Search Results

Search found 882 results on 36 pages for 'concurrency coordination'.

Page 15/36 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

• Generating different randoms valid for a day on different independent devices?

  - by Pentium10

  Let me describe the system. There are several mobile devices, each independent from each other, and they are generating content for the same record id. I want to avoid generating the same content for the same record on different devices, for this I though I would use a random and make it so too cluster the content pool based on these randoms. Suppose you have choices from 1 to 100. Day 1 Device#1 will choose for the record#33 between 1-10 Device#2 will choose for the record#33 between 40-50 Device#3 will choose for the record#33 between 50-60 Device#1 will choose for the record#55 between 40-50 Device#2 will choose for the record#55 between 1-10 Device#3 will choose for the record#55 between 10-20 Device#1 will choose for the record#11 between 1-10 Device#2 will choose for the record#22 between 1-10 Device#3 will choose for the record#99 between 1-10 Day 2 Device#1 will choose for the record#33 between 90-100 Device#2 will choose for the record#33 between 1-10 Device#3 will choose for the record#33 between 50-60 They don't have access to a central server. Data available for each of them: IMEI (unique per mobile) Date of today (same on all devices) Record id (same on all devices) What do you think, how is it possible? ps. tags can be edited

  Read the article

• How to synchronize static method in java.

  - by Summer_More_More_Tea

  Hi there: I come up with this question when implementing singleton pattern in Java. Even though the example listed blow is not my real code, yet very similar to the original one. public class ConnectionFactory{ private static ConnectionFactory instance; public static synchronized ConnectionFactory getInstance(){ if( instance == null ){ instance = new ConnectionFactory(); } return instance; } private ConnectionFactory(){ // private constructor implementation } } Because I'm not quite sure about the behavior of a static synchronized method, I get some suggestion from google -- do not have (or as less as possible) multiple static synchronized methods in the same class. I guess when implementing static synchronized method, a lock belongs to Class object is used so that multiple static synchronized methods may degrade performance of the system. Am I right? or JVM use other mechanism to implement static synchronized method? What's the best practice if I have to implement multiple static synchronized methods in a class? Thank you all! Kind regards!

  Read the article

• Java - Thread safety of ArrayList constructors

  - by andy boot

  I am looking at this piece of code. This constructor delegates to the native method "System.arraycopy" Is it Thread safe? And by that I mean can it ever throw a ConcurrentModificationException? public Collection<Object> getConnections(Collection<Object> someCollection) { return new ArrayList<Object>(someCollection); } Does it make any difference if the collection being copied is ThreadSafe eg a CopyOnWriteArrayList? public Collection<Object> getConnections(CopyOnWriteArrayList<Object> someCollection) { return new ArrayList<Object>(someCollection); }

  Read the article

• What strategies are efficient to handle concurrent reads on heterogeneous multi-core architectures?

  - by fabrizioM

  I am tackling the challenge of using both the capabilities of a 8 core machine and a high-end GPU (Tesla 10). I have one big input file, one thread for each core, and one for the the GPU handling. The Gpu thread, to be efficient, needs a big number of lines from the input, while the Cpu thread needs only one line to proceed (storing multiple lines in a temp buffer was slower). The file doesn't need to be read sequentially. I am using boost. My strategy is to have a mutex on the input stream and each thread locks - unlocks it. This is not optimal because the gpu thread should have a higher precedence when locking the mutex, being the fastest and the most demanding one. I can come up with different solutions but before rush into implementation I would like to have some guidelines. What approach do you use / recommend ?

  Read the article

• Updating an atom with a single value

  - by mikera

  I have a number of atoms in my code where a common requirement is to update them to a new value, regardless of the current value. I therefore find myself writing something like this: (swap! atom-name (fn [_] (identity new-value))) This works but seems pretty ugly and presumably incurs a performance penalty for constructing the anonymous closure. Is there a better way?

  Read the article

• Violation of primary key constraint, multiple users

  - by MC.

  Lets say UserA and UserB both have an application open and are working with the same type of data. UserA inserts a record into the table with value 10 (PrimaryKey='A'), UserB does not currently see the value UserA entered and attempts to insert a new value of 20 (PrimaryKey='A'). What I wanted in this situation was a DBConcurrencyException, but instead what I have is a primary key violation. I understand why, but I have no idea how to resolve this. What is a good practice to deal with such a circumstance? I do not want to merge before updating the database because I want an error to inform the user that multiple users updated this data.

  Read the article

• Is there a concurrent container library for C++

  - by Lirik

  I'm looking for implementations of lock-free containers: Blocking Queue Blocking Stack Hash Map etc... Are there any good libraries out there? I would like to refrain from writing these data structures... I would much rather use something that has been tested by the community.

  Read the article

• GAE update different fields of the same entity

  - by bach

  Hi, UserA and UserB are changing objectA.filedA objectA.filedB respectively and at the same time. Because they are not changing the same field one might think that there are no overlaps. Is that true? or the implementation of pm.makePersistnace() actually override the whole object... good to know...

  Read the article

• Ensuring all waiting threads complete

  - by Daniel

  I'm building a system where the progress of calling threads is dependent on the state of two variables. One variable is updated sporadically by an external source (separate from the client threads) and multiple client threads block on a condition of both variables. The system is something like this TypeB waitForB() { // Can be called by many threads. synchronized (B) { while (A <= B) { B.wait(); } A = B; return B; { } void updateB(TypeB newB) { // Called by one thread. synchronized (B) { B.update(newB); B.notifyAll(); // All blocked threads must receive new B. } } I need all the blocked threads to receive the new value of B once it has been updated. But the problem is once a single thread finishes and updates A, the waiting condition becomes true again so some of the other threads become blocked and don't receive the new value of B. Is there a way of ensuring that only the last thread that was blocked on B updates A, or another way of getting this behaviour?

  Read the article

• Call two Matlab functions simultaneously from .net

  - by Silv3rSurf

  I am writing a C# application and I would like to make calls to different matlab functions simultaneously(from different threads). Each Matlab function is located in its own compiled .net library. It seems that I am only able to call one Matlab function at a time however. ie, if matlab_func1() gets called from thread1 then matlab_func2() gets called from thread2, matlab_func2() must wait for matlab_func1() to finish executing. Is there a way to call different matlab functions simultaneously? Thanks.

  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

• Java Download Concurrent Data

  - by xger86x

  Hi, i'm developing an app which download map tiles around different places in a city. To do this, i have one thread for each place in which i select the tiles and create a thread to download each. Well, the question is how to avoid creating a thread for a tile that already exists in the thread pool. Should not just check if the file exists, since it is possible that the thread for that tile already exists (other place already need that tile) but the file has not been created- Any idea? Thanks

  Read the article

• Physical Cores vs Virtual Cores in Parallelism

  - by Code Curiosity

  When it comes to virtualization, I have been deliberating on the relationship between the physical cores and the virtual cores, especially in how it effects applications employing parallelism. For example, in a VM scenario, if there are less physical cores than there are virtual cores, if that's possible, what's the effect or limits placed on the application's parallel processing? I'm asking, because in my environment, it's not disclosed as to what the physical architecture is. Is there still much advantage to parallelizing if the application lives on a dual core VM hosted on a single core physical machine?

  Read the article

• How can CopyOnWriteArrayList be thread-safe?

  - by Shooshpanchick

  I've taken a look into OpenJDK's sources of CopyOnWriteArrayList and it seems that all write operations are protected by the same lock and read operations are not protected at all. As I understand, under JMM all accesses to a variable (both read and write) should be protected by lock or reordering effects may occur. For example, set(int, E) method contains these lines (under lock): /* 1 */ int len = elements.length; /* 2 */ Object[] newElements = Arrays.copyOf(elements, len); /* 3 */ newElements[index] = element; /* 4 */ setArray(newElements); The get(int) method, on the other hand, only does return get(getArray(), index);. In my understanding of JMM, this means that get may observe the array in an inconsistent state if statements 1-4 are reordered like 1-2(new)-4-2(copyOf)-3. Do I understand JMM incorrectly or is there any other explanations on why CopyOnWriteArrayList is thread-safe?

  Read the article

• Do the 'up to date' guarantees provided by final field in Java's memory model extend to indirect ref

  - by mattbh

  The Java language spec defines semantics of final fields in section 17.5: The usage model for final fields is a simple one. Set the final fields for an object in that object's constructor. Do not write a reference to the object being constructed in a place where another thread can see it before the object's constructor is finished. If this is followed, then when the object is seen by another thread, that thread will always see the correctly constructed version of that object's final fields. It will also see versions of any object or array referenced by those final fields that are at least as up-to-date as the final fields are. My question is - does the 'up-to-date' guarantee extend to the contents of nested arrays, and nested objects? An example scenario: Thread A constructs a HashMap of ArrayLists, then assigns the HashMap to final field 'myFinal' in an instance of class 'MyClass' Thread B sees a (non-synchronized) reference to the MyClass instance and reads 'myFinal', and accesses and reads the contents of one of the ArrayLists In this scenario, are the members of the ArrayList as seen by Thread B guaranteed to be at least as up to date as they were when MyClass's constructor completed?

  Read the article

• What is the effect of final variable declaration in methods?

  - by Finbarr

  Classic example of a simple server: class ThreadPerTaskSocketServer { public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException { ServerSocket socket = new ServerSocket(80); while (true) { final Socket connection = socket.accept(); Runnable task = new Runnable() { public void run() { handleRequest(connection); } }; new Thread(task).start(); } } } Why should the Socket be declared as final? Is it because the new Thread that handles the request could refer back to the socket variable in the method and cause some sort of ConcurrentModificationException?

  Read the article

• Will this make the object thread-safe?

  - by sharptooth

  I have a native Visual C++ COM object and I need to make it completely thread-safe to be able to legally mark it as "free-threaded" in th system registry. Specifically I need to make sure that no more than one thread ever accesses any member variable of the object simultaneously. The catch is I'm almost sure that no sane consumer of my COM object will ever try to simultaneously use the object from more than one thread. So I want the solution as simple as possible as long as it meets the requirement above. Here's what I came up with. I add a mutex or critical section as a member variable of the object. Every COM-exposed method will acquire the mutex/section at the beginning and release before returning control. I understand that this solution doesn't provide fine-grained access and this might slow execution down, but since I suppose simultaneous access will not really occur I don't care of this. Will this solution suffice? Is there a simpler solution?

  Read the article

• Is NFS capable of preserving order of operations?

  - by JustJeff

  I have a diskless host 'A', that has a directory NFS mounted on server 'B'. A process on A writes to two files F1 and F2 in that directory, and a process on B monitors these files for changes. Assume that B polls for changes faster than A is expected to make them. Process A seeks the head of the files, writes data, and flushes. Process B seeks the head of the files and does reads. Are there any guarantees about how the order of the changes performed by A will be detected at B? Specifically, if A alternately writes to one file, and then the other, is it reasonable to expect that B will notice alternating changes to F1 and F2? Or could B conceivably detect a series of changes on F1 and then a series on F2? I know there are a lot of assumptions embedded in the question. For instance, I am virtually certain that, even operating on just one file, if A performs 100 operations on the file, B may see a smaller number of changes that give the same result, due to NFS caching some of the actions on A before they are communicated to B. And of course there would be issues with concurrent file access even if NFS weren't involved and both the reading and the writing process were running on the same real file system. The reason I'm even putting the question up here is that it seems like most of the time, the setup described above does detect the changes at B in the same order they are made at A, but that occasionally some events come through in transposed order. So, is it worth trying to make this work? Is there some way to tune NFS to make it work, perhaps cache settings or something? Or is fine-grained behavior like this just too much expect from NFS?

  Read the article

• Is this technically thread safe despite being mutable?

  - by Finbarr

  Yes, the private member variable bar should be final right? But actually, in this instance, it is an atomic operation to simply read the value of an int. So is this technically thread safe? class foo { private int bar; public foo(int bar) { this.bar = bar; } public int getBar() { return bar; } } // assume infinite number of threads repeatedly calling getBar on the same instance of foo.

  Read the article

• ArrayBlockingQueue exceeds given capacity

  - by Wojciech Reszelewski

  I've written program solving bounded producer & consumer problem. While constructing ArrayBlockingQueue I defined capacity 100. I'm using methods take and put inside threads. And I've noticed that sometimes I see put 102 times with any take's between them. Why does it happen? Producer run method: public void run() { Object e = new Object(); while(true) { try { queue.put(e); } catch (InterruptedException w) { System.out.println("Oj, nie wyszlo, nie bij"); } System.out.println("Element added"); } } Consumer run method: public void run() { while(true) { try { queue.take(); } catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } System.out.println("Element removed"); } } Part of uniq -c on file with output: 102 Element removed 102 Element added 102 Element removed 102 Element added 102 Element removed 102 Element added 102 Element removed 102 Element added 102 Element removed 102 Element added 102 Element removed 102 Element added 2 Element removed 2 Element added 102 Element removed 102 Element added

  Read the article

• Find messages from certain key till certain key while being able to remove stale keys.

  - by Alfred

  My problem Let's say I add messages to some sort of datastructure: 1. "dude" 2. "where" 3. "is" 4. "my" 5. "car" Asking for messages from index[4,5] should return: "my","car". Next let's assume that after a while I would like to purge old messages because they aren't useful anymore and I want to save memory. Let's say at time x messages[1-3] became stale. I assume that it would be most efficient to just do the deletion once every x seconds. Next my datastructure should contain: 4. "my" 5. "car" My solution? I was thinking of using a concurrentskiplistset or concurrentskiplist map. Also I was thinking of deleting the old messages from inside a newSingleThreadScheduledExecutor. I would like to know how you would implement(efficiently/thread-safe) this or maybe use a library?

  Read the article

• Why wait should always be in synchronized block

  - by diy

  Hi gents, We all know that in order to invoke Object.wait() , this call must be placed in synchronized block,otherwise,IllegalMonitorStateException is thrown.But what's the reason for making this restriction?I know that wait() releases the monitor, but why do we need to explicitly acquire the monitor by making particular block synchronized and then release the monitor by calling wait() ? What is the potential damage if it was possible to invoke wait() outside synch block, retaining it's semantics - suspending the caller thread ? Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• re: adding more threads to forkjoinpool

  - by paintcan

  Word up y'all I recently successfully experimented with Scala futures, got future { my shiznit } all over da place. I'm pleased as punch w/ the gains I'm seeing from the parallelism and whatnot, but I'm only seeing 4 worker threads. Wanna see some more. I've been looking all over for how I can crank up the number of threads to 11, but no luck. Help me out doods

  Read the article

• Spring.Net how does WebApplicationContext.GetObject handle concurrent requests?

  - by Alfamale

  Apologies if I have missed something obvious here but having gone through the documentation, forums and googled for a number of hours, I just can't find a definitive answer to the following questions: How does the WebApplicationContext.GetObject() method handle concurrent requests? Are the requests serialized or executed in parallel? Is there any performance data available to demonstrate how it behaves under load? Thanks in advance for your help, Andrew

  Read the article

• FileInputStream and FileOutputStream to the same file: Is a read() guaranteed to see all write()s that "happened before"?

  - by user946850

  I am using a file as a cache for big data. One thread writes to it sequentially, another thread reads it sequentially. Can I be sure that all data that has been written (by write()) in one thread can be read() from another thread, assuming a proper "happens-before" relationship in terms of the Java memory model? Is this behavior documented? EDIT: In my JDK, FileOutputSream does not override flush(), and OutputStream.flush() is empty. That's why I'm wondering... EDIT^2: The streams in question are owned exclusively by a class that I have full control of. Each stream is guaranteed to be accesses by one thread only. My tests show that it works as expected, but I'm still wondering if this is guaranteed and documented. See also this related discussion: http://chat.stackoverflow.com/rooms/17598/discussion-between-hussain-al-mutawa-and-user946850

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >