Search Results

Search found 3641 results on 146 pages for 'threads'.

Page 28/146 | < Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >

  • two threads acting on the same runnable

    - by Eslam
    Given: public class Thread1 { int x = 0; public class Runner implements Runnable { public void run() { int current = 0; for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) { current = x; System.out.print(current + " "); x = current + 2; } } } public void go() { Runnable r1 = new Runner(); new Thread(r1).start(); new Thread(r1).start(); } public static void main(String[] args) { new Thread1().go(); } } Which two are possible results? (Choose two) A. 0, 2, 4, 4, 6, 8, 10, 6, B. 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 2, 4, C. 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, D. 0, 0, 2, 2, 4, 4, 6, 6, 8, 8, 10, 10, 12, 12, 14, 14, E. 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, i chosed A,B but i'm not certain is those is the true or not.

    Read the article

  • Castle ActiveRecord: session error search and access to lazy loading property in different threads

    - by sc911
    Hi *, I've got a problem with an multi-threaded desktop application using Castle ActiveRecord in C#: To keep the GUI alive while searching for the objects based on userinput I'm using the BackgroundWorker for the search-function. Some of the properties of the objects, especially some HasMany-Relations, are marked as Lazy. Now, when the search is finished and the user selects an resulting object, some of the properties of this object should be displayed. But as the search was done by the BackgroundWorker in a different thread, accessing the properties fails as the session for the lazy-access is no longer available. What will be the best way to do the search in an extra thread to keep the GUI alive and to access all properties correctly including those marked as lazy? Thanks for any advise! Regards sc911

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET Exception Handling in background threads

    - by Xodarap
    When I do ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem, I don't want unhandled exceptions to kill my entire process. So I do something like: ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(delegate() { try { FunctionIActuallyWantToCall(); } catch { HandleException(); } }); Is this the recommended pattern? It seems like there should be a simpler way to do this. It's in an asp.net-mvc app, if that's relevant.

    Read the article

  • Setting current culture with threads in ASP.NET MVC

    - by mare
    Here's an example of SetCulture attribute which inside does something like this: public void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { string cultureCode = SetCurrentLanguage(filterContext); if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(cultureCode)) return; HttpContext.Current.Response.Cookies.Add( new HttpCookie("Culture", cultureCode) { HttpOnly = true, Expires = DateTime.Now.AddYears(100) } ); filterContext.HttpContext.Session["Culture"] = cultureCode; CultureInfo culture = new CultureInfo(cultureCode); System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture = culture; System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentUICulture = culture; } I was wondering how does this affect a site with multiple users logged on and each one setting their own culture? What is the scope of a thread here with regards to the IIS worker process (w3wp) that the site is running in?

    Read the article

  • CollectionChanged notification across threads?

    - by Mark
    I'm writing a download manager using C#/WPF, and I just encountered this error: This type of CollectionView does not support changes to its SourceCollection from a thread different from the Dispatcher thread. The basic flow of my program is that a few web pages/downloads are enqueued at the start, and then they're downloaded asynchronously. When an HTML page has completed downloading, I parse it and look for more stuff to download, then enqueue it directly from within the worker thread. I get that error when trying to send out the CollectionChanged event on my customized queue class. However, I need to fire that event so that the GUI can get updated. What are my options?

    Read the article

  • Pointers to threads

    - by viswanathan
    Suppose i have pointer to a thread like this CWinThread *m_pThread = AfxBeginThread(StartThread, this, THREAD_PRIORITY_NORMAL, 0, 0); Now in my StartThread function assume i did all operations and the function returned like this UINT CClassThread::StartThread(LPVOID pVoid) { return true; } Will my m_pThread be invalid when the return statement is executed?

    Read the article

  • call multiple c++ functions in python using threads

    - by wiso
    Suppose I have a C(++) function taking an integer, and it is bound to (C)python with python api, so I can call it from python: import c_module c_module.f(10) now, I want to parallelize it. The problem is: how does the GIL work in this case? Suppose I have a queue of numbers to be processed, and some workers (threading.Thread) working in parallel, each of them calling c_module.f(number) where number is taken from a queue. The difference with the usual case, when GIL lock the interpreter, is that now you don't need the interpreter to evaluate c_module.f because it is compiled. So the question is: in this case the processing is really parallel?

    Read the article

  • Pass string between two threads in java

    - by geeta
    I have to search a string in a file and write the matched lines to another file. I have a thread to read a file and a thread to write a file. I want to send the stringBuffer from read thread to write thread. Please help me to pass this. I amm getting null value passed. write thread: class OutputThread extends Thread{ /****************** Writes the line with search string to the output file *************/ Thread runner1,runner; File Out_File; public OutputThread() { } public OutputThread(Thread runner,File Out_File) { runner1 = new Thread(this,"writeThread"); // (1) Create a new thread. this.Out_File=Out_File; this.runner=runner; runner1.start(); // (2) Start the thread. } public void run() { try{ BufferedWriter bufferedWriter=new BufferedWriter(new FileWriter(Out_File,true)); System.out.println("inside write"); synchronized(runner){ System.out.println("inside wait"); runner.wait(); } System.out.println("outside wait"); // bufferedWriter.write(line.toString()); Buffer Buf = new Buffer(); bufferedWriter.write(Buf.buffers); System.out.println(Buf.buffers); bufferedWriter.flush(); } catch(Exception e){ System.out.println(e); e.printStackTrace(); } } } Read Thraed: class FileThread extends Thread{ Thread runner; File dir; String search_string,stats; File Out_File,final_output; StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer(); public FileThread() { } public FileThread(CountDownLatch latch,String threadName,File dir,String search_string,File Out_File,File final_output,String stats) { runner = new Thread(this, threadName); // (1) Create a new thread. this.dir=dir; this.search_string=search_string; this.Out_File=Out_File; this.stats=stats; this.final_output=final_output; this.latch=latch; runner.start(); // (2) Start the thread. } public void run() { try{ Enumeration entries; ZipFile zipFile; String source_file_name = dir.toString(); File Source_file = dir; String extension; OutputThread out = new OutputThread(runner,Out_File); int dotPos = source_file_name.lastIndexOf("."); extension = source_file_name.substring(dotPos+1); if(extension.equals("zip")) { zipFile = new ZipFile(source_file_name); entries = zipFile.entries(); while(entries.hasMoreElements()) { ZipEntry entry = (ZipEntry)entries.nextElement(); if(entry.isDirectory()) { (new File(entry.getName())).mkdir(); continue; } searchString(runner,entry.getName(),new BufferedInputStream(zipFile.getInputStream(entry)),Out_File,final_output,search_string,stats); } zipFile.close(); } else { searchString(runner,Source_file.toString(),new BufferedInputStream(new FileInputStream(Source_file)),Out_File,final_output,search_string,stats); } } catch(Exception e){ System.out.println(e); e.printStackTrace(); } } /********* Reads the Input Files and Searches for the String ******************************/ public void searchString(Thread runner,String Source_File,BufferedInputStream in,File output_file,File final_output,String search,String stats) { int count = 0; int countw = 0; int countl=0; String s; String[] str; String newLine = System.getProperty("line.separator"); try { BufferedReader br2 = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(in)); //OutputFile outfile = new OutputFile(); BufferedWriter bufferedWriter = new BufferedWriter(new FileWriter(output_file,true)); Buffer Buf = new Buffer(); //StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer(); StringBuffer sb1 = new StringBuffer(); while((s = br2.readLine()) != null ) { str = s.split(search); count = str.length-1; countw += count; if(s.contains(search)){ countl++; sb.append(s); sb.append(newLine); } if(countl%100==0) { System.out.println("inside count"); Buf.setBuffers(sb.toString()); sb.delete(0,sb.length()); System.out.println("outside notify"); synchronized(runner) { runner.notify(); } //outfile.WriteFile(sb,bufferedWriter); //sb.delete(0,sb.length()); } } } synchronized(runner) { runner.notify(); } br2.close(); in.close(); if(countw == 0) { System.out.println("Input File : "+Source_File ); System.out.println("Word not found"); System.exit(0); } else { System.out.println("Input File : "+Source_File ); System.out.println("Matched word count : "+countw ); System.out.println("Lines with Search String : "+countl); System.out.println("Output File : "+output_file.toString()); System.out.println(); } } catch(Exception e){ System.out.println(e); e.printStackTrace(); } } }

    Read the article

  • C functions invoked as threads - Linux userland program

    - by Einar
    I'm writing a linux daemon in C which gets values from an ADC by SPI interface (ioctl). The SPI (spidev - userland) seems to be a bit unstable and freezes the daemon at random times. I need to have some better control of the calls to the functions getting the values, and I was thinking of making it as a thread which I could wait for to finish and get the return value and if it times out assume that it froze and kill it without this new thread taking down the daemon itself. Also I could do other things like resetting the ADC before restarting. Is this possible? Pseudo example of what I want to achieve: (function int get_adc_value(int adc_channel, float *value) ) pid = thread( get_adc_value(1,&value); //makes thread wait_until_finish(pid, timeout); //waits until function finishes/timesout if(timeout) kill pid, start over //if thread do not return in given time, kill it (it is frozen) else if return value sane, continue //if successful, handle return variable value and continue Thanks for any input on the matter, examples highly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Does add() on LinkedBlockingQueue notify waiting threads?

    - by obvio171
    I have a consumer thread taking elements from a LinkedBlockingQueue, and I make it sleep manually when it's empty. I use peek() to see if the queue empty because I have to do stuff because sending the thread to sleep, and I do that with queue.wait(). So, when I'm in another thread and add()an element to the queue, does that automatically notify the thread that was wait()ing on the queue?

    Read the article

  • Efficient implementation of threads in the given scenario

    - by shadeMe
    I've got a winforms application that is set up in the following manner: 2 buttons, a textbox, a collection K, function X and another function, Y. Function X parses a large database and enumerates some of its data in the global collection. Button 1 calls function X. Function Y walks through the above collection and prints out the data in the textbox. Button 2 calls function Y. I'd like to call function X through a worker thread in such a way that: The form remains responsive to user input. This comes intrinsically from the use of a separate thread. There is never more than a single instance of function X running at any point in time. K can be accessed by both functions at all times. What would be the most efficient implementation of the above environment ?

    Read the article

  • Polling servers at the same port - Threads and Java

    - by John
    Hi there. I'm currently busy working on an IP ban tool for the early versions of Call of Duty 1. (Apparently such a feature wasn't implemented in these versions). I've finished a single threaded application but it won't perform well enough for multiple servers, which is why I am trying to implement threading. Right now, each server has its own thread. I have a Networking class, which has a method; "GetStatus" -- this method is synchronized. This method uses a DatagramSocket to communicate with the server. Since this method is static and synchronized, I shouldn't get in trouble and receive a whole bunch of "Address already in use" exceptions. However, I have a second method named "SendMessage". This method is supposed to send a message to the server. How can I make sure "SendMessage" cannot be invoked when there's already a thread running in "GetStatus", and the other way around? If I make both synchronized, I will still get in trouble if Thread A is opening a socket on Port 99999 and invoking "SendMessage" while Thread B is opening a socket on the same port and invoking "GetStatus"? (Game servers are usually hosted on the same ports) I guess what I am really after is a way to make an entire class synchronized, so that only one method can be invoked and run at a time by a single thread. Hope that what I am trying to accomplish/avoid is made clear in this text. Any help is greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Simple POSIX threads question

    - by Andy
    Hi, I have this POSIX thread: void subthread(void) { while(!quit_thread) { // do something ... // don't waste cpu cycles if(!quit_thread) usleep(500); } // free resources ... // tell main thread we're done quit_thread = FALSE; } Now I want to terminate subthread() from my main thread. I've tried the following: quit_thread = TRUE; // wait until subthread() has cleaned its resources while(quit_thread); But it does not work! The while() clause does never exit although my subthread clearly sets quit_thread to FALSE after having freed its resources! If I modify my shutdown code like this: quit_thread = TRUE; // wait until subthread() has cleaned its resources while(quit_thread) usleep(10); Then everything is working fine! Could someone explain to me why the first solution does not work and why the version with usleep(10) suddenly works? I know that this is not a pretty solution. I could use semaphores/signals for this but I'd like to learn something about multithreading, so I'd like to know why my first solution doesn't work. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Fault address when malloc/free pthread_t across threads

    - by scleung
    Fault address occurred when i malloc pthread_t to save a newly created thread id and free it in another thread. Codes as follows: typedef struct _TaskInfo { // int dummy_int; pthread_t tid; } TaskInfo; void* dummy_task(void* pArg) { free(pArg); return NULL; } void create_task() { TaskInfo *pInfo; pthread_attr_t attr; // set detached state stuff ... pInfo = (TaskInfo*) malloc(sizeof(TaskInfo)); pthread_create(&pInfo->tid, &attr, dummy_task, pInfo); // destroy pthread attribute stuff ... } int main() { int i; while(i < 10000) { create_task(); ++i; } return 0; } When I uncomment the member dummy_int of TaskInfo it sometimes ran successfully, but sometimes failed. My platform is VMWare + Ubuntu 9.10 + ndk r3 Thanks!

    Read the article

  • C: Fifo between threads, writing and reading strings

    - by Yonatan
    Hello once more dear internet, I writing a small program that among other things, writes a log file of commands received. to do that, I want to use a thread that all it should do is just attempt to read from a pipe, while the main thread will write into that pipe whenever it should. Since i don't know the length of each string command, i thought about writing and reading the pointer to the char buf[MAX_MESSAGE_LEN]. Since what i've tried so far doesn't work, i'll post my best effort :P char str[] = "hello log thread 123456789 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19\n"; if (pipe(pipe_fd) != 0) return -1; pthread_t log_thread; pthread_create(&log_thread,NULL, log_thread_start, argv[2]); success_write = 0; do { write(pipe_fd[1],(void*)&str,sizeof(char*)); } while (success_write < sizeof(char*)); and the thread does this: char buffer[MAX_MSGLEN]; int success_read; success_read = 0; //while(1) { do { success_read += read(pipe_fd[0],(void*)&buffer, sizeof(char*)); } while (success_read < sizeof(char*)); //} printf("%s",buffer); (Sorry if this doesn't indent, i can't seem to figure out this editor...) oh, and pipe_fd[2] is a global parameter. So, any help with this, either by the way i thought of, or another way i could read strings without knowing the length, would be much appreciated. On a side note, i'm working on Eclipse IDE C/C++, version 1.2.1 and i can't seem to set up the compiler so it will link the pthread library to my project. I've resorted to writing my own Makefile to make it (pun intended :P) work. Anyone knows what to do ? i've looked online, but all i find are solutions that are probably good on an older version because the tabs and option keys are different. Anyways, Thanks a bunch internet ! Yonatan

    Read the article

  • Android CursorAdapters, ListViews and background threads

    - by MattC
    This application I've been working on has databases with multiple megabytes of data to sift through. A lot of the activities are just ListViews descending through various levels of data within the databases until we reach "documents", which is just HTML to be pulled from the DB(s) and displayed on the phone. The issue I am having is that some of these activities need to have the ability to search through the databases by capturing keystrokes and re-running the query with a "like %blah%" in it. This works reasonably quickly except when the user is first loading the data and when the user first enters a keystroke. I am using a ResourceCursorAdapter and I am generating the cursor in a background thread, but in order to do a listAdapter.changeCursor(), I have to use a Handler to post it to the main UI thread. This particular call is then freezing the UI thread just long enough to bring up the dreaded ANR dialog. I'm curious how I can offload this to a background thread totally so the user interface remains responsive and we don't have ANR dialogs popping up. Just for full disclosure, I was originally returning an ArrayList of custom model objects and using an ArrayAdapter, but (understandably) the customer pointed out it was bad memory-manangement and I wasn't happy with the performance anyways. I'd really like to avoid a solution where I'm generating huge lists of objects and then doing a listAdapter.notifyDataSetChanged/Invalidated() Here is the code in question: private Runnable filterDrugListRunnable = new Runnable() { public void run() { if (filterLock.tryLock() == false) return; cur = ActivityUtils.getIndexItemCursor(DrugListActivity.this); if (cur == null || forceRefresh == true) { cur = docDb.getItemCursor(selectedIndex.getIndexId(), filter); ActivityUtils.setIndexItemCursor(DrugListActivity.this, cur); forceRefresh = false; } updateHandler.post(new Runnable() { public void run() { listAdapter.changeCursor(cur); } }); filterLock.unlock(); updateHandler.post(hideProgressRunnable); updateHandler.post(updateListRunnable); } };

    Read the article

  • Named pipe stalls threads?

    - by entens
    I am attempting to push updates into a process via a named pipe, but in doing so my process loop now seams to stall on while ((line = sr.ReadLine()) != null). I'm a little mystified as to what might be wrong as this is my first foray into named pipes. void RefreshThread() { using (NamedPipeServerStream pipeStream = new NamedPipeServerStream("processPipe", PipeDirection.In)) { pipeStream.WaitForConnection(); using (StreamReader sr = new StreamReader(pipeStream)) { for (; ; ) { if (StopThread == true) { StopThread = false; return; // exit loop and terminate the thread } // push update for heartbeat int HeartbeatHandle = ItemDictionary["Info.Heartbeat"]; int HeartbeatValue = (int)Config.Items[HeartbeatHandle].Value; Config.Items[HeartbeatHandle].Value = ++HeartbeatValue; SetItemValue(HeartbeatHandle, HeartbeatValue, (short)0xC0, DateTime.Now); string line = null; while ((line = sr.ReadLine()) != null) { // line is in the format: item, value, timestamp string[] parts = line.Split(','); // push update and store value in item cache int handle = ItemDictionary[parts[0]]; object value = parts[1]; Config.Items[handle].Value = int.Parse(value); DateTime timestamp = DateTime.FromBinary(long.Parse(parts[2])); SetItemValue(handle, value, (short)0xC0, timestamp); } Thread.Sleep(500); } } } }

    Read the article

  • synchronize threads - no UI

    - by UshaP
    I'm trying to write multithreading code and facing some synchronization questions. I know there are lots of posts here but I couldn't find anything that fits. I have a System.Timers.Timer that elapsed every 30 seconds it goes to the db and checks if there are any new jobs. If he finds one, he executes the job on the current thread (timer open new thread for every elapsed). While the job is running I need to notify the main thread (where the timer is) about the progress. Notes: I don't have UI so I can't do beginInvoke (or use background thread) as I usually do in winforms. I thought to implement ISynchronizeInvoke on my main class but that looks a little bit overkill (maybe I'm wrong here). I have an event in my job class and the main class register to it and I invoke the event whenever I need but I'm worrying it might cause blocking. Each job can take up to 20 minutes. I can have up to 20 jobs running concurrently. My question is: What is the right way to notify my main thread about any progress in my job thread? Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • Multiple things at once (Threads?)

    - by Jonathan
    All, What is a really simple way of having a program do more than one thing at once, even if the computer does not necessarily have multiple 'cores'. Can I do this by creating more than one Thread? My goal is to be able to have two computers networked (through Sockets) to respond to each-other's requests, while my program will at the same time be able to be managing a UI. I want the server to potentially handle more than one client at the same time as well. My understanding is that the communication is done with BufferedReader.readLine() and PrintWriter.println(). My problem is that I want the server to be waiting on multiple readLine() requests, and also be doing other things. How do I handle this? Many thanks, Jonathan

    Read the article

  • Threads in C# [Question]

    - by blez
    Thread1/2: do TotalThreads-- on their exit int TotalThreads = 2; void AsyncFunc() { // run thread for Func() } void Func() { // run Thread1 // run Thread2 while(TotalThreads > 0) { /* do nothing */ } // some code } is that bad design?

    Read the article

  • Can't establish a DB connection. (Maybe threads related)

    - by JobGovernor
    Hello, I am getting this exception on the Rufus::Scheduler ActiveRecord::ConnectionTimeoutError: could not obtain a database connection within 5 seconds. The max pool size is currently 30; consider increasing it. I've increased the pool from 10 to 30. And I also monkey patched the method which raises the exception to also call ActiveRecord::Base.verify_active_connections! before doing its job. And I also restarted the service which executes the script so that the new code is run. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. Let me know if you need any other info about environment or whatnot. Thank you.

    Read the article

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