Search Results

Search found 69034 results on 2762 pages for 'file locking'.

Page 2/2762 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • How to Customize the File Open/Save Dialog Box in Windows

    - by Lori Kaufman
    Generally, there are two kinds of Open/Save dialog boxes in Windows. One kind looks like Windows Explorer, with the tree on the left containing Favorites, Libraries, Computer, etc. The other kind contains a vertical toolbar, called the Places Bar. The Windows Explorer-style Open/Save dialog box can be customized by adding your own folders to the Favorites list. You can, then, click the arrows to the left of the main items, except the Favorites, to collapse them, leaving only the list of default and custom Favorites. The Places Bar is located along the left side of the File Open/Save dialog box and contains buttons providing access to frequently-used folders. The default buttons on the Places Bar are links to Recent Places, Desktop, Libraries, Computer, and Network. However, you change these links to be links to custom folders of your choice. We will show you how to customize the Places Bar using the registry and using a free tool in case you are not comfortable making changes in the registry. Use Your Android Phone to Comparison Shop: 4 Scanner Apps Reviewed How to Run Android Apps on Your Desktop the Easy Way HTG Explains: Do You Really Need to Defrag Your PC?

    Read the article

  • Database locking: ActiveRecord + Heroku

    - by JP
    I'm building a Sinatra based app for deployment on Heroku. You can imagine it like a standard URL shortener but where old shortcodes expire and become available for new URLs (I realise this is a silly concept but its easier to explain this way). I'm representing the shortcode in my database as an integer and redefining its reader to give a nice short and unique string from the integer. As some rows will be deleted, I've written code that goes thru all the shortcode integers and picks the first free one to use just before_save. Unfortunately I can make my code create two rows with identical shortcode integers if I run two instances very quickly one after another, which is obviously no good! How should I implement a locking system so that I can quickly save my record with a unique shortcode integer? Here's what I have so far: Chars = ('a'..'z').to_a + ('A'..'Z').to_a + ('0'..'9').to_a CharLength = Chars.length class Shorts < ActiveRecord::Base before_save :gen_shortcode after_save :done_shortcode def shortcode i = read_attribute(:shortcode).to_i return '0' if i == 0 s = '' while i > 0 s << Chars[i.modulo(CharLength)] i /= 62 end s end private def gen_shortcode shortcode = 0 self.class.find(:all,:order=>"shortcode ASC").each do |s| if s.read_attribute(:shortcode).to_i != shortcode # Begin locking? break end shortcode += 1 end write_attribute(:shortcode,shortcode) end def done_shortcode # End Locking? end end

    Read the article

  • Opening a file opens the folder the file is in, not the file itself

    - by Pepe Lebuntu
    Whenever I try to open a file (such as an .odt, or .doc) from say, the Dash or the Firefox Downloads, Ubuntu 11.10 opens Nautilus to the the folder where the file is, rather than just going to the application and loading the file straight away. In previous releases, when I clicked on a downloaded file, it just went straight to LibreOffice, and it was fine. This is adding a superfluous step in the process. How do I associate the correct extensions?

    Read the article

  • Check to see if file transfer is complete

    - by Cymon
    We have a daily job that processes files delivered from an external source. The process usually runs fine without any issues but every once in a while we have an issue of attempting to process a file that is not completely transferred. The external source SCPs these files from a UNIX server to our Windows server. From there we try to process the files. Is there a way to check to see if a file is still being transferred? Does UNIX put a lock on a file while SCPing it that we could check on the Windows side?

    Read the article

  • How to improve INSERT INTO ... SELECT locking behavior

    - by Artem
    In our production database, we ran the following pseudo-code SQL batch query running every hour: INSERT INTO TemporaryTable (SELECT FROM HighlyContentiousTableInInnoDb WHERE allKindsOfComplexConditions are true) Now this query itself does not need to be fast, but I noticed it was locking up HighlyContentiousTableInInnoDb, even though it was just reading from it. Which was making some other very simple queries take ~25 seconds (that's how long that other query takes). Then I discovered that InnoDB tables in such a case are actually locked by a SELECT! http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/07/12/insert-into-select-performance-with-innodb-tables/ But I don't really like the solution in the article of selecting into an OUTFILE, it seems like a hack (temporary files on filesystem seem sucky). Any other ideas? Is there a way to make a full copy of an InnoDB table without locking it in this way during the copy. Then I could just copy the HighlyContentiousTable to another table and do the query there.

    Read the article

  • What interprocess locking calls should I monitor?

    - by Matt Joiner
    I'm monitoring a process with strace/ltrace in the hope to find and intercept a call that checks, and potentially activates some kind of globally shared lock. While I've dealt with and read about several forms of interprocess locking on Linux before, I'm drawing a blank on what to calls to look for. Currently my only suspect is futex() which comes up very early on in the process' execution. Update0 There is some confusion about what I'm after. I'm monitoring an existing process for calls to persistent interprocess memory or equivalent. I'd like to know what system and library calls to look for. I have no intention call these myself, so naturally futex() will come up, I'm sure many libraries will implement their locking calls in terms of this, etc. Update1 I'd like a list of function names or a link to documentation, that I should monitor at the ltrace and strace levels (and specifying which). Any other good advice about how to track and locate the global lock in mind would be great.

    Read the article

  • Does my Dictionary must use locking mechanism?

    - by theateist
    Many threads have access to summary. Each thread will have an unique key for accessing the dictionary; Dictionary<string, List<Result>> summary; Do I need locking for following operations? summary[key] = new List<Result>() summary[key].Add(new Result()); It seems that I don't need locking because each thread will access dictionary with different key, but won't the (1) be problematic because of adding concurrently new record to dictionary with other treads?

    Read the article

  • PHP File Downloading Questions

    - by nsearle
    Hey All! I am currently running into some problems with user's downloading a file stored on my server. I have code set up to auto download a file once the user hits the download button. It is working for all files, but when the size get's larger than 30 MB it is having issues. Is there a limit on user download? Also, I have supplied my example code and am wondering if there is a better practice than using the PHP function 'file_get_contents'. Thank You all for the help! $path = $_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] . '../path/to/file/'; $filename = 'filename.zip'; $filesize = filesize($path . $filename); @header("Content-type: application/zip"); @header("Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=$filename"); @header("Content-Length: $filesize") echo file_get_contents($path . $filename);

    Read the article

  • Using Multiple File Handles for Single File

    - by Ryan Rosario
    I have an O(n^2) operation that requires me to read line i from a file, and then compare line i to every line in the file. This repeats for all i. I wrote the following code to do this with 2 file handles, but it does not yield the result I am looking for. I imagine this is a simple error on my part. IN1 = open("myfile.dat","r") IN2 = open("myfile.dat","r") for line1 in IN1: for line2 in IN2: print line1.strip(), line2.strip() IN1.close() IN2.close() The result: Hello Hello Hello World Hello This Hello is Hello an Hello Example Hello of Hello Using Hello Two Hello File Hello Pointers Hello to Hello Read Hello One Hello File The output should contain 15^2 lines.

    Read the article

  • Upload File to Windows Azure Blob in Chunks through ASP.NET MVC, JavaScript and HTML5

    - by Shaun
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/shaunxu/archive/2013/07/01/upload-file-to-windows-azure-blob-in-chunks-through-asp.net.aspxMany people are using Windows Azure Blob Storage to store their data in the cloud. Blob storage provides 99.9% availability with easy-to-use API through .NET SDK and HTTP REST. For example, we can store JavaScript files, images, documents in blob storage when we are building an ASP.NET web application on a Web Role in Windows Azure. Or we can store our VHD files in blob and mount it as a hard drive in our cloud service. If you are familiar with Windows Azure, you should know that there are two kinds of blob: page blob and block blob. The page blob is optimized for random read and write, which is very useful when you need to store VHD files. The block blob is optimized for sequential/chunk read and write, which has more common usage. Since we can upload block blob in blocks through BlockBlob.PutBlock, and them commit them as a whole blob with invoking the BlockBlob.PutBlockList, it is very powerful to upload large files, as we can upload blocks in parallel, and provide pause-resume feature. There are many documents, articles and blog posts described on how to upload a block blob. Most of them are focus on the server side, which means when you had received a big file, stream or binaries, how to upload them into blob storage in blocks through .NET SDK.  But the problem is, how can we upload these large files from client side, for example, a browser. This questioned to me when I was working with a Chinese customer to help them build a network disk production on top of azure. The end users upload their files from the web portal, and then the files will be stored in blob storage from the Web Role. My goal is to find the best way to transform the file from client (end user’s machine) to the server (Web Role) through browser. In this post I will demonstrate and describe what I had done, to upload large file in chunks with high speed, and save them as blocks into Windows Azure Blob Storage.   Traditional Upload, Works with Limitation The simplest way to implement this requirement is to create a web page with a form that contains a file input element and a submit button. 1: @using (Html.BeginForm("About", "Index", FormMethod.Post, new { enctype = "multipart/form-data" })) 2: { 3: <input type="file" name="file" /> 4: <input type="submit" value="upload" /> 5: } And then in the backend controller, we retrieve the whole content of this file and upload it in to the blob storage through .NET SDK. We can split the file in blocks and upload them in parallel and commit. The code had been well blogged in the community. 1: [HttpPost] 2: public ActionResult About(HttpPostedFileBase file) 3: { 4: var container = _client.GetContainerReference("test"); 5: container.CreateIfNotExists(); 6: var blob = container.GetBlockBlobReference(file.FileName); 7: var blockDataList = new Dictionary<string, byte[]>(); 8: using (var stream = file.InputStream) 9: { 10: var blockSizeInKB = 1024; 11: var offset = 0; 12: var index = 0; 13: while (offset < stream.Length) 14: { 15: var readLength = Math.Min(1024 * blockSizeInKB, (int)stream.Length - offset); 16: var blockData = new byte[readLength]; 17: offset += stream.Read(blockData, 0, readLength); 18: blockDataList.Add(Convert.ToBase64String(BitConverter.GetBytes(index)), blockData); 19:  20: index++; 21: } 22: } 23:  24: Parallel.ForEach(blockDataList, (bi) => 25: { 26: blob.PutBlock(bi.Key, new MemoryStream(bi.Value), null); 27: }); 28: blob.PutBlockList(blockDataList.Select(b => b.Key).ToArray()); 29:  30: return RedirectToAction("About"); 31: } This works perfect if we selected an image, a music or a small video to upload. But if I selected a large file, let’s say a 6GB HD-movie, after upload for about few minutes the page will be shown as below and the upload will be terminated. In ASP.NET there is a limitation of request length and the maximized request length is defined in the web.config file. It’s a number which less than about 4GB. So if we want to upload a really big file, we cannot simply implement in this way. Also, in Windows Azure, a cloud service network load balancer will terminate the connection if exceed the timeout period. From my test the timeout looks like 2 - 3 minutes. Hence, when we need to upload a large file we cannot just use the basic HTML elements. Besides the limitation mentioned above, the simple HTML file upload cannot provide rich upload experience such as chunk upload, pause and pause-resume. So we need to find a better way to upload large file from the client to the server.   Upload in Chunks through HTML5 and JavaScript In order to break those limitation mentioned above we will try to upload the large file in chunks. This takes some benefit to us such as - No request size limitation: Since we upload in chunks, we can define the request size for each chunks regardless how big the entire file is. - No timeout problem: The size of chunks are controlled by us, which means we should be able to make sure request for each chunk upload will not exceed the timeout period of both ASP.NET and Windows Azure load balancer. It was a big challenge to upload big file in chunks until we have HTML5. There are some new features and improvements introduced in HTML5 and we will use them to implement our solution.   In HTML5, the File interface had been improved with a new method called “slice”. It can be used to read part of the file by specifying the start byte index and the end byte index. For example if the entire file was 1024 bytes, file.slice(512, 768) will read the part of this file from the 512nd byte to 768th byte, and return a new object of interface called "Blob”, which you can treat as an array of bytes. In fact,  a Blob object represents a file-like object of immutable, raw data. The File interface is based on Blob, inheriting blob functionality and expanding it to support files on the user's system. For more information about the Blob please refer here. File and Blob is very useful to implement the chunk upload. We will use File interface to represent the file the user selected from the browser and then use File.slice to read the file in chunks in the size we wanted. For example, if we wanted to upload a 10MB file with 512KB chunks, then we can read it in 512KB blobs by using File.slice in a loop.   Assuming we have a web page as below. User can select a file, an input box to specify the block size in KB and a button to start upload. 1: <div> 2: <input type="file" id="upload_files" name="files[]" /><br /> 3: Block Size: <input type="number" id="block_size" value="512" name="block_size" />KB<br /> 4: <input type="button" id="upload_button_blob" name="upload" value="upload (blob)" /> 5: </div> Then we can have the JavaScript function to upload the file in chunks when user clicked the button. 1: <script type="text/javascript"> 1: 2: $(function () { 3: $("#upload_button_blob").click(function () { 4: }); 5: });</script> Firstly we need to ensure the client browser supports the interfaces we are going to use. Just try to invoke the File, Blob and FormData from the “window” object. If any of them is “undefined” the condition result will be “false” which means your browser doesn’t support these premium feature and it’s time for you to get your browser updated. FormData is another new feature we are going to use in the future. It could generate a temporary form for us. We will use this interface to create a form with chunk and associated metadata when invoked the service through ajax. 1: $("#upload_button_blob").click(function () { 2: // assert the browser support html5 3: if (window.File && window.Blob && window.FormData) { 4: alert("Your brwoser is awesome, let's rock!"); 5: } 6: else { 7: alert("Oh man plz update to a modern browser before try is cool stuff out."); 8: return; 9: } 10: }); Each browser supports these interfaces by their own implementation and currently the Blob, File and File.slice are supported by Chrome 21, FireFox 13, IE 10, Opera 12 and Safari 5.1 or higher. After that we worked on the files the user selected one by one since in HTML5, user can select multiple files in one file input box. 1: var files = $("#upload_files")[0].files; 2: for (var i = 0; i < files.length; i++) { 3: var file = files[i]; 4: var fileSize = file.size; 5: var fileName = file.name; 6: } Next, we calculated the start index and end index for each chunks based on the size the user specified from the browser. We put them into an array with the file name and the index, which will be used when we upload chunks into Windows Azure Blob Storage as blocks since we need to specify the target blob name and the block index. At the same time we will store the list of all indexes into another variant which will be used to commit blocks into blob in Azure Storage once all chunks had been uploaded successfully. 1: $("#upload_button_blob").click(function () { 2: // assert the browser support html5 3: ... ... 4: // start to upload each files in chunks 5: var files = $("#upload_files")[0].files; 6: for (var i = 0; i < files.length; i++) { 7: var file = files[i]; 8: var fileSize = file.size; 9: var fileName = file.name; 10:  11: // calculate the start and end byte index for each blocks(chunks) 12: // with the index, file name and index list for future using 13: var blockSizeInKB = $("#block_size").val(); 14: var blockSize = blockSizeInKB * 1024; 15: var blocks = []; 16: var offset = 0; 17: var index = 0; 18: var list = ""; 19: while (offset < fileSize) { 20: var start = offset; 21: var end = Math.min(offset + blockSize, fileSize); 22:  23: blocks.push({ 24: name: fileName, 25: index: index, 26: start: start, 27: end: end 28: }); 29: list += index + ","; 30:  31: offset = end; 32: index++; 33: } 34: } 35: }); Now we have all chunks’ information ready. The next step should be upload them one by one to the server side, and at the server side when received a chunk it will upload as a block into Blob Storage, and finally commit them with the index list through BlockBlobClient.PutBlockList. But since all these invokes are ajax calling, which means not synchronized call. So we need to introduce a new JavaScript library to help us coordinate the asynchronize operation, which named “async.js”. You can download this JavaScript library here, and you can find the document here. I will not explain this library too much in this post. We will put all procedures we want to execute as a function array, and pass into the proper function defined in async.js to let it help us to control the execution sequence, in series or in parallel. Hence we will define an array and put the function for chunk upload into this array. 1: $("#upload_button_blob").click(function () { 2: // assert the browser support html5 3: ... ... 4:  5: // start to upload each files in chunks 6: var files = $("#upload_files")[0].files; 7: for (var i = 0; i < files.length; i++) { 8: var file = files[i]; 9: var fileSize = file.size; 10: var fileName = file.name; 11: // calculate the start and end byte index for each blocks(chunks) 12: // with the index, file name and index list for future using 13: ... ... 14:  15: // define the function array and push all chunk upload operation into this array 16: blocks.forEach(function (block) { 17: putBlocks.push(function (callback) { 18: }); 19: }); 20: } 21: }); 22: }); As you can see, I used File.slice method to read each chunks based on the start and end byte index we calculated previously, and constructed a temporary HTML form with the file name, chunk index and chunk data through another new feature in HTML5 named FormData. Then post this form to the backend server through jQuery.ajax. This is the key part of our solution. 1: $("#upload_button_blob").click(function () { 2: // assert the browser support html5 3: ... ... 4: // start to upload each files in chunks 5: var files = $("#upload_files")[0].files; 6: for (var i = 0; i < files.length; i++) { 7: var file = files[i]; 8: var fileSize = file.size; 9: var fileName = file.name; 10: // calculate the start and end byte index for each blocks(chunks) 11: // with the index, file name and index list for future using 12: ... ... 13: // define the function array and push all chunk upload operation into this array 14: blocks.forEach(function (block) { 15: putBlocks.push(function (callback) { 16: // load blob based on the start and end index for each chunks 17: var blob = file.slice(block.start, block.end); 18: // put the file name, index and blob into a temporary from 19: var fd = new FormData(); 20: fd.append("name", block.name); 21: fd.append("index", block.index); 22: fd.append("file", blob); 23: // post the form to backend service (asp.net mvc controller action) 24: $.ajax({ 25: url: "/Home/UploadInFormData", 26: data: fd, 27: processData: false, 28: contentType: "multipart/form-data", 29: type: "POST", 30: success: function (result) { 31: if (!result.success) { 32: alert(result.error); 33: } 34: callback(null, block.index); 35: } 36: }); 37: }); 38: }); 39: } 40: }); Then we will invoke these functions one by one by using the async.js. And once all functions had been executed successfully I invoked another ajax call to the backend service to commit all these chunks (blocks) as the blob in Windows Azure Storage. 1: $("#upload_button_blob").click(function () { 2: // assert the browser support html5 3: ... ... 4: // start to upload each files in chunks 5: var files = $("#upload_files")[0].files; 6: for (var i = 0; i < files.length; i++) { 7: var file = files[i]; 8: var fileSize = file.size; 9: var fileName = file.name; 10: // calculate the start and end byte index for each blocks(chunks) 11: // with the index, file name and index list for future using 12: ... ... 13: // define the function array and push all chunk upload operation into this array 14: ... ... 15: // invoke the functions one by one 16: // then invoke the commit ajax call to put blocks into blob in azure storage 17: async.series(putBlocks, function (error, result) { 18: var data = { 19: name: fileName, 20: list: list 21: }; 22: $.post("/Home/Commit", data, function (result) { 23: if (!result.success) { 24: alert(result.error); 25: } 26: else { 27: alert("done!"); 28: } 29: }); 30: }); 31: } 32: }); That’s all in the client side. The outline of our logic would be - Calculate the start and end byte index for each chunks based on the block size. - Defined the functions of reading the chunk form file and upload the content to the backend service through ajax. - Execute the functions defined in previous step with “async.js”. - Commit the chunks by invoking the backend service in Windows Azure Storage finally.   Save Chunks as Blocks into Blob Storage In above we finished the client size JavaScript code. It uploaded the file in chunks to the backend service which we are going to implement in this step. We will use ASP.NET MVC as our backend service, and it will receive the chunks, upload into Windows Azure Bob Storage in blocks, then finally commit as one blob. As in the client side we uploaded chunks by invoking the ajax call to the URL "/Home/UploadInFormData", I created a new action under the Index controller and it only accepts HTTP POST request. 1: [HttpPost] 2: public JsonResult UploadInFormData() 3: { 4: var error = string.Empty; 5: try 6: { 7: } 8: catch (Exception e) 9: { 10: error = e.ToString(); 11: } 12:  13: return new JsonResult() 14: { 15: Data = new 16: { 17: success = string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(error), 18: error = error 19: } 20: }; 21: } Then I retrieved the file name, index and the chunk content from the Request.Form object, which was passed from our client side. And then, used the Windows Azure SDK to create a blob container (in this case we will use the container named “test”.) and create a blob reference with the blob name (same as the file name). Then uploaded the chunk as a block of this blob with the index, since in Blob Storage each block must have an index (ID) associated with so that finally we can put all blocks as one blob by specifying their block ID list. 1: [HttpPost] 2: public JsonResult UploadInFormData() 3: { 4: var error = string.Empty; 5: try 6: { 7: var name = Request.Form["name"]; 8: var index = int.Parse(Request.Form["index"]); 9: var file = Request.Files[0]; 10: var id = Convert.ToBase64String(BitConverter.GetBytes(index)); 11:  12: var container = _client.GetContainerReference("test"); 13: container.CreateIfNotExists(); 14: var blob = container.GetBlockBlobReference(name); 15: blob.PutBlock(id, file.InputStream, null); 16: } 17: catch (Exception e) 18: { 19: error = e.ToString(); 20: } 21:  22: return new JsonResult() 23: { 24: Data = new 25: { 26: success = string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(error), 27: error = error 28: } 29: }; 30: } Next, I created another action to commit the blocks into blob once all chunks had been uploaded. Similarly, I retrieved the blob name from the Request.Form. I also retrieved the chunks ID list, which is the block ID list from the Request.Form in a string format, split them as a list, then invoked the BlockBlob.PutBlockList method. After that our blob will be shown in the container and ready to be download. 1: [HttpPost] 2: public JsonResult Commit() 3: { 4: var error = string.Empty; 5: try 6: { 7: var name = Request.Form["name"]; 8: var list = Request.Form["list"]; 9: var ids = list 10: .Split(',') 11: .Where(id => !string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(id)) 12: .Select(id => Convert.ToBase64String(BitConverter.GetBytes(int.Parse(id)))) 13: .ToArray(); 14:  15: var container = _client.GetContainerReference("test"); 16: container.CreateIfNotExists(); 17: var blob = container.GetBlockBlobReference(name); 18: blob.PutBlockList(ids); 19: } 20: catch (Exception e) 21: { 22: error = e.ToString(); 23: } 24:  25: return new JsonResult() 26: { 27: Data = new 28: { 29: success = string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(error), 30: error = error 31: } 32: }; 33: } Now we finished all code we need. The whole process of uploading would be like this below. Below is the full client side JavaScript code. 1: <script type="text/javascript" src="~/Scripts/async.js"></script> 2: <script type="text/javascript"> 3: $(function () { 4: $("#upload_button_blob").click(function () { 5: // assert the browser support html5 6: if (window.File && window.Blob && window.FormData) { 7: alert("Your brwoser is awesome, let's rock!"); 8: } 9: else { 10: alert("Oh man plz update to a modern browser before try is cool stuff out."); 11: return; 12: } 13:  14: // start to upload each files in chunks 15: var files = $("#upload_files")[0].files; 16: for (var i = 0; i < files.length; i++) { 17: var file = files[i]; 18: var fileSize = file.size; 19: var fileName = file.name; 20:  21: // calculate the start and end byte index for each blocks(chunks) 22: // with the index, file name and index list for future using 23: var blockSizeInKB = $("#block_size").val(); 24: var blockSize = blockSizeInKB * 1024; 25: var blocks = []; 26: var offset = 0; 27: var index = 0; 28: var list = ""; 29: while (offset < fileSize) { 30: var start = offset; 31: var end = Math.min(offset + blockSize, fileSize); 32:  33: blocks.push({ 34: name: fileName, 35: index: index, 36: start: start, 37: end: end 38: }); 39: list += index + ","; 40:  41: offset = end; 42: index++; 43: } 44:  45: // define the function array and push all chunk upload operation into this array 46: var putBlocks = []; 47: blocks.forEach(function (block) { 48: putBlocks.push(function (callback) { 49: // load blob based on the start and end index for each chunks 50: var blob = file.slice(block.start, block.end); 51: // put the file name, index and blob into a temporary from 52: var fd = new FormData(); 53: fd.append("name", block.name); 54: fd.append("index", block.index); 55: fd.append("file", blob); 56: // post the form to backend service (asp.net mvc controller action) 57: $.ajax({ 58: url: "/Home/UploadInFormData", 59: data: fd, 60: processData: false, 61: contentType: "multipart/form-data", 62: type: "POST", 63: success: function (result) { 64: if (!result.success) { 65: alert(result.error); 66: } 67: callback(null, block.index); 68: } 69: }); 70: }); 71: }); 72:  73: // invoke the functions one by one 74: // then invoke the commit ajax call to put blocks into blob in azure storage 75: async.series(putBlocks, function (error, result) { 76: var data = { 77: name: fileName, 78: list: list 79: }; 80: $.post("/Home/Commit", data, function (result) { 81: if (!result.success) { 82: alert(result.error); 83: } 84: else { 85: alert("done!"); 86: } 87: }); 88: }); 89: } 90: }); 91: }); 92: </script> And below is the full ASP.NET MVC controller code. 1: public class HomeController : Controller 2: { 3: private CloudStorageAccount _account; 4: private CloudBlobClient _client; 5:  6: public HomeController() 7: : base() 8: { 9: _account = CloudStorageAccount.Parse(CloudConfigurationManager.GetSetting("DataConnectionString")); 10: _client = _account.CreateCloudBlobClient(); 11: } 12:  13: public ActionResult Index() 14: { 15: ViewBag.Message = "Modify this template to jump-start your ASP.NET MVC application."; 16:  17: return View(); 18: } 19:  20: [HttpPost] 21: public JsonResult UploadInFormData() 22: { 23: var error = string.Empty; 24: try 25: { 26: var name = Request.Form["name"]; 27: var index = int.Parse(Request.Form["index"]); 28: var file = Request.Files[0]; 29: var id = Convert.ToBase64String(BitConverter.GetBytes(index)); 30:  31: var container = _client.GetContainerReference("test"); 32: container.CreateIfNotExists(); 33: var blob = container.GetBlockBlobReference(name); 34: blob.PutBlock(id, file.InputStream, null); 35: } 36: catch (Exception e) 37: { 38: error = e.ToString(); 39: } 40:  41: return new JsonResult() 42: { 43: Data = new 44: { 45: success = string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(error), 46: error = error 47: } 48: }; 49: } 50:  51: [HttpPost] 52: public JsonResult Commit() 53: { 54: var error = string.Empty; 55: try 56: { 57: var name = Request.Form["name"]; 58: var list = Request.Form["list"]; 59: var ids = list 60: .Split(',') 61: .Where(id => !string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(id)) 62: .Select(id => Convert.ToBase64String(BitConverter.GetBytes(int.Parse(id)))) 63: .ToArray(); 64:  65: var container = _client.GetContainerReference("test"); 66: container.CreateIfNotExists(); 67: var blob = container.GetBlockBlobReference(name); 68: blob.PutBlockList(ids); 69: } 70: catch (Exception e) 71: { 72: error = e.ToString(); 73: } 74:  75: return new JsonResult() 76: { 77: Data = new 78: { 79: success = string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(error), 80: error = error 81: } 82: }; 83: } 84: } And if we selected a file from the browser we will see our application will upload chunks in the size we specified to the server through ajax call in background, and then commit all chunks in one blob. Then we can find the blob in our Windows Azure Blob Storage.   Optimized by Parallel Upload In previous example we just uploaded our file in chunks. This solved the problem that ASP.NET MVC request content size limitation as well as the Windows Azure load balancer timeout. But it might introduce the performance problem since we uploaded chunks in sequence. In order to improve the upload performance we could modify our client side code a bit to make the upload operation invoked in parallel. The good news is that, “async.js” library provides the parallel execution function. If you remembered the code we invoke the service to upload chunks, it utilized “async.series” which means all functions will be executed in sequence. Now we will change this code to “async.parallel”. This will invoke all functions in parallel. 1: $("#upload_button_blob").click(function () { 2: // assert the browser support html5 3: ... ... 4: // start to upload each files in chunks 5: var files = $("#upload_files")[0].files; 6: for (var i = 0; i < files.length; i++) { 7: var file = files[i]; 8: var fileSize = file.size; 9: var fileName = file.name; 10: // calculate the start and end byte index for each blocks(chunks) 11: // with the index, file name and index list for future using 12: ... ... 13: // define the function array and push all chunk upload operation into this array 14: ... ... 15: // invoke the functions one by one 16: // then invoke the commit ajax call to put blocks into blob in azure storage 17: async.parallel(putBlocks, function (error, result) { 18: var data = { 19: name: fileName, 20: list: list 21: }; 22: $.post("/Home/Commit", data, function (result) { 23: if (!result.success) { 24: alert(result.error); 25: } 26: else { 27: alert("done!"); 28: } 29: }); 30: }); 31: } 32: }); In this way all chunks will be uploaded to the server side at the same time to maximize the bandwidth usage. This should work if the file was not very large and the chunk size was not very small. But for large file this might introduce another problem that too many ajax calls are sent to the server at the same time. So the best solution should be, upload the chunks in parallel with maximum concurrency limitation. The code below specified the concurrency limitation to 4, which means at the most only 4 ajax calls could be invoked at the same time. 1: $("#upload_button_blob").click(function () { 2: // assert the browser support html5 3: ... ... 4: // start to upload each files in chunks 5: var files = $("#upload_files")[0].files; 6: for (var i = 0; i < files.length; i++) { 7: var file = files[i]; 8: var fileSize = file.size; 9: var fileName = file.name; 10: // calculate the start and end byte index for each blocks(chunks) 11: // with the index, file name and index list for future using 12: ... ... 13: // define the function array and push all chunk upload operation into this array 14: ... ... 15: // invoke the functions one by one 16: // then invoke the commit ajax call to put blocks into blob in azure storage 17: async.parallelLimit(putBlocks, 4, function (error, result) { 18: var data = { 19: name: fileName, 20: list: list 21: }; 22: $.post("/Home/Commit", data, function (result) { 23: if (!result.success) { 24: alert(result.error); 25: } 26: else { 27: alert("done!"); 28: } 29: }); 30: }); 31: } 32: });   Summary In this post we discussed how to upload files in chunks to the backend service and then upload them into Windows Azure Blob Storage in blocks. We focused on the frontend side and leverage three new feature introduced in HTML 5 which are - File.slice: Read part of the file by specifying the start and end byte index. - Blob: File-like interface which contains the part of the file content. - FormData: Temporary form element that we can pass the chunk alone with some metadata to the backend service. Then we discussed the performance consideration of chunk uploading. Sequence upload cannot provide maximized upload speed, but the unlimited parallel upload might crash the browser and server if too many chunks. So we finally came up with the solution to upload chunks in parallel with the concurrency limitation. We also demonstrated how to utilize “async.js” JavaScript library to help us control the asynchronize call and the parallel limitation.   Regarding the chunk size and the parallel limitation value there is no “best” value. You need to test vary composition and find out the best one for your particular scenario. It depends on the local bandwidth, client machine cores and the server side (Windows Azure Cloud Service Virtual Machine) cores, memory and bandwidth. Below is one of my performance test result. The client machine was Windows 8 IE 10 with 4 cores. I was using Microsoft Cooperation Network. The web site was hosted on Windows Azure China North data center (in Beijing) with one small web role (1.7GB 1 core CPU, 1.75GB memory with 100Mbps bandwidth). The test cases were - Chunk size: 512KB, 1MB, 2MB, 4MB. - Upload Mode: Sequence, parallel (unlimited), parallel with limit (4 threads, 8 threads). - Chunk Format: base64 string, binaries. - Target file: 100MB. - Each case was tested 3 times. Below is the test result chart. Some thoughts, but not guidance or best practice: - Parallel gets better performance than series. - No significant performance improvement between parallel 4 threads and 8 threads. - Transform with binaries provides better performance than base64. - In all cases, chunk size in 1MB - 2MB gets better performance.   Hope this helps, Shaun All documents and related graphics, codes are provided "AS IS" without warranty of any kind. Copyright © Shaun Ziyan Xu. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

    Read the article

  • Naming Convention for Dedicated Thread Locking objects

    - by Chris Sinclair
    A relatively minor question, but I haven't been able to find official documentation or even blog opinion/discussions on it. Simply put: when I have a private object whose sole purpose is to serve for private lock, what do I name that object? class MyClass { private object LockingObject = new object(); void DoSomething() { lock(LockingObject) { //do something } } } What should we name LockingObject here? Also consider not just the name of the variable but how it looks in-code when locking. I've seen various examples, but seemingly no solid go-to advice: Plenty of usages of SyncRoot (and variations such as _syncRoot). Code Sample: lock(SyncRoot), lock(_syncRoot) This appears to be influenced by VB's equivalent SyncLock statement, the SyncRoot property that exists on some of the ICollection classes and part of some kind of SyncRoot design pattern (which arguably is a bad idea) Being in a C# context, not sure if I'd want to have a VBish naming. Even worse, in VB naming the variable the same as the keyword. Not sure if this would be a source of confusion or not. thisLock and lockThis from the MSDN articles: C# lock Statement, VB SyncLock Statement Code Sample: lock(thisLock), lock(lockThis) Not sure if these were named minimally purely for the example or not Kind of weird if we're using this within a static class/method. Several usages of PadLock (of varying casing) Code Sample: lock(PadLock), lock(padlock) Not bad, but my only beef is it unsurprisingly invokes the image of a physical "padlock" which I tend to not associate with the abstract threading concept. Naming the lock based on what it's intending to lock Code Sample: lock(messagesLock), lock(DictionaryLock), lock(commandQueueLock) In the VB SyncRoot MSDN page example, it has a simpleMessageList example with a private messagesLock object I don't think it's a good idea to name the lock against the type you're locking around ("DictionaryLock") as that's an implementation detail that may change. I prefer naming around the concept/object you're locking ("messagesLock" or "commandQueueLock") Interestingly, I very rarely see this naming convention for locking objects in code samples online or on StackOverflow. Question: What's your opinion generally about naming private locking objects? Recently, I've started naming them ThreadLock (so kinda like option 3), but I'm finding myself questioning that name. I'm frequently using this locking pattern (in the code sample provided above) throughout my applications so I thought it might make sense to get a more professional opinion/discussion about a solid naming convention for them. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • mysql row locking via php

    - by deezee
    I am helping a friend with a web based form that is for their business. I am trying to get it ready to handle multiple users. I have set it up so that just before the record is displayed for editing I am locking the record with the following code. $query = "START TRANSACTION;"; mysql_query($query); $query = "SELECT field FROM table WHERE ID = \"$value\" FOR UPDATE;"; mysql_query($query); (okay that is greatly simplified but that is the essence of the mysql) It does not appear to be working. However, when I go directly to mysql from the command line, logging in with the same user and execute START TRANSACTION; SELECT field FROM table WHERE ID = "40" FOR UPDATE; I can effectively block the web form from accessing record "40" and get the timeout warning. I have tried using BEGIN instead of START TRANSACTION. I have tried doing SET AUTOCOMMIT=0 first and starting the transaction after locking but I cannot seem to lock the row from the PHP code. Since I can lock the row from the command line I do not think there is a problem with how the database is set up. I am really hoping that there is some simple something that I have missed in my reading. FYI, I am developing on XAMPP version 1.7.3 which has Apache 2.2.14, MySQL 5.1.41 and PHP 5.3.1. Thanks in advance. This is my first time posting but I have gleaned alot of knowledge from this site in the past.

    Read the article

  • Is this a dangerous locking pattern?

    - by Martin
    I have an enumerator written in C#, which looks something like this: try { ReadWriteLock.EnterReadLock(); yield foo; yield bar; yield bash; } finally { ReadWriteLock.ExitReadLock(); } I believe this may be a dangerous locking pattern, as the ReadWriteLock will only be released if the enumeration is complete, otherwise the lock is left hanging and is never released, am I correct? If so, what's the best way to combat this?

    Read the article

  • Android pattern locking

    - by JonF
    I have been able to lock the screen using LOCK_PATTERN_ENABLED, however in many cases when I enable this pattern locking it will take any pattern and move past the pattern check. Has anyone else run across this?

    Read the article

  • how can we achieve second application read that file when first application not modifying it

    - by soField
    i have two application first application is bash second is java which one of them is periodically deleting and recreating a specific file (first) the other one is also periodically reading this file and process it in it's own logic (second) how can we achieve second application read that file when first application not modifying it my aim is to force second app read the file only when content of file fully written inside it how can achieve this goal ?

    Read the article

  • Java Concurrency: CAS vs Locking

    - by Hugo Walker
    Im currently reading the Book Java Concurrency in Practice. In the Chapter 15 they are speaking about the Nonblocking algorithms and the compare-and-swap (CAS) Method. It is written that the CAS perform much better than the Locking Methods. I want to ask the people which already worked with both of this concepts and would like to hear when you are preferring which of these concept? Is it really so much faster? Personally for me the usage of Locks is much clearer and easier to understand and maybe even better to maintain. (Please correct me if I am wrong). Should we really focus creating our concurrent code related on CAS than Locks to get a better performance boost or is sustainability a higher thing? I know there is maybe not a strict rule, when to use what. But I just would like to hear some opinions, experiences with the new concept of CAS.

    Read the article

  • double checked locking - objective c

    - by bandejapaisa
    I realised double checked locking is flawed in java due to the memory model, but that is usually associated with the singleton pattern and optimizing the creation of the singleton. What about under this case in objective-c: I have a boolean flag to determine if my application is streaming data or not. I have 3 methods, startStreaming, stopStreaming, streamingDataReceived and i protect them from multiple threads using: - (void) streamingDataReceived:(StreamingData *)streamingData { if (self.isStreaming) { @synchronized(self) { if (self.isStreaming) { - (void) stopStreaming { if (self.isStreaming) { @synchronized(self) { if (self.isStreaming) { - (void) startStreaming:(NSArray *)watchlistInstrumentData { if (!self.isStreaming) { @synchronized(self) { if (!self.isStreaming) { Is this double check uneccessary? Does the double check have similar problems in objective-c as in java? What are the alternatives to this pattern (anti-pattern). Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to avoid SQLiteException locking errors

    - by TheArchedOne
    I'm developing an android app. It has multiple threads reading from and writing to the android SQLite db. I am receiving the following error: SQLiteException: error code 5: database is locked I understand the SQLite locks the entire db on inserting/updating, but these errors only seems to happen when inserting/updating while I'm running a select query. The select query returns a cursor which is being left open quite a wile (a few seconds some times) while I iterate over it. If the select query is not running, I never get the locks. I'm surprised that the select could be locking the db.... is this possible, or is something else going on? What's the best way to avoid such locks? Thanks TAO

    Read the article

  • optimistic locking batch update

    - by Priit
    How to use optimistic locking with batch updates? I am using SimpleJdbcTemplate and for single row I can build update sql that increments version column value and includes version in WHERE clause. Unfortunately te result int[] updated = simpleJdbcTemplate.batchUpdate does not contain rowcounts when using oracle driver. All elements are -2 indicating unknown rowcount. Is there some other, more performant way of doing this than executing all updates individually? These batches contain an average of 5 items (only) but may be up to 250.

    Read the article

  • Guidelines of when to use locking

    - by miguel
    I would like to know if there are any guidelineswhich a developer should follow as to when (and where) to place locks. For instance: I understand that code such as this should be locked, to avoid the possibility of another thread changing the value of SomeHeapValue unexpectedly. class Foo { public SomeHeapObject myObject; public void DoSummat(object inputValue_) { myObject.SomeHeapValue = inputValue_; } } My question is, however, how deep does one go with the locking? For instance, if we have this code: class Foo { public SomeHeapObject myObject; public void DoSummat(object inputValue_) { myObject.SomeHeapValue = GetSomeHeapValue(); } } Should we lock in the DoSummat(...) method, or should we lock in the GetSomeHeapValue() method? Are there any guidelines that you all keep in mind when strcturing multi-threaded code?

    Read the article

  • Thread locking issue with FileHelpers between calling engine.ReadNext() method and readign engine.Li

    - by Rad
    I use producer/consumer pattern with FileHelpers library to import data from one file (which can be huge) using multiple threads. Each thread is supposed to import a chunk of that file and I would like to use LineNumber property of the FileHelperAsyncEngine instance that is reading the file as primary key for imported rows. FileHelperAsyncEngine internally has an IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator(); which is iterated over using engine.ReadNext() method. That internally sets LineNumber property (which seems is not thread safe). Consumers will have Producers assiciated with them that will supply DataTables to Consumers which will consume them via SqlBulkLoad class which will use IDataReader implementation which will iterate over a collection of DataTables which are internal to a Consumer instance. Each instance of will have one SqlBulkCopy instance associate with it. I have thread locking issue. Below is how I create multiple Producer threads. I start each thread afterwords. Produce method on a producer instance will be called determining which chunk of input file will be processed. It seems that engine.LineNumber is not thread safe and I doesn't import a proper LineNumber in the database. It seems that by the time engine.LineNumber is read some other thread called engine.ReadNext() and changed engine.LineNumber property. I don't want to lock the loop that is supposed to process a chunk of input file because I loose parallelism. How to reorganize the code to solve this threading issue? Thanks Rad for (int i = 0; i < numberOfProducerThreads; i++) DataConsumer consumer = dataConsumers[i]; //create a new producer DataProducer producer = new DataProducer(); //consumer has already being created consumer.Subscribe(producer); FileHelperAsyncEngine orderDetailEngine = new FileHelperAsyncEngine(recordType); orderDetailEngine.Options.RecordCondition.Condition = RecordCondition.ExcludeIfBegins; orderDetailEngine.Options.RecordCondition.Selector = STR_ORDR; int skipLines = i * numberOfBufferTablesToProcess * DataBuffer.MaxBufferRowCount; Thread newThread = new Thread(() => { producer.Produce(consumer, inputFilePath, lineNumberFieldName, dict, orderDetailEngine, skipLines, numberOfBufferTablesToProcess); consumer.SetEndOfData(producer); }); producerThreads.Add(newThread); thread.Start();} public void Produce(DataConsumer consumer, string inputFilePath, string lineNumberFieldName, Dictionary<string, object> dict, FileHelperAsyncEngine engine, int skipLines, int numberOfBufferTablesToProcess) { lock (this) { engine.Options.IgnoreFirstLines = skipLines; engine.BeginReadFile(inputFilePath); } int rowCount = 1; DataTable buffer = consumer.BufferDataTable; while (engine.ReadNext() != null) { lock (this) { dict[lineNumberFieldName] = engine.LineNumber; buffer.Rows.Add(ObjectFieldsDataRowMapper.MapObjectFieldsToDataRow(engine.LastRecord, dict, buffer)); if (rowCount % DataBuffer.MaxBufferRowCount == 0) { consumer.AddBufferDataTable(buffer); buffer = consumer.BufferDataTable; } if (rowCount % (numberOfBufferTablesToProcess * DataBuffer.MaxBufferRowCount) == 0) { break; } rowCount++; } } if (buffer.Rows.Count > 0) { consumer.AddBufferDataTable(buffer); } engine.Close(); }

    Read the article

  • C# Working with Locking and Threads

    - by aherrick
    Work on this small test application to learn threading/locking. I have the following code, I would think that the line should only write to console once. However it doesn't seem to be working as expected. Any thoughts on why? What I'm trying to do is add this Lot object to a List, then if any other threads try and hit that list, it would block. Am i completely misusing lock here? class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { int threadCount = 10; //spin up x number of test threads Thread[] threads = new Thread[threadCount]; Work w = new Work(); for (int i = 0; i < threadCount; i++) { threads[i] = new Thread(new ThreadStart(w.DoWork)); } for (int i = 0; i < threadCount; i++) { threads[i].Start(); } // don't let the console close Console.ReadLine(); } } public class Work { List<Lot> lots = new List<Lot>(); private static readonly object thisLock = new object(); public void DoWork() { Lot lot = new Lot() { LotID = 1, LotNumber = "100" }; LockLot(lot); } private void LockLot(Lot lot) { // i would think that "Lot has been added" should only print once? lock (thisLock) { if(!lots.Contains(lot)) { lots.Add(lot); Console.WriteLine("Lot has been added"); } } } }

    Read the article

  • .NET Working with Locking and Threads

    - by aherrick
    Work on this small test application to learn threading/locking. I have the following code, I would think that the line should only write to console once. However it doesn't seem to be working as expected. Any thoughts on why? What I'm trying to do is add this Lot object to a List, then if any other threads try and hit that list, it would block. Am i completely misusing lock here? class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { int threadCount = 10; //spin up x number of test threads Thread[] threads = new Thread[threadCount]; Work w = new Work(); for (int i = 0; i < threadCount; i++) { threads[i] = new Thread(new ThreadStart(w.DoWork)); } for (int i = 0; i < threadCount; i++) { threads[i].Start(); } // don't let the console close Console.ReadLine(); } } public class Work { List<Lot> lots = new List<Lot>(); private static readonly object thisLock = new object(); public void DoWork() { Lot lot = new Lot() { LotID = 1, LotNumber = "100" }; LockLot(lot); } private void LockLot(Lot lot) { // i would think that "Lot has been added" should only print once? lock (thisLock) { if(!lots.Contains(lot)) { lots.Add(lot); Console.WriteLine("Lot has been added"); } } } }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >