0) { fbo = PendingOrders.Dequeue(); } else { fbo = null; } } // Do Some Work if fbo is != null } Where CommandEventArr is made up of the NewOrderEvent (an auto reset event) and the ExitEvent (a manual reset event). But I just realized today that its not thread safe at all. If this thread gets interrupted right after the first (PendingOrder.Count 0) check has returned false. And then the other thread both enqueues an order and sets the NewOrderEvent before I get a chance to wait on it, the body of the while loop will never run. What's the usual pattern used with a Queue and an AutoResetEvent to fix this and do what I'm trying to do with the code above?

  Read the article

• Disable Adding Item to Collection

  - by Wonko the Sane

  Hi All, I'm sure there's an "easy" answer to this, but for the moment it escapes me. In an MVVM application, I have a property that is a ObservableCollection, used for displaying some set of elements on the view. private readonly ObservableCollection<MyType> mMyCollection = new ObservableCollection<MyType>(); public ObservableCollection<MyType> MyCollection { get { return mMyCollection; } } I want to restrict consumers of this collection from simply using the property to add to the collection (i.e. I want to prevent this from the view): viewModel.MyCollection.Add(newThing); // want to prevent this! Instead, I want to force the use of a method to add items, because there may be another thread using that collection, and I don't want to modify the collection while that thread is processing it. public void AddToMyCollection(MyType newItem) { // Do some thread/task stuff here } Thanks, wTs

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142  | Next Page >