Search Results

Search found 1638 results on 66 pages for 'multithreading'.

Page 28/66 | < Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >

  • Does operator new allocate on THREAD heap?

    - by Jonas Byström
    My problem seems to be this: heap data allocated by one thread (that later dies) seems to die as well. As so: Thread X: starts Thread Y: starts Thread X: ptr = new some bytes Thread X: dies Thread Y: tries to use ptr - and crashes! So far, I've only seen this problem on Darwin (Mac OS 10.5 and 10.6), but haven't tried more other platforms than Windows and Linux (Ubuntu) where it works as expected. I've had this problem for some time, so any know-how or more information about this is highly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • How to interrupt a thread performing a blocking socket connect?

    - by Jason R
    I have some code that spawns a pthread that attempts to maintain a socket connection to a remote host. If the connection is ever lost, it attempts to reconnect using a blocking connect() call on its socket. Since the code runs in a separate thread, I don't really care about the fact that it uses the synchronous socket API. That is, until it comes time for my application to exit. I would like to perform some semblance of an orderly shutdown, so I use thread synchronization primitives to wake up the thread and signal for it to exit, then perform a pthread_join() on the thread to wait for it to complete. This works great, unless the thread is in the middle of a connect() call when I command the shutdown. In that case, I have to wait for the connect to time out, which could be a long time. This makes the application appear to take a long time to shut down. What I would like to do is to interrupt the call to connect() in some way. After the call returns, the thread will notice my exit signal and shut down cleanly. Since connect() is a system call, I thought that I might be able to intentionally interrupt it using a signal (thus making the call return EINTR), but I'm not sure if this is a robust method in a POSIX threads environment. Does anyone have any recommendations on how to do this, either using signals or via some other method? As a note, the connect() call is down in some library code that I cannot modify, so changing to a non-blocking socket is not an option.

    Read the article

  • non blocking client server chat application in java using nio

    - by Amith
    I built a simple chat application using nio channels. I am very much new to networking as well as threads. This application is for communicating with server (Server / Client chat application). My problem is that multiple clients are not supported by the server. How do I solve this problem? What's the bug in my code? public class Clientcore extends Thread { SelectionKey selkey=null; Selector sckt_manager=null; public void coreClient() { System.out.println("please enter the text"); BufferedReader stdin=new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in)); SocketChannel sc = null; try { sc = SocketChannel.open(); sc.configureBlocking(false); sc.connect(new InetSocketAddress(8888)); int i=0; while (!sc.finishConnect()) { } for(int ii=0;ii>-22;ii++) { System.out.println("Enter the text"); String HELLO_REQUEST =stdin.readLine().toString(); if(HELLO_REQUEST.equalsIgnoreCase("end")) { break; } System.out.println("Sending a request to HelloServer"); ByteBuffer buffer = ByteBuffer.wrap(HELLO_REQUEST.getBytes()); sc.write(buffer); } } catch (IOException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } finally { if (sc != null) { try { sc.close(); } catch (Exception e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } } } public void run() { try { coreClient(); } catch(Exception ej) { ej.printStackTrace(); }}} public class ServerCore extends Thread { SelectionKey selkey=null; Selector sckt_manager=null; public void run() { try { coreServer(); } catch(Exception ej) { ej.printStackTrace(); } } private void coreServer() { try { ServerSocketChannel ssc = ServerSocketChannel.open(); try { ssc.socket().bind(new InetSocketAddress(8888)); while (true) { sckt_manager=SelectorProvider.provider().openSelector(); ssc.configureBlocking(false); SocketChannel sc = ssc.accept(); register_server(ssc,SelectionKey.OP_ACCEPT); if (sc == null) { } else { System.out.println("Received an incoming connection from " + sc.socket().getRemoteSocketAddress()); printRequest(sc); System.err.println("testing 1"); String HELLO_REPLY = "Sample Display"; ByteBuffer buffer = ByteBuffer.wrap(HELLO_REPLY.getBytes()); System.err.println("testing 2"); sc.write(buffer); System.err.println("testing 3"); sc.close(); }}} catch (IOException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } finally { if (ssc != null) { try { ssc.close(); } catch (IOException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } } } catch(Exception E) { System.out.println("Ex in servCORE "+E); } } private static void printRequest(SocketChannel sc) throws IOException { ReadableByteChannel rbc = Channels.newChannel(sc.socket().getInputStream()); WritableByteChannel wbc = Channels.newChannel(System.out); ByteBuffer b = ByteBuffer.allocate(1024); // read 1024 bytes while (rbc.read(b) != -1) { b.flip(); while (b.hasRemaining()) { wbc.write(b); System.out.println(); } b.clear(); } } public void register_server(ServerSocketChannel ssc,int selectionkey_ops)throws Exception { ssc.register(sckt_manager,selectionkey_ops); }} public class HelloClient { public void coreClientChat() { Clientcore t=new Clientcore(); new Thread(t).start(); } public static void main(String[] args)throws Exception { HelloClient cl= new HelloClient(); cl.coreClientChat(); }} public class HelloServer { public void coreServerChat() { ServerCore t=new ServerCore(); new Thread(t).start(); } public static void main(String[] args) { HelloServer st= new HelloServer(); st.coreServerChat(); }}

    Read the article

  • SwingWorker in Java (beginner question)

    - by Malachi
    I am relatively new to multi-threading and want to execute a background task using a Swingworker thread - the method that is called does not actually return anything but I would like to be notified when it has completed. The code I have so far doesn't appear to be working: private void crawl(ActionEvent evt) { try { SwingWorker<Void, Void> crawler = new SwingWorker<Void, Void>() { @Override protected Void doInBackground() throws Exception { Discoverer discover = new Discoverer(); discover.crawl(); return null; } @Override protected void done() { JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(jfThis, "Finished Crawling", "Success", JOptionPane.INFORMATION_MESSAGE); } }; crawler.execute(); } catch (Exception ex) { JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(this, ex.getMessage(), "Exception", JOptionPane.ERROR_MESSAGE); } } Any feedback/advice would be greatly appreciated as multi-threading is a big area of programming that I am weak in.

    Read the article

  • Kill a Perl system call after a timeout

    - by Fergal
    I've got a Perl script I'm using for running a file processing tool which is started using backticks. The problem is that occasionally the tool hangs and It needs to be killed in order for the rest of the files to be processed. Whats the best way best way to apply a timeout after which the parent script will kill the hung process? At the moment I'm using: foreach $file (@FILES) { $runResult = `mytool $file >> $file.log`; } But when mytool hangs after n seconds I'd like to be able to kill it and continue to the next file.

    Read the article

  • Understanding Java Wait and Notify methods

    - by Maddy
    Hello all: I have a following program: import java.util.concurrent.ExecutorService; import java.util.concurrent.Executors; public class SimpleWaitNotify implements Runnable { final static Object obj = new Object(); static boolean value = true; public synchronized void flag() { System.out.println("Before Wait"); try { obj.wait(); } catch (InterruptedException e) { System.out.println("Thread interrupted"); } System.out.println("After Being Notified"); } public synchronized void unflag() { System.out.println("Before Notify All"); obj.notifyAll(); System.out.println("After Notify All Method Call"); } public void run() { if (value) { flag(); } else { unflag(); } } public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException { ExecutorService pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(4); SimpleWaitNotify sWait = new SimpleWaitNotify(); pool.execute(sWait); SimpleWaitNotify.value = false; SimpleWaitNotify sNotify = new SimpleWaitNotify(); pool.execute(sNotify); pool.shutdown(); } } When I wait on obj, I get the following exception Exception in thread "pool-1-thread-1" java.lang.IllegalMonitorStateException: current thread not owner for each of the two threads. But if I use SimpleWaitNotify's monitor then the program execution is suspended. In other words, I think it suspends current execution thread and in turn the executor. Any help towards understanding what's going on would be duly appreciated. This is an area1 where the theory and javadoc seem straightforward, and since there aren't many examples, conceptually left a big gap in me.

    Read the article

  • Async Socket Listener on separate thread - VB.net

    - by TheHockeyGeek
    I am trying to use the code from Microsoft for an Async Socket connection. It appears the listener runs in the main thread locking the GUI. I am new at both socket connections and multi-threading all at the same time. Having a hard time getting my mind wrapped around this all at once. The code used is at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/fx6588te.aspx Using this example, how can I move the listener to its own thread? Public Shared Sub Main() ' Data buffer for incoming data. Dim bytes() As Byte = New [Byte](1023) {} ' Establish the local endpoint for the socket. Dim ipHostInfo As IPHostEntry = Dns.GetHostEntry(Dns.GetHostName()) Dim ipAddress As IPAddress = ipHostInfo.AddressList(1) Dim localEndPoint As New IPEndPoint(ipAddress, 11000) ' Create a TCP/IP socket. Dim listener As New Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork, SocketType.Stream, ProtocolType.Tcp) ' Bind the socket to the local endpoint and listen for incoming connections. listener.Bind(localEndPoint) listener.Listen(100)

    Read the article

  • Java multi-threading - what is the best way to monitor the activity of a number of threads?

    - by MalcomTucker
    I have a number of threads that are performing a long runing task. These threads themselves have child threads that do further subdivisions of work. What is the best way for me to track the following: How many total threads my process has created What the state of each thread currently is What part of my process each thread has currently got to I want to do it in as efficient a way as possible and once threads finish, I don't want any references to them hanging around becasuse I need to be freeing up memory as early as possible. Any advice?

    Read the article

  • Impossible to be const-correct when combining data and it's lock?

    - by Graeme
    I've been looking at ways to combine a piece of data which will be accessed by multiple threads alongside the lock provisioned for thread-safety. I think I've got to a point where I don't think its possible to do this whilst maintaining const-correctness. Take the following class for example: template <typename TType, typename TMutex> class basic_lockable_type { public: typedef TMutex lock_type; public: template <typename... TArgs> explicit basic_lockable_type(TArgs&&... args) : TType(std::forward<TArgs...>(args)...) {} TType& data() { return data_; } const TType& data() const { return data_; } void lock() { mutex_.lock(); } void unlock() { mutex_.unlock(); } private: TType data_; mutable TMutex mutex_; }; typedef basic_lockable_type<std::vector<int>, std::mutex> vector_with_lock; In this I try to combine the data and lock, marking mutex_ as mutable. Unfortunately this isn't enough as I see it because when used, vector_with_lock would have to be marked as mutable in order for a read operation to be performed from a const function which isn't entirely correct (data_ should be mutable from a const). void print_values() const { std::lock_guard<vector_with_lock>(values_); for(const int val : values_) { std::cout << val << std::endl; } } vector_with_lock values_; Can anyone see anyway around this such that const-correctness is maintained whilst combining data and lock? Also, have I made any incorrect assumptions here?

    Read the article

  • Update C# Chart using BackgroundWorker

    - by Mark
    I am currently trying to update a chart which is on my form to the background worker using: bwCharter.RunWorkerAsync(chart1); Which runs: private void bcCharter_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e) { System.Windows.Forms.DataVisualization.Charting.Chart chart = null; // Convert e.Argument to chart //.. // Converted.. chart.Series.Clear(); e.Result=chart; setChart(c.chart); } private void setChart(System.Windows.Forms.DataVisualization.Charting.Chart arg) { if (chart1.InvokeRequired) { chart1.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate { setChart(arg); })); return; } chart1 = arg; } However, at the point of clearing the series, an exception is thrown. Basically, I want to do a whole lot more processing after clearing the series, which slows the GUI down completely - so wanted this in another thread. I thought that by passing it as an argument, I should be safe, but apparently not! Interestingly, the chart is on a tab page. I can run this over and over if the tabpage is in the background, but if I run this, look at the chart, hide it again, and re-run, it throws the exception. Obviously, it throws if the chart is in the foreground as well. Can anyone suggest what I can do differently? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • {DCC Warning} W1036 Variable '$frame' might not have been initialized?

    - by Gad D Lord
    Any ideas why I get this warning in Delphi XE: [DCC Warning] Form1.pas(250): W1036 Variable '$frame' might not have been initialized procedure TForm1.Action1Execute(Sender: TObject); var Thread: TThread; begin ... Thread := TThread.CreateAnonymousThread( procedure{Anonymos}() procedure ShowLoading(const Show: Boolean); begin /// <------------- WARNING IS GIVEN FOR THIS LINE (line number 250) Thread.Synchronize(Thread, procedure{Anonymous}() begin ... Button1.Enabled := not Show; ... end ); end; var i: Integer; begin ShowLoading(true); try Thread.Synchronize(Thread, procedure{Anonymous}() begin ... // some UI updates end Thread.Synchronize(Thread, procedure{Anonymous}() begin ... // some UI updates end ); finally ShowLoading(false); end; end ).NameThread('Some Thread Name'); Thread.Start; end; I do not have anywhere in my code a variable names frame nor $frame. I am even not sure how $frame with $ sign can be a valid identifier. Smells like compiler magic to me. PS: Of course the real life xosw is having other than Form1, Button1, Action1 names.

    Read the article

  • Thread pool in scala

    - by ghedas
    I have a project that is actor-based and for one part of it I must use some actors that receive message after that one actor assigns to each request separately and each actor is responsible for doing its message request, so I need something like a thread pool for actors of my project, are there any features in Scala that is useful for my necessity? how can I achieve this goal? tanks a lot for your attention!

    Read the article

  • Monitor.Wait, Pulse - When worker thread should conditionally behave as an actual worker thread

    - by Griever
    My particular scenario: - Main thread starts a worker thread. - Main thread needs to block itself until either worker thread is completed (yeah funny) or worker thread itself informs main thread to go on Alright, so what I did in main thread: wokerThread.Start(lockObj); lock(lockObj) Monitor.Wait(lockObj); Somewhere in worker thread: if(mainThreadShouldGoOn) lock(lockObj) Monitor.Pulse(lockObj); Also, at the end of worker thread: lock(lockObj) Monitor.Pulse(lockObj); So far, it's working perfect. But is it a good solution? Is there a better one?

    Read the article

  • Thread safe lazy contruction of a singleton in C++

    - by pauldoo
    Is there a way to implement a singleton object in C++ that is: Lazily constructed in a thread safe manner (two threads might simultaneously be the first user of the singleton - it should still only be constructed once). Doesn't rely on static variables being constructed beforehand (so the singleton object is itself safe to use during the construction of static variables). (I don't know my C++ well enough, but is it the case that integral and constant static variables are initialized before any code is executed (ie, even before static constructors are executed - their values may already be "initialized" in the program image)? If so - perhaps this can be exploited to implement a singleton mutex - which can in turn be used to guard the creation of the real singleton..) Excellent, it seems that I have a couple of good answers now (shame I can't mark 2 or 3 as being the answer). There appears to be two broad solutions: Use static initialisation (as opposed to dynamic initialisation) of a POD static varible, and implementing my own mutex with that using the builtin atomic instructions. This was the type of solution I was hinting at in my question, and I believe I knew already. Use some other library function like pthread_once or boost::call_once. These I certainly didn't know about - and am very grateful for the answers posted.

    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

  • Unhandled exceptions in BackgroundWorker

    - by edg
    My WinForms app uses a number of BackgroundWorker objects to retrieve information from a database. I'm using BackgroundWorker because it allows the UI to remain unblocked during long-running database queries and it simplifies the threading model for me. I'm getting occasional DatabaseExceptions in some of these background threads, and I have witnessed at least one of these exceptions in a worker thread while debugging. I'm fairly confident these exceptions are timeouts which I suppose its reasonable to expect from time to time. My question is about what happens when an unhandled exception occurs in one of these background worker threads. I don't think I can catch an exception in another thread, but can I expect my WorkerCompleted method to be executed? Is there any property or method of the BackgroundWorker I can interrogate for exceptions?

    Read the article

  • can i know the Thread runnable class attributes in java?

    - by dori naji
    probability this question have been asked before but i cant find anything in my searching mechanism. I am trying to create a multiple threads, in an array list but i want to retrieve them from an arraylist and filter them by the attribute of w1 i used in my code. any ideas ? w1 = new FirstWorker(ProductsList, OrdersList, s); FirstWorkerThread = new Thread(w1); ThreadArrayList.add(FirstWorkerThread); //I know i cant do the code below but i want to do that how ? for(Thread x : ThreadArrayList){ x.ProductsList } this is FirstWorker class import java.lang.String; import java.util.HashMap; /* * To change this template, choose Tools | Templates and open the template in * the editor. */ /** * * @author Dimitris */ public class FirstWorker extends Thread implements Runnable { private OrderList orderlist; private ProductList productlist; private String Worker; boolean Stop; private int speed = 1000; public FirstWorker(ProductList productlist, OrderList orderlist, String Worker) { this.productlist = productlist; this.orderlist = orderlist; this.Worker = Worker; this.Stop = true; } public void run() { if (Stop == true) { try { Thread.sleep(100); } catch (InterruptedException e) { } while (orderlist.returnLengthofOrder() != 0) { if (Thread.interrupted()) { System.out.println("I am in the thread inturrupt"); // We've been interrupted: no more crunching. return; } if (orderlist.getDone() == true) { } else if (orderlist.getDone() == false) { orderlist.setDoneTrue(); orderlist.Purchased(Worker); orderlist.setDoneFalse(); try { Thread.sleep(this.speed); } catch (InterruptedException e) { return; } } } } } public void setWork() { Stop = false; } public void setSpeed(int speed) { this.speed = speed; } }

    Read the article

  • How can I make these images download on a separate thread?

    - by Andy Barlow
    I have the following code running on my Android device. It works great and displays my list items wonderfully. It's also clever in the fact it only downloads the data when it's needed by the ArrayAdapter. However, whilst the download of the thumbnail is occurring, the entire list stalls and you cannot scroll until it's finished downloading. Is there any way of threading this so it'll still scroll happily, maybe show a place holder for the downloading image, finish the download, and then show? Any help with this would be really appreciated. private class CatalogAdapter extends ArrayAdapter<SingleQueueResult> { private ArrayList<SingleQueueResult> items; //Must research what this actually does! public CatalogAdapter(Context context, int textViewResourceId, ArrayList<SingleQueueResult> items) { super(context, textViewResourceId, items); this.items = items; } /** This overrides the getview of the ArrayAdapter. It should send back our new custom rows for the list */ @Override public View getView(int position, View convertView, ViewGroup parent) { View v = convertView; if (v == null) { LayoutInflater vi = (LayoutInflater)getSystemService(Context.LAYOUT_INFLATER_SERVICE); v = vi.inflate(R.layout.mylists_rows, null); } final SingleQueueResult result = items.get(position); // Sets the text inside the rows as they are scrolled by! if (result != null) { TextView title = (TextView)v.findViewById(R.id.mylist_title); TextView format = (TextView)v.findViewById(R.id.mylist_format); title.setText(result.getTitle()); format.setText(result.getThumbnail()); // Download Images ImageView myImageView = (ImageView)v.findViewById(R.id.mylist_thumbnail); downloadImage(result.getThumbnail(), myImageView); } return v; } } // This should run in a seperate thread public void downloadImage(String imageUrl, ImageView myImageView) { try { url = new URL(imageUrl); URLConnection conn = url.openConnection(); conn.connect(); InputStream is = conn.getInputStream(); BufferedInputStream bis = new BufferedInputStream(is); Bitmap bm = BitmapFactory.decodeStream(bis); bis.close(); is.close(); myImageView.setImageBitmap(bm); } catch (IOException e) { /* Reset to Default image on any error. */ //this.myImageView.setImageDrawable(getResources().getDrawable(R.drawable.default)); } }

    Read the article

  • Pause and resume thread drawing to SurfaceView

    - by fhucho
    I am developing a chess game for Android (http://androidchess.appspot.com), using SurfaceView for the chessboard. I have a drawing Thread, that draws the chessboard in a loop. The problem is that when there are no active animations (this is more that 90% of time), it makes no sense to waste CPU and battery for drawing. How should I solve this? Maybe somehow pausing and resuming the drawing Thread?

    Read the article

  • Wait on multiple condition variables on Linux without unnecessary sleeps?

    - by Joseph Garvin
    I'm writing a latency sensitive app that in effect wants to wait on multiple condition variables at once. I've read before of several ways to get this functionality on Linux (apparently this is builtin on Windows), but none of them seem suitable for my app. The methods I know of are: Have one thread wait on each of the condition variables you want to wait on, which when woken will signal a single condition variable which you wait on instead. Cycling through multiple condition variables with a timed wait. Writing dummy bytes to files or pipes instead, and polling on those. #1 & #2 are unsuitable because they cause unnecessary sleeping. With #1, you have to wait for the dummy thread to wake up, then signal the real thread, then for the real thread to wake up, instead of the real thread just waking up to begin with -- the extra scheduler quantum spent on this actually matters for my app, and I'd prefer not to have to use a full fledged RTOS. #2 is even worse, you potentially spend N * timeout time asleep, or your timeout will be 0 in which case you never sleep (endlessly burning CPU and starving other threads is also bad). For #3, pipes are problematic because if the thread being 'signaled' is busy or even crashes (I'm in fact dealing with separate process rather than threads -- the mutexes and conditions would be stored in shared memory), then the writing thread will be stuck because the pipe's buffer will be full, as will any other clients. Files are problematic because you'd be growing it endlessly the longer the app ran. Is there a better way to do this? Curious for answers appropriate for Solaris as well.

    Read the article

  • Thread Proc for an instancable class?

    - by user146780
    Basically I have a class and it is instincable (not static). Basically I want the class to be able to generate its own threads and manage its own stuff. I don't want to make a global callback for each instance I make, this doesnt seem clean and proper to me. What is the proper way of doing what I want. If I try to pass the threadproc to CreateThread and it is the proc from a class instance the compiler says I cannot do this. What is the best way of achieving what I want? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to re-use a thread in Java ?

    - by David
    I am a building a console Sudoku Solver where the main objective is raw speed. I now have a ManagerThread that starts WorkerThreads to compute the neibhbors of each cell. So one WorkerThread is started for each cell right now. How can I re-use an existing thread that has completed its work? The Thread Pool Pattern seems to be the solution, but I don't understand what to do to prevent the thread from dying once its job has been completed. ps : I do not expect to gain much performance for this particular task, just want to experiment how multi-threading works before applying it to the more complex parts of the code. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why slim reader/writer exclusive lock outperformance the shared one?

    - by Jichao
    I have tested the performance of slim reader/writer lock under windows 7 using the codefrom Windows Via C/C++. The result surprised me that the exclusive lock out performance the shared one. Here are the code and the result. unsigned int __stdcall slim_reader_writer_exclusive(void *arg) { //SRWLOCK srwLock; //InitializeSRWLock(&srwLock); for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; ++i) { AcquireSRWLockExclusive(&srwLock); g_value = 0; ReleaseSRWLockExclusive(&srwLock); } _endthreadex(0); return 0; } unsigned int __stdcall slim_reader_writer_shared(void *arg) { int b; for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; ++i) { AcquireSRWLockShared(&srwLock); //b = g_value; g_value = 0; ReleaseSRWLockShared(&srwLock); } _endthreadex(0); return 0; } g_value is a global int volatile variable. Could you kindly explain why this could happen?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >