Search Results

Search found 8567 results on 343 pages for 'thread safety'.

Page 18/343 | < Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >

  • HTG Explains: What is DNS?

    - by Chris Hoffman
    Did you know you could be connected to facebook.com – and see facebook.com in your web browser’s address bar – while not actually being connected to Facebook’s real website? To understand why, you’ll need to know a bit about DNS. DNS underpins the world wide web we use every day. It works transparently in the background, converting human-readable website names into computer-readable numerical IP addresses. Image Credit: Jemimus on Flickr How To Switch Webmail Providers Without Losing All Your Email How To Force Windows Applications to Use a Specific CPU HTG Explains: Is UPnP a Security Risk?

    Read the article

  • VPN vs. SSH Tunnel: Which Is More Secure?

    - by Chris Hoffman
    VPNs and SSH tunnels can both securely “tunnel” network traffic over an encrypted connection. They’re similar in some ways, but different in others – if you’re trying to decide which to use, it helps to understand how each works. An SSH tunnel is often referred to as a “poor man’s VPN” because it can provide some of the same features as a VPN without the more complicated server setup process – however, it has some limitations. How to Use an Xbox 360 Controller On Your Windows PC Download the Official How-To Geek Trivia App for Windows 8 How to Banish Duplicate Photos with VisiPic

    Read the article

  • C++ strongly typed typedef

    - by Kian
    I've been trying to think of a way of declaring strongly typed typedefs, to catch a certain class of bugs in the compilation stage. It's often the case that I'll typedef an int into several types of ids, or a vector to position or velocity: typedef int EntityID; typedef int ModelID; typedef Vector3 Position; typedef Vector3 Velocity; This can make the intent of code more clear, but after a long night of coding one might make silly mistakes like comparing different kinds of ids, or adding a position to a velocity perhaps. EntityID eID; ModelID mID; if ( eID == mID ) // <- Compiler sees nothing wrong { /*bug*/ } Position p; Velocity v; Position newP = p + v; // bug, meant p + v*s but compiler sees nothing wrong Unfortunately, suggestions I've found for strongly typed typedefs include using boost, which at least for me isn't a possibility (I do have c++11 at least). So after a bit of thinking, I came upon this idea, and wanted to run it by someone. First, you declare the base type as a template. The template parameter isn't used for anything in the definition, however: template < typename T > class IDType { unsigned int m_id; public: IDType( unsigned int const& i_id ): m_id {i_id} {}; friend bool operator==<T>( IDType<T> const& i_lhs, IDType<T> const& i_rhs ); }; Friend functions actually need to be forward declared before the class definition, which requires a forward declaration of the template class. We then define all the members for the base type, just remembering that it's a template class. Finally, when we want to use it, we typedef it as: class EntityT; typedef IDType<EntityT> EntityID; class ModelT; typedef IDType<ModelT> ModelID; The types are now entirely separate. Functions that take an EntityID will throw a compiler error if you try to feed them a ModelID instead, for example. Aside from having to declare the base types as templates, with the issues that entails, it's also fairly compact. I was hoping anyone had comments or critiques about this idea? One issue that came to mind while writing this, in the case of positions and velocities for example, would be that I can't convert between types as freely as before. Where before multiplying a vector by a scalar would give another vector, so I could do: typedef float Time; typedef Vector3 Position; typedef Vector3 Velocity; Time t = 1.0f; Position p = { 0.0f }; Velocity v = { 1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f }; Position newP = p + v*t; With my strongly typed typedef I'd have to tell the compiler that multypling a Velocity by a Time results in a Position. class TimeT; typedef Float<TimeT> Time; class PositionT; typedef Vector3<PositionT> Position; class VelocityT; typedef Vector3<VelocityT> Velocity; Time t = 1.0f; Position p = { 0.0f }; Velocity v = { 1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f }; Position newP = p + v*t; // Compiler error To solve this, I think I'd have to specialize every conversion explicitly, which can be kind of a bother. On the other hand, this limitation can help prevent other kinds of errors (say, multiplying a Velocity by a Distance, perhaps, which wouldn't make sense in this domain). So I'm torn, and wondering if people have any opinions on my original issue, or my approach to solving it.

    Read the article

  • Boost Thread Synchronization

    - by Dave18
    I don't see synchronized output when i comment the the line wait(1) in thread(). can I make them run at the same time (one after another) without having to use 'wait(1)'? #include <boost/thread.hpp> #include <iostream> void wait(int seconds) { boost::this_thread::sleep(boost::posix_time::seconds(seconds)); } boost::mutex mutex; void thread() { for (int i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { wait(1); mutex.lock(); std::cout << "Thread " << boost::this_thread::get_id() << ": " << i << std::endl; mutex.unlock(); } } int main() { boost::thread t1(thread); boost::thread t2(thread); t1.join(); t2.join(); }

    Read the article

  • WinForms - How do I access/call methods in UI thread from a separate thread without passing a delega

    - by Greg
    Hi, QUESTION: In .NET 3.5 WinForms apps, how do I access/call methods in UI thread from a separate thread, without passing a delegate? EXAMPLE: Say I have some code I want to run both (a) manually when the user clicks a button, and (b) periodically called by a process which is running in a separate non-mainUI thread but without passing a delegate. [Simplistically I'm thinking that the class that has this method is already been constructed, and the main UI thread has a handle to it, therefore if the process running in the separate thread could just get a handle to it from the main-UI thread it could call it. Hopefully this is not a flawed concept] BACKGROUND: I'm actually after a way to do the above for the case where my separate process thread is actually a job I schedule using quartz.net. The way the scheduler works I can't seem to actually pass in a delegate. There is a way to pass JobDetails, however it only seems to caters for things like string, int, etc. Hence what I'm after is a way to access the MainForm class for example, to call a method on it, from within the quartz.net job which runs in a separate thread. Thanks

    Read the article

  • .NET Thread.Abort again

    - by hoodoos
    Again I want to talk about safety of the Thread.Abort function. I was interested to have some way to abort operations which I can't control really and don't want actually, but I want to have my threads free as soon as possible to prevent thread thirsty of my application. So I wrote some test code to see if it's possible to use Thread.Abort and have the aborting thread clean up resources propertly. Here's code: int threadRunCount = 0; int threadAbortCount = 0; int threadFinallyCount = 0; int iterations = 0; while( true ) { Thread t = new Thread( () => { threadRunCount++; try { Thread.Sleep( Random.Next( 45, 55 ) ); } catch( ThreadAbortException ) { threadAbortCount++; } finally { threadFinallyCount++; } } ); t.Start(); Thread.Sleep( 45 ); t.Abort(); iterations++; } So, so far this code worked for about 5 mins, and threadRunCount was always equal to threadFinally and threadAbort was somewhat lower in number, because some threads completed with no abort or probably got aborted in finally. So the question is, do I miss something?

    Read the article

  • How do you pass a BitmapImage from a background thread to the UI thread in WPF?

    - by DanM
    I have a background thread that generates a series of BitmapImage objects. Each time the background thread finishes generating a bitmap, I would like to show this bitmap to the user. The problem is figuring out how to pass the BitmapImage from the background thread to the UI thread. This is an MVVM project, so my view has an Image element: <Image Source="{Binding GeneratedImage}" /> My view-model has a property GeneratedImage: private BitmapImage _generatedImage; public BitmapImage GeneratedImage { get { return _generatedImage; } set { if (value == _generatedImage) return; _generatedImage= value; RaisePropertyChanged("GeneratedImage"); } } My view-model also has the code that creates the background thread: public void InitiateGenerateImages(List<Coordinate> coordinates) { ThreadStart generatorThreadStarter = delegate { GenerateImages(coordinates); }; var generatorThread = new Thread(generatorThreadStarter); generatorThread.ApartmentState = ApartmentState.STA; generatorThread.IsBackground = true; generatorThread.Start(); } private void GenerateImages(List<Coordinate> coordinates) { foreach (var coordinate in coordinates) { var backgroundThreadImage = GenerateImage(coordinate); // I'm stuck here...how do I pass this to the UI thread? } } I'd like to somehow pass backgroundThreadImage to the UI thread, where it will become uiThreadImage, then set GeneratedImage = uiThreadImage so the view can update. I've looked at some examples dealing with the WPF Dispatcher, but I can't seem to come up with an example that addresses this issue. Please advise.

    Read the article

  • Waiting for thread to finish Python

    - by lunchtime
    Alright, here's my problem. I have a thread that creates another thread in a pool, applies async so I can work with the returned data, which is working GREAT. But I need the current thread to WAIT until the result is returned. Here is the simplified code, as the current script is over 300 lines. I'm sure i've included everything for you to make sense of what I'm attempting: from multiprocessing.pool import ThreadPool import threading pool = ThreadPool(processes=1) class MyStreamer(TwythonStreamer): #[...] def on_success(self, data): #### Everytime data comes in, this is called #[...] #<Pseudocode> if score >= limit if list exists: Do stuff elif list does not exist: #</Pseudocode> dic = [] dic.append([k1, v1]) did = dict(dic) async_result = pool.apply_async(self.list_step, args=(did)) return_val = async_result.get() slug = return_val[0] idd = return_val[1] #[...] def list_step(self, *args): ## CREATE LIST ## RETURN 2 VALUES class threadStream (threading.Thread): def __init__(self, auth): threading.Thread.__init__(self) self.auth = auth def run(self): stream = MyStreamer(auth = auth[0], *auth[0]) stream.statuses.filter(track=auth[1]) t = threadStream(auth=AuthMe) t.start() I receive the results as intended, which is great, but how do I make it so this thread t waits for the async_result to come in?? My problem is everytime new data comes in, it seems that the ## CREATE LIST function is called multiple times if similar data comes in quickly enough. So I'm ending up with many lists of the same name when I have code in place to ensure that a list will never be created if the name already exists. So to reiterate: How do I make this thread wait on the function to complete before accepting new data / continuing. I don't think time.sleep() works because on_success is called when data enters the stream. I don't think Thread.Join() will work either since I have to use a ThreadPool.apply_async to receive the data I need. Is there a hack I can make in the MyStreamer class somehow? I'm kind of at a loss here. Am I over complicating things and can this be simplified to do what I want?

    Read the article

  • What is difference between Thread Affinity and Process affinity ?

    - by DotNetBeginner
    What is difference between Thread Affinity and Process affinity ? If I have two Threads and I have duel core machine then is it possible to run these two threads parallely on the two cores ? If I use processor affinity Mask then I can control execution of a process on the cores but when I have to run threads on a particular core how can I make these threads core specific ? A very simple example will be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How is thread local storage (__thread) implemented on LInux?

    - by anon
    __thread Foo foo; How is "foo" actually resolved? Does the compiler silently replace every instance of "foo" with a function call? Is "foo" stored somewhere relative to the bottom of the stack, and the compiler stores this as "hey, for each thread, have this space near the bottom of the stack, and foo is stored as "offset x from bottom of stack"" ? Insights please.

    Read the article

  • Thread vs async execution. What's different?

    - by Eonil
    I believed any kind of asynchronous execution makes a thread in invisible area. But if so, Async codes does not offer any performance gain than threaded codes. But I can't understand why so many developers are making many features async form. Could you explain about difference and cost of them?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET Thread Safety in aspx.cs code behind file

    - by Tim Michalski
    I am thinking of adding a DataContext as a member variable to my aspx.cs code-behind class for executing LinqToSql queries. Is this thread safe? I am not sure if a new instance of this code-behind class is created for each HTTP request, or if the instance is shared amongst all request threads? My fear is that I will get 10 simultaneous concurrent http requests that will be using the same database session. public partial class MyPage : System.Web.UI.Page { private DataContext myDB = new DataContext(); protected void MyAction_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { myDB.DoWork(); } }

    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

  • Is there a straightforward way to have a ThreadStatic instance member?

    - by Dan Tao
    With the ThreadStatic attribute I can have a static member of a class with one instance of the object per thread. This is really handy for achieving thread safety using types of objects that don't guarantee thread-safe instance methods (e.g., System.Random). It only works for static members, though. Is there some corresponding attribute that provides the same functionality, but for instance members? In other words, that allows me to have one instance of the object, per thread, per instance of the containing class?

    Read the article

  • Sucky MSTest and the "WaitAll for multiple handles on a STA thread is not supported" Error

    - by Anne Bougie
    If you are doing any multi-threading and are using MSTest, you will probably run across this error. For some reason, MSTest by default runs in STA threading mode. WTF, Microsoft! Why so stuck in the old COM world?  When I run the same test using NUnit, I don't have this problem. Unfortunately, my company has chosen MSTest, so I have a lot of testing problems. NUnit is so much better, IMO. After determining that I wasn't referencing any unmanaged code that would flip the thread into STA, which can also cause this error, the only thing left was the testing suite I was using. I dug around a little and found this obscure setting for the Test Run Config settings file that you can't set using its interface. You have to open it up as a text file and add the following setting:  <ExecutionThread apartmentState="MTA" /> This didn't break any other tests, so I'm not sure why it's not the default, or why there is nothing in the test run configuration app to change this setting. Here is the code I was testing:  public void ProcessTest(ProcessInfo[] infos) {    WaitHandle[] waits = new WaitHandle[infos.Length];    int i = 0;    foreach (ProcessInfo info in infos)    {       AutoResetEvent are = new AutoResetEvent(false);       info.Are = are;       waits[i++] = are;         Processor pr = new Processor();       WaitCallback callback = pr.ProcessTest;       ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(callback, info);    }      WaitHandle.WaitAll(waits); }

    Read the article

  • Can't get past 2542 Threads in Java on 4GB iMac OSX 10.6.3 Snow Leopard (32bit)

    - by fuzzy lollipop
    I am running the following program trying to figure out how to configure my JVM to get the maximum number of threads my machine can support. For those that might not know, Snow Leopard ships with Java 6. I tried starting it with defaults, and the following command lines, I always get the Out of Memory Error at Thread 2542 no matter what the JVM options are set to. java TestThreadStackSizes 100000 java -Xss1024 TestThreadStackSizes 100000 java -Xmx128m -Xss1024 TestThreadStackSizes 100000 java -Xmx2048m -Xss1024 TestThreadStackSizes 100000 java -Xmx2048m -Xms2048m -Xss1024 TestThreadStackSizes 100000 no matter what I pass it, I get the same results, Out of Memory Error at 2542 public class TestThreadStackSizes { public static void main(final String[] args) { Thread.currentThread().setUncaughtExceptionHandler(new Thread.UncaughtExceptionHandler() { public void uncaughtException(final Thread t, final Throwable e) { System.err.println(e.getMessage()); System.exit(1); } }); int numThreads = 1000; if (args.length == 1) { numThreads = Integer.parseInt(args[0]); } for (int i = 0; i < numThreads; i++) { try { Thread t = new Thread(new SleeperThread(i)); t.start(); } catch (final OutOfMemoryError e) { throw new RuntimeException(String.format("Out of Memory Error on Thread %d", i), e); } } } private static class SleeperThread implements Runnable { private final int i; private SleeperThread(final int i) { this.i = i; } public void run() { try { System.out.format("Thread %d about to sleep\n", this.i); Thread.sleep(1000 * 60 * 60); } catch (final InterruptedException e) { throw new RuntimeException(e); } } } } Any ideas on now I can affect these results?

    Read the article

  • Change classloader

    - by Chris
    I'm trying to switch the class loader at runtime: public class Test { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { final InjectingClassLoader classLoader = new InjectingClassLoader(); Thread.currentThread().setContextClassLoader(classLoader); Thread thread = new Thread("test") { public void run() { System.out.println("running..."); // approach 1 ClassLoader cl = TestProxy.class.getClassLoader(); try { Class c = classLoader.loadClass("classloader.TestProxy"); Object o = c.newInstance(); c.getMethod("test", new Class[] {}).invoke(o); } catch (Exception e) { e.printStackTrace(); } // approach 2 new TestProxy().test(); }; }; thread.setContextClassLoader(classLoader); thread.start(); } } and: public class TestProxy { public void test() { ClassLoader tcl = Thread.currentThread().getContextClassLoader(); ClassLoader ccl = ClassToLoad.class.getClassLoader(); ClassToLoad classToLoad = new ClassToLoad(); } } (it is not relevant what the InjectingClassLoader is) I'd like to make the result of "approach 1" and "approach 2" exactly same, but it looks like thread.setContextClassLoader(classLoader) does nothing and the "approach 2" always uses the system classloader (can be determined by comparing tcl and ccl variables while debugging). Is it possible to make all classes loaded by new thread use given classloader?

    Read the article

  • Writing a synchronized thread-safety wrapper for NavigableMap

    - by polygenelubricants
    java.util.Collections currently provide the following utility methods for creating synchronized wrapper for various collection interfaces: synchronizedCollection(Collection<T> c) synchronizedList(List<T> list) synchronizedMap(Map<K,V> m) synchronizedSet(Set<T> s) synchronizedSortedMap(SortedMap<K,V> m) synchronizedSortedSet(SortedSet<T> s) Analogously, it also has 6 unmodifiedXXX overloads. The glaring omission here are the utility methods for NavigableMap<K,V>. It's true that it extends SortedMap, but so does SortedSet extends Set, and Set extends Collection, and Collections have dedicated utility methods for SortedSet and Set. Presumably NavigableMap is a useful abstraction, or else it wouldn't have been there in the first place, and yet there are no utility methods for it. So the questions are: Is there a specific reason why Collections doesn't provide utility methods for NavigableMap? How would you write your own synchronized wrapper for NavigableMap? Glancing at the source code for OpenJDK version of Collections.java seems to suggest that this is just a "mechanical" process Is it true that in general you can add synchronized thread-safetiness feature like this? If it's such a mechanical process, can it be automated? (Eclipse plug-in, etc) Is this code repetition necessary, or could it have been avoided by a different OOP design pattern?

    Read the article

  • The application called an interface that was marshalled for a different thread

    - by X-Ray
    i'm writing a delphi app that communicates with excel. one thing i noticed is that if i call the Save method on the Excel workbook object, it can appear to hang because excel has a dialog box open for the user. i'm using the late binding. i'd like for my app to be able to notice when Save takes several seconds and then take some kind of action like show a dialog box telling this is what's happening. i figured this'd be fairly easy. all i'd need to do is create a thread that calls Save and have that thread call Excel's Save routine. if it takes too long, i can take some action. procedure TOfficeConnect.Save; var Thread:TOfficeHangThread; begin // spin off as thread so we can control timeout Thread:=TOfficeSaveThread.Create(m_vExcelWorkbook); if WaitForSingleObject(Thread.Handle, 5 {s} * 1000 {ms/s})=WAIT_TIMEOUT then begin Thread.FreeOnTerminate:=true; raise Exception.Create(_('The Office spreadsheet program seems to be busy.')); end; Thread.Free; end; TOfficeSaveThread = class(TThread) private { Private declarations } m_vExcelWorkbook:variant; protected procedure Execute; override; procedure DoSave; public constructor Create(vExcelWorkbook:variant); end; { TOfficeSaveThread } constructor TOfficeSaveThread.Create(vExcelWorkbook:variant); begin inherited Create(true); m_vExcelWorkbook:=vExcelWorkbook; Resume; end; procedure TOfficeSaveThread.Execute; begin m_vExcelWorkbook.Save; end; i understand this problem happens because the OLE object was created from another thread (absolutely). how can i get around this problem? most likely i'll need to "re-marshall" for this call somehow... any ideas? thank you!

    Read the article

  • Java ThreadPoolExecutor getting stuck while using ArrayBlockingQueue

    - by Ravi Rao
    Hi, I'm working on some application and using ThreadPoolExecutor for handling various tasks. ThreadPoolExecutor is getting stuck after some duration. To simulate this in a simpler environment, I've written a simple code where I'm able to simulate the issue. import java.util.concurrent.ArrayBlockingQueue; import java.util.concurrent.RejectedExecutionHandler; import java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor; import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit; public class MyThreadPoolExecutor { private int poolSize = 10; private int maxPoolSize = 50; private long keepAliveTime = 10; private ThreadPoolExecutor threadPool = null; private final ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;Runnable&gt; queue = new ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;Runnable&gt;( 100000); public MyThreadPoolExecutor() { threadPool = new ThreadPoolExecutor(poolSize, maxPoolSize, keepAliveTime, TimeUnit.SECONDS, queue); threadPool.setRejectedExecutionHandler(new RejectedExecutionHandler() { @Override public void rejectedExecution(Runnable runnable, ThreadPoolExecutor threadPoolExecutor) { System.out .println(&quot;Execution rejected. Please try restarting the application.&quot;); } }); } public void runTask(Runnable task) { threadPool.execute(task); } public void shutDown() { threadPool.shutdownNow(); } public ThreadPoolExecutor getThreadPool() { return threadPool; } public void setThreadPool(ThreadPoolExecutor threadPool) { this.threadPool = threadPool; } public static void main(String[] args) { MyThreadPoolExecutor mtpe = new MyThreadPoolExecutor(); for (int i = 0; i &lt; 1000; i++) { final int j = i; mtpe.runTask(new Runnable() { @Override public void run() { System.out.println(j); } }); } } } Try executing this code a few times. It normally print outs the number on console and when all threads end, it exists. But at times, it finished all task and then is not getting terminated. The thread dump is as follows: MyThreadPoolExecutor [Java Application] MyThreadPoolExecutor at localhost:2619 (Suspended) Daemon System Thread [Attach Listener] (Suspended) Daemon System Thread [Signal Dispatcher] (Suspended) Daemon System Thread [Finalizer] (Suspended) Object.wait(long) line: not available [native method] ReferenceQueue&lt;T&gt;.remove(long) line: not available ReferenceQueue&lt;T&gt;.remove() line: not available Finalizer$FinalizerThread.run() line: not available Daemon System Thread [Reference Handler] (Suspended) Object.wait(long) line: not available [native method] Reference$Lock(Object).wait() line: 485 Reference$ReferenceHandler.run() line: not available Thread [pool-1-thread-1] (Suspended) Unsafe.park(boolean, long) line: not available [native method] LockSupport.park(Object) line: not available AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await() line: not available ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;E&gt;.take() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor.getTask() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: not available Thread.run() line: not available Thread [pool-1-thread-2] (Suspended) Unsafe.park(boolean, long) line: not available [native method] LockSupport.park(Object) line: not available AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await() line: not available ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;E&gt;.take() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor.getTask() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: not available Thread.run() line: not available Thread [pool-1-thread-3] (Suspended) Unsafe.park(boolean, long) line: not available [native method] LockSupport.park(Object) line: not available AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await() line: not available ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;E&gt;.take() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor.getTask() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: not available Thread.run() line: not available Thread [pool-1-thread-4] (Suspended) Unsafe.park(boolean, long) line: not available [native method] LockSupport.park(Object) line: not available AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await() line: not available ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;E&gt;.take() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor.getTask() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: not available Thread.run() line: not available Thread [pool-1-thread-6] (Suspended) Unsafe.park(boolean, long) line: not available [native method] LockSupport.park(Object) line: not available AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await() line: not available ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;E&gt;.take() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor.getTask() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: not available Thread.run() line: not available Thread [pool-1-thread-8] (Suspended) Unsafe.park(boolean, long) line: not available [native method] LockSupport.park(Object) line: not available AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await() line: not available ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;E&gt;.take() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor.getTask() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: not available Thread.run() line: not available Thread [pool-1-thread-5] (Suspended) Unsafe.park(boolean, long) line: not available [native method] LockSupport.park(Object) line: not available AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await() line: not available ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;E&gt;.take() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor.getTask() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: not available Thread.run() line: not available Thread [pool-1-thread-10] (Suspended) Unsafe.park(boolean, long) line: not available [native method] LockSupport.park(Object) line: not available AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await() line: not available ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;E&gt;.take() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor.getTask() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: not available Thread.run() line: not available Thread [pool-1-thread-9] (Suspended) Unsafe.park(boolean, long) line: not available [native method] LockSupport.park(Object) line: not available AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await() line: not available ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;E&gt;.take() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor.getTask() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: not available Thread.run() line: not available Thread [pool-1-thread-7] (Suspended) Unsafe.park(boolean, long) line: not available [native method] LockSupport.park(Object) line: not available AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await() line: not available ArrayBlockingQueue&lt;E&gt;.take() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor.getTask() line: not available ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: not available Thread.run() line: not available Thread [DestroyJavaVM] (Suspended) C:\Program Files\Java\jre1.6.0_07\bin\javaw.exe (Jun 17, 2010 10:42:33 AM) In my actual application,ThreadPoolExecutor threads go in this state and then it stops responding. Regards, Ravi Rao

    Read the article

  • What is the impact of Thread.Sleep(1) in C#?

    - by Justin Tanner
    In a windows form application what is the impact of calling Thread.Sleep(1) as illustrated in the following code: public Constructor() { Thread thread = new Thread(Task); thread.IsBackground = true; thread.Start(); } private void Task() { while (true) { // do something Thread.Sleep(1); } } Will this thread hog all of the available CPU? What profiling techniques can I use to measure this Thread's CPU usage ( other than task manager )?

    Read the article

  • Using Parallel Extensions with ThreadStatic attribute. Could it leak memory?

    - by the-locster
    I'm using Parallel Extensions fairly heavily and I've just now encountered a case where using thread locla storrage might be sensible to allow re-use of objects by worker threads. As such I was lookign at the ThreadStatic attribute which marks a static field/variable as having a unique value per thread. It seems to me that it would be unwise to use PE with the ThreadStatic attribute without any guarantee of thread re-use by PE. That is, if threads are created and destroyed to some degree would the variables (and thus objects they point to) remain in thread local storage for some indeterminate amount of time, thus causing a memory leak? Or perhaps the thread storage is tied to the threads and disposed of when the threads are disposed? But then you still potentially have threads in a pool that are longed lived and that accumulate thread local storage from various pieces of code the threads are used for. Is there a better approach to obtaining thread local storage with PE? Thankyou.

    Read the article

  • Sending message from working non-gui thread to the main window

    - by bartek
    I'm using WinApi. Is SendMessage/PostMessage a good, thread safe method of communicating with the main window? Suppose, the working thread is creating a bitmap, that must be displayed on the screen. The working thread allocates a bitmap, sends a message with a pointer to this bitmap and waits until GUI thread processes it (for example using SendMessage). The working thread shares no data with other threads. Am I running into troubles with such design? Are there any other possibilities that do not introduce thread synchronizing, locking etc. ?

    Read the article

  • Thread scheduling C

    - by MRP
    include <pthread.h> include <stdio.h> include <stdlib.h> #define NUM_THREADS 4 #define TCOUNT 5 #define COUNT_LIMIT 13 int done = 0; int count = 0; int thread_ids[4] = {0,1,2,3}; int thread_runtime[4] = {0,5,4,1}; pthread_mutex_t count_mutex; pthread_cond_t count_threshold_cv; void *inc_count(void *t) { int i; long my_id = (long)t; long run_time = thread_runtime[my_id]; if (my_id==2 && done ==0) { for(i=0; i< 5 ; i++) { if( i==4 ){done =1;} pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); count++; if (count == COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_signal(&count_threshold_cv); printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d Threshold reached.\n", my_id, count); } printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d, unlocking mutex\n", my_id, count); pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); } } if (my_id==3 && done==1) { for(i=0; i< 4 ; i++) { if(i == 3 ){ done = 2;} pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); count++; if (count == COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_signal(&count_threshold_cv); printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d Threshold reached.\n", my_id, count); } printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d, unlocking mutex\n", my_id, count); pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); } } if (my_id==4&& done == 2) { for(i=0; i< 8 ; i++) { pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); count++; if (count == COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_signal(&count_threshold_cv); printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d Threshold reached.\n",my_id, count); } printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d, unlocking mutex\n", my_id, count); pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); } } pthread_exit(NULL); } void *watch_count(void *t) { long my_id = (long)t; printf("Starting watch_count(): thread %ld\n", my_id); pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); if (count<COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_wait(&count_threshold_cv, &count_mutex); printf("watch_count(): thread %ld Condition signal received.\n", my_id); count += 125; printf("watch_count(): thread %ld count now = %d.\n", my_id, count); } pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); pthread_exit(NULL); } int main (int argc, char *argv[]) { int i, rc; long t1=1, t2=2, t3=3, t4=4; pthread_t threads[4]; pthread_attr_t attr; pthread_mutex_init(&count_mutex, NULL); pthread_cond_init (&count_threshold_cv, NULL); pthread_attr_init(&attr); pthread_attr_setdetachstate(&attr,PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE); pthread_create(&threads[0], &attr, watch_count, (void *)t1); pthread_create(&threads[1], &attr, inc_count, (void *)t2); pthread_create(&threads[2], &attr, inc_count, (void *)t3); pthread_create(&threads[3], &attr, inc_count, (void *)t4); for (i=0; i<NUM_THREADS; i++) { pthread_join(threads[i], NULL); } printf ("Main(): Waited on %d threads. Done.\n", NUM_THREADS); pthread_attr_destroy(&attr); pthread_mutex_destroy(&count_mutex); pthread_cond_destroy(&count_threshold_cv); pthread_exit(NULL); } so this code creates 4 threads. thread 1 keeps track of the count value while the other 3 increment the count value. the run time is the number of times the thread will increment the count value. I have a done value that allows the first thread to increment the count value first until its run time is up.. so its like a First Come First Serve. my question is, is there a better way of implementing this? I have read about SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_RR.. I guess I dont know how to implement them into this code or if it can be.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >