Search Results

Search found 7391 results on 296 pages for 'record locking'.

Page 2/296 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • 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

  • SQL Query to update parent record with child record values

    - by Wells
    I need to create a Trigger that fires when a child record (Codes) is added, updated or deleted. The Trigger stuffs a string of comma separated Code values from all child records (Codes) into a single field in the parent record (Projects) of the added, updated or deleted child record. I am stuck on writing a correct query to retrieve the Code values from just those child records that are the children of a single parent record. -- Create the test tables CREATE TABLE projects ( ProjectId varchar(16) PRIMARY KEY, ProjectName varchar(100), Codestring nvarchar(100) ) GO CREATE TABLE prcodes ( CodeId varchar(16) PRIMARY KEY, Code varchar (4), ProjectId varchar(16) ) GO -- Add sample data to tables: Two projects records, one with 3 child records, the other with 2. INSERT INTO projects (ProjectId, ProjectName) SELECT '101','Smith' UNION ALL SELECT '102','Jones' GO INSERT INTO prcodes (CodeId, Code, ProjectId) SELECT 'A1','Blue', '101' UNION ALL SELECT 'A2','Pink', '101' UNION ALL SELECT 'A3','Gray', '101' UNION ALL SELECT 'A4','Blue', '102' UNION ALL SELECT 'A5','Gray', '102' GO I am stuck on how to create a correct Update query. Can you help fix this query? -- Partially working, but stuffs all values, not just values from chile (prcodes) records of parent (projects) UPDATE proj SET proj.Codestring = (SELECT STUFF((SELECT ',' + prc.Code FROM projects proj INNER JOIN prcodes prc ON proj.ProjectId = prc.ProjectId ORDER BY 1 ASC FOR XML PATH('')),1, 1, '')) The result I get for the Codestring field in Projects is: ProjectId ProjectName Codestring 101 Smith Blue,Blue,Gray,Gray,Pink ... But the result I need for the Codestring field in Projects is: ProjectId ProjectName Codestring 101 Smith Blue,Pink,Gray ... Here is my start on the Trigger. The Update query, above, will be added to this Trigger. Can you help me complete the Trigger creation query? CREATE TRIGGER Update_Codestring ON prcodes AFTER INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE AS WITH CTE AS ( select ProjectId from inserted union select ProjectId from deleted )

    Read the article

  • Perl XML SAX parser emulating XML::Simple record for record

    - by DVK
    Short Q summary: I am looking a fast XML parser (most likely a wrapper around some standard SAX parser) which will produce per-record data structure 100% identical to those produced by XML::Simple. Details: We have a large code infrastructure which depends on processing records one-by-one and expects the record to be a data structure in a format produced by XML::Simple since it always used XML::Simple since early Jurassic era. An example simple XML is: <root> <rec><f1>v1</f1><f2>v2</f2></rec> <rec><f1>v1b</f1><f2>v2b</f2></rec> <rec><f1>v1c</f1><f2>v2c</f2></rec> </root> And example rough code is: sub process_record { my ($obj, $record_hash) = @_; # do_stuff } my $records = XML::Simple->XMLin(@args)->{root}; foreach my $record (@$records) { $obj->process_record($record) }; As everyone knows XML::Simple is, well, simple. And more importantly, it is very slow and a memory hog - due to being a DOM parser and needing to build/store 100% of data in memory. So, it's not the best tool for parsing an XML file consisting of large amount of small records record-by-record. However, re-writing the entire code (which consist of large amount of "process_record"-like methods) to work with standard SAX parser seems like an big task not worth the resources, even at the cost of living with XML::Simple. What I'm looking for is an existing module which will probably be based on a SAX parser (or anything fast with small memory footprint) which can be used to produce $record hashrefs one by one based on the XML pictured above that can be passed to $obj->process_record($record) and be 100% identical to what XML::Simple's hashrefs would have been.

    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

  • Amazon SES domain verification TXT DNS record

    - by Skittles
    I currently am trying to get my domain verified on Amazon's SES and running int a problem that google searches are not helping me get any closer to solving. According to SES, I have to create a TXT record in my DNS for the domain I'm trying to verify. Amazon gives you the following (value changed for security purposes); TYPE: TXT NAME: _amazonses.somedomain.com VALUE: M2sXTycXkgZXXuMuWI8TczngaPIDDMToPefzGhZ3uYA= I have tried numerous entries in my registrar's DNS manager, but SES still fails to find what it's looking for. I am not a DNS guru, so, I have tried to construct the TXT record from very sparse examples, at best, to try to get this right. My present TXT record is this; "v=DKIM1 s=_domainkey d=_amazonses.somedomain.com p=M2sXTycXkgZXXuMuWI8TczngaPIDDMToPefzGhZ3uYA=" Am I doing something incorrect? Thanks

    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 do I check a reverse PTR record?

    - by Daisetsu
    I need to check a reverse PTR record to make sure that a script I have is sending emails which will actually received by my users and not incorrectly marked as spam. I understand that the ISP which owns the IP range has to set up the PTR record, but how do I check if it is already set up?

    Read the article

  • how do you add an A record for a root domain

    - by nbv4
    this seems really simple, but I can't figure it out. I'm using xname.org since it's free and I own a bunch of domains spread over a few different registrars. The setup I desire is very simple: one A record that points the bare domain name to my server, plus a wildcard CNAME record pointing all subdomains to the same server. So if the user goes to domain.com it will point them to 285.24.435.75, if they go to www.domain, blah.domain.com, or any other sub domain, they'll get sent to 285.24.435.75. All the examples I read on the internet about setting up A records all have the A record set to a subdomain such as www. WWW is deprecated so I want to have noting to do with it. Currently my xname.org zone looks like this: $TTL 86400 ; Default TTL domain.com. IN SOA ns0.xname.org. nbvfour.gmail.com. ( 2010052503 ; serial 10800 ; Refresh period 3600 ; Retry interval 604800 ; Expire time 10800 ; Negative caching TTL ) $ORIGIN domain.com. IN NS ns2.xname.org. IN NS ns0.xname.org. IN NS ns1.xname.org. @ IN A 65.49.73.148 * IN CNAME domain.com The '@' symbol is something that the godaddy domain interface uses to mean "this root domain', but that may have been specefic to that interface and has no meaning here. Before I had a 'www' entry in the A rcords and it worked in the sense that I could ping 'www.domain.com' and it returned a response, but pinging the root domain 'domain.com' returned "no host found".

    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

  • BizTalk 2009 - Scoped Record Counting in Maps

    - by StuartBrierley
    Within BizTalk there is a functoid called Record Count that will return the number of instances of a repeated record or repeated element that occur in a message instance. The input to this functoid is the record or element to be counted. As an example take the following Source schema, where the Source message has a repeated record called Box and each Box has a repeated element called Item: An instance of this Source schema may look as follows; 2 box records - one with 2 items and one with only 1 item. Our destination schema has a number of elements and a repeated box record.  The top level elements contain totals for the number of boxes and the overall number of items.  Each box record contains a single element representing the number of items in that box. Using the Record Count functoid it is easy to map the top level elements, producing the expected totals of 2 boxes and 3 items: We now need to map the total number of items per box, but how will we do this?  We have already seen that the record count functoid returns the total number of instances for the entire message, and unfortunately it does not allow you to specify a scoping parameter.  In order to acheive Scoped Record Counting we will need to make use of a combination of functoids. As you can see above, by linking to a Logical Existence functoid from the record/element to be counted we can then feed the output into a Value Mapping functoid.  Set the other Value Mapping parameter to "1" and link the output to a Cumulative Sum functoid. Set the other Cumulative Sum functoid parameter to "1" to limit the scope of the Cumulative Sum. This gives us the expected results of Items per Box of 2 and 1 respectively. I ran into this issue with a larger schema on a more complex map, but the eventual solution is still the same.  Hopefully this simplified example will act as a good reminder to me and save someone out there a few minutes of brain scratching.

    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

  • Python Locking Implementation (with threading module)

    - by Matty
    This is probably a rudimentary question, but I'm new to threaded programming in Python and am not entirely sure what the correct practice is. Should I be creating a single lock object (either globally or being passed around) and using that everywhere that I need to do locking? Or, should I be creating multiple lock instances in each of the classes where I will be employing them. Take these 2 rudimentary code samples, which direction is best to go? The main difference being that a single lock instance is used in both class A and B in the second, while multiple instances are used in the first. Sample 1 class A(): def __init__(self, theList): self.theList = theList self.lock = threading.Lock() def poll(self): while True: # do some stuff that eventually needs to work with theList self.lock.acquire() try: self.theList.append(something) finally: self.lock.release() class B(threading.Thread): def __init__(self,theList): self.theList = theList self.lock = threading.Lock() self.start() def run(self): while True: # do some stuff that eventually needs to work with theList self.lock.acquire() try: self.theList.remove(something) finally: self.lock.release() if __name__ == "__main__": aList = [] for x in range(10): B(aList) A(aList).poll() Sample 2 class A(): def __init__(self, theList,lock): self.theList = theList self.lock = lock def poll(self): while True: # do some stuff that eventually needs to work with theList self.lock.acquire() try: self.theList.append(something) finally: self.lock.release() class B(threading.Thread): def __init__(self,theList,lock): self.theList = theList self.lock = lock self.start() def run(self): while True: # do some stuff that eventually needs to work with theList self.lock.acquire() try: self.theList.remove(something) finally: self.lock.release() if __name__ == "__main__": lock = threading.Lock() aList = [] for x in range(10): B(aList,lock) A(aList,lock).poll()

    Read the article

  • CNAME records query

    - by user223346
    I have a control panel with Enta which lets me mess with my DNS settings. So i have added a CNAME record to point to an IP address. Assume my website is called: www.example.com I have added a CNAME like this: subdomain.example.com -> This works fine. But now i wish to add another CNAME for the following to point to the same IP: www.subdomain.example.com This is proving to be not possible as it says i cant add "." in the name when i try to create the record? Any help?

    Read the article

  • How do you record how much memory an app is using on OS X

    - by Ace Legend
    I'm on a Mac Mini with OS X 10.8.2. I am an app developer, but in this case am building an app in C++, so I can not use Xcode for this question. I would like to track how much memory my app is using, but I don't want to manually record it. How do I do this. MORE INFO: I want to record it all day long. I will have the app running all day, so that I can compare peaks in memory. I am not opposed to 3rd party apps, as long as they are reliable. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Utility that helps in file locking - expert tips wanted

    - by maix
    I've written a subclass of file that a) provides methods to conveniently lock it (using fcntl, so it only supports unix, which is however OK for me atm) and b) when reading or writing asserts that the file is appropriately locked. Now I'm not an expert at such stuff (I've just read one paper [de] about it) and would appreciate some feedback: Is it secure, are there race conditions, are there other things that could be done better … Here is the code: from fcntl import flock, LOCK_EX, LOCK_SH, LOCK_UN, LOCK_NB class LockedFile(file): """ A wrapper around `file` providing locking. Requires a shared lock to read and a exclusive lock to write. Main differences: * Additional methods: lock_ex, lock_sh, unlock * Refuse to read when not locked, refuse to write when not locked exclusivly. * mode cannot be `w` since then the file would be truncated before it could be locked. You have to lock the file yourself, it won't be done for you implicitly. Only you know what lock you need. Example usage:: def get_config(): f = LockedFile(CONFIG_FILENAME, 'r') f.lock_sh() config = parse_ini(f.read()) f.close() def set_config(key, value): f = LockedFile(CONFIG_FILENAME, 'r+') f.lock_ex() config = parse_ini(f.read()) config[key] = value f.truncate() f.write(make_ini(config)) f.close() """ def __init__(self, name, mode='r', *args, **kwargs): if 'w' in mode: raise ValueError('Cannot open file in `w` mode') super(LockedFile, self).__init__(name, mode, *args, **kwargs) self.locked = None def lock_sh(self, **kwargs): """ Acquire a shared lock on the file. If the file is already locked exclusively, do nothing. :returns: Lock status from before the call (one of 'sh', 'ex', None). :param nonblocking: Don't wait for the lock to be available. """ if self.locked == 'ex': return # would implicitly remove the exclusive lock return self._lock(LOCK_SH, **kwargs) def lock_ex(self, **kwargs): """ Acquire an exclusive lock on the file. :returns: Lock status from before the call (one of 'sh', 'ex', None). :param nonblocking: Don't wait for the lock to be available. """ return self._lock(LOCK_EX, **kwargs) def unlock(self): """ Release all locks on the file. Flushes if there was an exclusive lock. :returns: Lock status from before the call (one of 'sh', 'ex', None). """ if self.locked == 'ex': self.flush() return self._lock(LOCK_UN) def _lock(self, mode, nonblocking=False): flock(self, mode | bool(nonblocking) * LOCK_NB) before = self.locked self.locked = {LOCK_SH: 'sh', LOCK_EX: 'ex', LOCK_UN: None}[mode] return before def _assert_read_lock(self): assert self.locked, "File is not locked" def _assert_write_lock(self): assert self.locked == 'ex', "File is not locked exclusively" def read(self, *args): self._assert_read_lock() return super(LockedFile, self).read(*args) def readline(self, *args): self._assert_read_lock() return super(LockedFile, self).readline(*args) def readlines(self, *args): self._assert_read_lock() return super(LockedFile, self).readlines(*args) def xreadlines(self, *args): self._assert_read_lock() return super(LockedFile, self).xreadlines(*args) def __iter__(self): self._assert_read_lock() return super(LockedFile, self).__iter__() def next(self): self._assert_read_lock() return super(LockedFile, self).next() def write(self, *args): self._assert_write_lock() return super(LockedFile, self).write(*args) def writelines(self, *args): self._assert_write_lock() return super(LockedFile, self).writelines(*args) def flush(self): self._assert_write_lock() return super(LockedFile, self).flush() def truncate(self, *args): self._assert_write_lock() return super(LockedFile, self).truncate(*args) def close(self): self.unlock() return super(LockedFile, self).close() (the example in the docstring is also my current use case for this) Thanks for having read until down here, and possibly even answering :)

    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

  • SQLite file locking and DropBox

    - by Alex Jenter
    I'm developing an app in Visual C++ that uses an SQLite3 DB for storing data. Usually it sits in the tray most of the time. I also would like to enable putting my app in a DropBox folder to share it across several PCs. It worked really well up until DropBox has recently updated itself. And now it says that it "can't sync the file in use". The SQLite file is open in my app, but the lock is shared. There are some prepared statements, but all are reset immediately after using step. Is there any way to enable synchronizing of an open SQLite database file? Thanks! Here is the simple wrapper that I use just for testing (no error handling), in case this helps: class Statement { private: Statement(sqlite3* db, const std::wstring& sql) : db(db) { sqlite3_prepare16_v2(db, sql.c_str(), sql.length() * sizeof(wchar_t), &stmt, NULL); } public: ~Statement() { sqlite3_finalize(stmt); } public: void reset() { sqlite3_reset(stmt); } int step() { return sqlite3_step(stmt); } int getInt(int i) const { return sqlite3_column_int(stmt, i); } tstring getText(int i) const { const wchar_t* v = (const wchar_t*)sqlite3_column_text16(stmt, i); int sz = sqlite3_column_bytes16(stmt, i) / sizeof(wchar_t); return std::wstring(v, v + sz); } private: friend class Database; sqlite3* db; sqlite3_stmt* stmt; }; class Database { public: Database(const std::wstring& filename = L"")) : db(NULL) { sqlite3_open16(filename.c_str(), &db); } ~Database() { sqlite3_close(db); } void exec(const std::wstring& sql) { auto_ptr<Statement> st(prepare(sql)); st->step(); } auto_ptr<Statement> prepare(const tstring& sql) const { return auto_ptr<Statement>(new Statement(db, sql)); } private: sqlite3* db; };

    Read the article

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