Search Results

Search found 1137 results on 46 pages for 'barrier synchronization'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 3/46 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Microsoft Access to SQL Server - synchronization

    - by David Pfeffer
    I have a client that uses a point-of-sale solution involving an Access database for its back-end storage. I am trying to provide this client with a service that involves, for SLA reasons, the need to copy parts of this Access database into tables in my own database server which runs SQL Server 2008. I need to do this on a periodic basis, probably about 5 times a day. I do have VPN connectivity to the client. Is there an easy programmatic way to do this, or an available tool? I don't want to handcraft what I assume is a relatively common task.

    Read the article

  • Efficient synchronization of querying an array of resources

    - by Erel Segal Halevi
    There is a list of N resources, each of them can be queried by at most a single thread at a time. There are serveral threads that need to do the same thing at approximately the same time: query each of the resources (each thread has a different query), in arbitrary order, and collect the responses. If each thread loops over the resources in the same order, from 0 to N-1, then they will probably have to wait for each other, which is not efficient. I thought of letting the threads loop over the resources in a random permutation, but this seems too complex and also not so efficient, for example, for 2 resources and 2 threads, in half the cases they will choose the same order and wait for each other. Is there a simple and more efficient way to solve this?

    Read the article

  • GWT synchronization

    - by hdantas
    i'm doing a function in gwt it sends an IQ stanza into a server and has to wait for the server answer in the function i make the handler that waits for the answer from the server to that IQ stanza so what i need is for the function to wait until i get the response from the server and after that do other stuff i'm a beginner in gwt so any thoughts would be great thanks public void getServices() { IQ iq = new IQ(IQ.Type.get); iq.setAttribute("to", session.getDomainName()); iq.addChild("query", "http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#items"); session.addResponseHandler(iq, new ResponseHandler() { public void onError(IQ iq, ErrorType errorType, ErrorCondition errorCondition, String text) { <do stuff> } public void onResult(IQ iq) { <do stuff> } }); session.send(iq); <after receiving answer do stuff> }

    Read the article

  • Java Thread - Synchronization issue

    - by Yatendra Goel
    From Sun's tutorial: Synchronized methods enable a simple strategy for preventing thread interference and memory consistency errors: if an object is visible to more than one thread, all reads or writes to that object's variables are done through synchronized methods. (An important exception: final fields, which cannot be modified after the object is constructed, can be safely read through non-synchronized methods, once the object is constructed) This strategy is effective, but can present problems with liveness, as we'll see later in this lesson. Q1. Is the above statements mean that if an object of a class is going to be shared among multiple threads, then all instance methods of that class (except getters of final fields) should be made synchronized, since instance methods process instance variables?

    Read the article

  • Any techniques to interrupt, kill, or otherwise unwind (releasing synchronization locks) a single de

    - by gojomo
    I have a long-running process where, due to a bug, a trivial/expendable thread is deadlocked with a thread which I would like to continue, so that it can perform some final reporting that would be hard to reproduce in another way. Of course, fixing the bug for future runs is the proper ultimate resolution. Of course, any such forced interrupt/kill/stop of any thread is inherently unsafe and likely to cause other unpredictable inconsistencies. (I'm familiar with all the standard warnings and the reasons for them.) But still, since the only alternative is to kill the JVM process and go through a more lengthy procedure which would result in a less-complete final report, messy/deprecated/dangerous/risky/one-time techniques are exactly what I'd like to try. The JVM is Sun's 1.6.0_16 64-bit on Ubuntu, and the expendable thread is waiting-to-lock an object monitor. Can an OS signal directed to an exact thread create an InterruptedException in the expendable thread? Could attaching with gdb, and directly tampering with JVM data or calling JVM procedures allow a forced-release of the object monitor held by the expendable thread? Would a Thread.interrupt() from another thread generate a InterruptedException from the waiting-to-lock frame? (With some effort, I can inject an arbitrary beanshell script into the running system.) Can the deprecated Thread.stop() be sent via JMX or any other remote-injection method? Any ideas appreciated, the more 'dangerous', the better! And, if your suggestion has worked in personal experience in a similar situation, the best!

    Read the article

  • What would be my best MySQL Synchronization method?

    - by Kerry
    We're moving a social media service to be on separate data centers with global load balancing, as our other hosting provider's entire data center went down. Twice. This means that both websites need to be synchronized in some sense -- I'm less worried about the code of the pages, that's easy enough to sync, but they need to have the same database data. From my research on SO, it seems MySQL Replication is a good option, but the MySQL manual, for scaling out, says that its best when there are far more reads then there are writes/updates: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/replication-solutions-scaleout.html In our case, it's about equal. We're getting around 200-300 thousand requests a day right now, and we can grow rapidly. Every request is both a read and write request. What would be the best method or tool to handle this?

    Read the article

  • Win32 reset event like synchronization class with boost C++

    - by fgungor
    I need some mechanism reminiscent of Win32 reset events that I can check via functions having the same semantics with WaitForSingleObject() and WaitForMultipleObjects() (Only need the ..SingleObject() version for the moment) . But I am targeting multiple platforms so all I have is boost::threads (AFAIK) . I came up with the following class and wanted to ask about the potential problems and whether it is up to the task or not. Thanks in advance. class reset_event { bool flag, auto_reset; boost::condition_variable cond_var; boost::mutex mx_flag; public: reset_event(bool _auto_reset = false) : flag(false), auto_reset(_auto_reset) { } void wait() { boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); if (flag) return; cond_var.wait(LOCK); if (auto_reset) flag = false; } bool wait(const boost::posix_time::time_duration& dur) { boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); bool ret = cond_var.timed_wait(LOCK, dur) || flag; if (auto_reset && ret) flag = false; return ret; } void set() { boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); flag = true; cond_var.notify_all(); } void reset() { boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); flag = false; } }; Example usage; reset_event terminate_thread; void fn_thread() { while(!terminate_thread.wait(boost::posix_time::milliseconds(10))) { std::cout << "working..." << std::endl; boost::this_thread::sleep(boost::posix_time::milliseconds(1000)); } std::cout << "thread terminated" << std::endl; } int main() { boost::thread worker(fn_thread); boost::this_thread::sleep(boost::posix_time::seconds(1)); terminate_thread.set(); worker.join(); return 0; } EDIT I have fixed the code according to Michael Burr's suggestions. My "very simple" tests indicate no problems. class reset_event { bool flag, auto_reset; boost::condition_variable cond_var; boost::mutex mx_flag; public: explicit reset_event(bool _auto_reset = false) : flag(false), auto_reset(_auto_reset) { } void wait() { boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); if (flag) { if (auto_reset) flag = false; return; } do { cond_var.wait(LOCK); } while(!flag); if (auto_reset) flag = false; } bool wait(const boost::posix_time::time_duration& dur) { boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); if (flag) { if (auto_reset) flag = false; return true; } bool ret = cond_var.timed_wait(LOCK, dur); if (ret && flag) { if (auto_reset) flag = false; return true; } return false; } void set() { boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); flag = true; cond_var.notify_all(); } void reset() { boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); flag = false; } };

    Read the article

  • absolute audio synchronization

    - by user1780526
    I would like to synchronize my computer with an external camcorder recording so that I can know exactly (to the millisecond) when certain recored events happen with respect to other sensors logged by the computer. One idea is to playback short sound pulses or chirps every second from the computer that get picked up by the microphone on the camcorder. But the accuracy of a simple cron job playing a sound clip is not precise enough. I was thinking of using something like gstreamer, but how does one get it to playback a clip at precisely a certain time according to the system clock?

    Read the article

  • Speed of Synchronization vs Normal

    - by Swaranga Sarma
    I have a class which is written for a single thread with no methods being synchronized. class MyClass implements MyInterface{ //interface implementation methods, not synchronized } But we also needed a synchronized version of the class. So we made a wrapper class that implements the same interface but has a constructor that takes an instance of MyClass. Any call to the methods of the synchronized class are delegated to the instance of MyClass. Here is my synchronized class.. class SynchronizedMyClass implements MyInterface{ //the constructor public SynchronizedMyClass(MyInterface i/*this is actually an instance of MyClass*/) //interface implementation methods; all synchronized; all delegated to the MyInterface instance } After all this I ran numerous amounts of test runs with both the classes. The tests involve reading log files and counting URLs in each line. The problem is that the synchronized version of the class is consistently taking less time for the parsing. I am using only one thread for the teste, so there is no chance of deadlocks, race around condition etc etc. Each log file contains more than 5 million lines which means calling the methods more than 5 million times. Can anyone explain why synchronized versiuon of the class migt be taking less time than the normal one?

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Lowers Cloud Barrier To Entry

    - by Herve Roggero
    Once in a while, the technology stack changes enough to create a disturbance in the IT industry. Microsoft did just that today and has officially closed the gap with its #1 competitor: Amazon. What is remarkable is that Microsoft is no longer an alternative to Amazon, it is becoming a clear leader in that space. Some of the new features include official support for durable Virtual Machines with high availability (cross-geographic replication), free WebSites to try Azure, MySQL database at no charge, a new distributed low-latency cache feature, Linux support, support with existing VPN hardware for seamless on-premise integration, a new partner ecosystem and much, much more. Amazon had an edge against Windows Azure in the IaaS (Infrastructure as a Service) space, until now. With the latest release from Microsoft Azure, the gap has been filled. In fact, it seems Amazon may now have a gap to fill… This is great news to everyone; it seems that cloud offerings are becoming more standardized with the more mature cloud providers, and the management stack and quality of service of each cloud provider is increasingly becoming the differentiator. With today’s announcements, it is becoming clear that cloud providers are pushing hard to increase their service footprint and lowering typical barriers to entry such as support for open-source operating systems, free trial offers, higher availability, faster deployment times and simpler enterprise integration.

    Read the article

  • Message Queue with 'Message Barrier' Feature?

    - by Lajos Nagy
    Is there a message queue implementation that allows breaking up work into 'batches' by inserting 'message barriers' into the message stream? Let me clarify. No messages after a message barrier should be delivered to any consumers of the queue, until all messages before the barrier are consumed. Sort of like a synchronization point. I'd also prefer if all consumers received notification when they reached a barrier. Anything like this out there?

    Read the article

  • how to implement a "soft barrier" in multithreaded c++

    - by Jason
    I have some multithreaded c++ code with the following structure: do_thread_specific_work(); update_shared_variables(); //checkpoint A do_thread_specific_work_not_modifying_shared_variables(); //checkpoint B do_thread_specific_work_requiring_all_threads_have_updated_shared_variables(); What follows checkpoint B is work that could have started if all threads have reached only checkpoint A, hence my notion of a "soft barrier". Typically multithreading libraries only provide "hard barriers" in which all threads must reach some point before any can continue. Obviously a hard barrier could be used at checkpoint B. Using a soft barrier can lead to better execution time, especially since the work between checkpoints A and B may not be load-balanced between the threads (i.e. 1 slow thread who has reached checkpoint A but not B could be causing all the others to wait at the barrier just before checkpoint B). I've tried using atomics to synchronize things and I know with 100% certainty that is it NOT guaranteed to work. For example using openmp syntax, before the parallel section start with: shared_thread_counter = num_threads; //known at compile time #pragma omp flush Then at checkpoint A: #pragma omp atomic shared_thread_counter--; Then at checkpoint B (using polling): #pragma omp flush while (shared_thread_counter > 0) { usleep(1); //can be removed, but better to limit memory bandwidth #pragma omp flush } I've designed some experiments in which I use an atomic to indicate that some operation before it is finished. The experiment would work with 2 threads most of the time but consistently fail when I have lots of threads (like 20 or 30). I suspect this is because of the caching structure of modern CPUs. Even if one thread updates some other value before doing the atomic decrement, it is not guaranteed to be read by another thread in that order. Consider the case when the other value is a cache miss and the atomic decrement is a cache hit. So back to my question, how to CORRECTLY implement this "soft barrier"? Is there any built-in feature that guarantees such functionality? I'd prefer openmp but I'm familiar with most of the other common multithreading libraries. As a workaround right now, I'm using a hard barrier at checkpoint B and I've restructured my code to make the work between checkpoint A and B automatically load-balancing between the threads (which has been rather difficult at times). Thanks for any advice/insight :)

    Read the article

  • Openvz: What exactly does it mean when tcpsndbuf failcnt increases? Why must there be a minimum difference between limit and barrier?

    - by Antonis Christofides
    When the failcnt of tcpsndbuf increases, what does this mean? Does it mean the system had to go past the barrier, or past the limit? Or, maybe, that the system failed to provide enough buffers, either because it needed to go past the limit, or because it needed to go past the barrier but couldn't because other VMs were using too many resources? I understand the difference between barrier and limit only for disk space, where you can specify a grace period for which the system can exceed the barrier but not the limit. But in resources like tcpsndbuf, which have no such thing as a grace period, what is the meaning of barrier vs. limit? Why does the difference between barrier and limit in tcpsndbuf be at least 2.5KB times tcpnumsock? I could understand it if, e.g., tcpsndbuf should be at least 2.5KB times tcpnumsock (either the barrier or the limit), but why should I care about the difference between the barrier and the limit?

    Read the article

  • What is the fastest cyclic synchronization in Java (ExecutorService vs. CyclicBarrier vs. X)?

    - by Alex Dunlop
    Which Java synchronization construct is likely to provide the best performance for a concurrent, iterative processing scenario with a fixed number of threads like the one outlined below? After experimenting on my own for a while (using ExecutorService and CyclicBarrier) and being somewhat surprised by the results, I would be grateful for some expert advice and maybe some new ideas. Existing questions here do not seem to focus primarily on performance, hence this new one. Thanks in advance! The core of the app is a simple iterative data processing algorithm, parallelized to the spread the computational load across 8 cores on a Mac Pro, running OS X 10.6 and Java 1.6.0_07. The data to be processed is split into 8 blocks and each block is fed to a Runnable to be executed by one of a fixed number of threads. Parallelizing the algorithm was fairly straightforward, and it functionally works as desired, but its performance is not yet what I think it could be. The app seems to spend a lot of time in system calls synchronizing, so after some profiling I wonder whether I selected the most appropriate synchronization mechanism(s). A key requirement of the algorithm is that it needs to proceed in stages, so the threads need to sync up at the end of each stage. The main thread prepares the work (very low overhead), passes it to the threads, lets them work on it, then proceeds when all threads are done, rearranges the work (again very low overhead) and repeats the cycle. The machine is dedicated to this task, Garbage Collection is minimized by using per-thread pools of pre-allocated items, and the number of threads can be fixed (no incoming requests or the like, just one thread per CPU core). V1 - ExecutorService My first implementation used an ExecutorService with 8 worker threads. The program creates 8 tasks holding the work and then lets them work on it, roughly like this: // create one thread per CPU executorService = Executors.newFixedThreadPool( 8 ); ... // now process data in cycles while( ...) { // package data into 8 work items ... // create one Callable task per work item ... // submit the Callables to the worker threads executorService.invokeAll( taskList ); } This works well functionally (it does what it should), and for very large work items indeed all 8 CPUs become highly loaded, as much as the processing algorithm would be expected to allow (some work items will finish faster than others, then idle). However, as the work items become smaller (and this is not really under the program's control), the user CPU load shrinks dramatically: blocksize | system | user | cycles/sec 256k 1.8% 85% 1.30 64k 2.5% 77% 5.6 16k 4% 64% 22.5 4096 8% 56% 86 1024 13% 38% 227 256 17% 19% 420 64 19% 17% 948 16 19% 13% 1626 Legend: - block size = size of the work item (= computational steps) - system = system load, as shown in OS X Activity Monitor (red bar) - user = user load, as shown in OS X Activity Monitor (green bar) - cycles/sec = iterations through the main while loop, more is better The primary area of concern here is the high percentage of time spent in the system, which appears to be driven by thread synchronization calls. As expected, for smaller work items, ExecutorService.invokeAll() will require relatively more effort to sync up the threads versus the amount of work being performed in each thread. But since ExecutorService is more generic than it would need to be for this use case (it can queue tasks for threads if there are more tasks than cores), I though maybe there would be a leaner synchronization construct. V2 - CyclicBarrier The next implementation used a CyclicBarrier to sync up the threads before receiving work and after completing it, roughly as follows: main() { // create the barrier barrier = new CyclicBarrier( 8 + 1 ); // create Runable for thread, tell it about the barrier Runnable task = new WorkerThreadRunnable( barrier ); // start the threads for( int i = 0; i < 8; i++ ) { // create one thread per core new Thread( task ).start(); } while( ... ) { // tell threads about the work ... // N threads + this will call await(), then system proceeds barrier.await(); // ... now worker threads work on the work... // wait for worker threads to finish barrier.await(); } } class WorkerThreadRunnable implements Runnable { CyclicBarrier barrier; WorkerThreadRunnable( CyclicBarrier barrier ) { this.barrier = barrier; } public void run() { while( true ) { // wait for work barrier.await(); // do the work ... // wait for everyone else to finish barrier.await(); } } } Again, this works well functionally (it does what it should), and for very large work items indeed all 8 CPUs become highly loaded, as before. However, as the work items become smaller, the load still shrinks dramatically: blocksize | system | user | cycles/sec 256k 1.9% 85% 1.30 64k 2.7% 78% 6.1 16k 5.5% 52% 25 4096 9% 29% 64 1024 11% 15% 117 256 12% 8% 169 64 12% 6.5% 285 16 12% 6% 377 For large work items, synchronization is negligible and the performance is identical to V1. But unexpectedly, the results of the (highly specialized) CyclicBarrier seem MUCH WORSE than those for the (generic) ExecutorService: throughput (cycles/sec) is only about 1/4th of V1. A preliminary conclusion would be that even though this seems to be the advertised ideal use case for CyclicBarrier, it performs much worse than the generic ExecutorService. V3 - Wait/Notify + CyclicBarrier It seemed worth a try to replace the first cyclic barrier await() with a simple wait/notify mechanism: main() { // create the barrier // create Runable for thread, tell it about the barrier // start the threads while( ... ) { // tell threads about the work // for each: workerThreadRunnable.setWorkItem( ... ); // ... now worker threads work on the work... // wait for worker threads to finish barrier.await(); } } class WorkerThreadRunnable implements Runnable { CyclicBarrier barrier; @NotNull volatile private Callable<Integer> workItem; WorkerThreadRunnable( CyclicBarrier barrier ) { this.barrier = barrier; this.workItem = NO_WORK; } final protected void setWorkItem( @NotNull final Callable<Integer> callable ) { synchronized( this ) { workItem = callable; notify(); } } public void run() { while( true ) { // wait for work while( true ) { synchronized( this ) { if( workItem != NO_WORK ) break; try { wait(); } catch( InterruptedException e ) { e.printStackTrace(); } } } // do the work ... // wait for everyone else to finish barrier.await(); } } } Again, this works well functionally (it does what it should). blocksize | system | user | cycles/sec 256k 1.9% 85% 1.30 64k 2.4% 80% 6.3 16k 4.6% 60% 30.1 4096 8.6% 41% 98.5 1024 12% 23% 202 256 14% 11.6% 299 64 14% 10.0% 518 16 14.8% 8.7% 679 The throughput for small work items is still much worse than that of the ExecutorService, but about 2x that of the CyclicBarrier. Eliminating one CyclicBarrier eliminates half of the gap. V4 - Busy wait instead of wait/notify Since this app is the primary one running on the system and the cores idle anyway if they're not busy with a work item, why not try a busy wait for work items in each thread, even if that spins the CPU needlessly. The worker thread code changes as follows: class WorkerThreadRunnable implements Runnable { // as before final protected void setWorkItem( @NotNull final Callable<Integer> callable ) { workItem = callable; } public void run() { while( true ) { // busy-wait for work while( true ) { if( workItem != NO_WORK ) break; } // do the work ... // wait for everyone else to finish barrier.await(); } } } Also works well functionally (it does what it should). blocksize | system | user | cycles/sec 256k 1.9% 85% 1.30 64k 2.2% 81% 6.3 16k 4.2% 62% 33 4096 7.5% 40% 107 1024 10.4% 23% 210 256 12.0% 12.0% 310 64 11.9% 10.2% 550 16 12.2% 8.6% 741 For small work items, this increases throughput by a further 10% over the CyclicBarrier + wait/notify variant, which is not insignificant. But it is still much lower-throughput than V1 with the ExecutorService. V5 - ? So what is the best synchronization mechanism for such a (presumably not uncommon) problem? I am weary of writing my own sync mechanism to completely replace ExecutorService (assuming that it is too generic and there has to be something that can still be taken out to make it more efficient). It is not my area of expertise and I'm concerned that I'd spend a lot of time debugging it (since I'm not even sure my wait/notify and busy wait variants are correct) for uncertain gain. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Directory Synchronization

    - by Robert May
    We’re using federated security with Office 365 and everything was running swimmingly and then I started getting the following error when trying to synchronize security information: “An unknown error occurred with the Microsoft Online Services Sign-in Assistant. Contact Technical Support.” Great.  Very descriptive.  In the event viewer, you get a bit more detail: GetAuthState() failed with -2147186688 state. HResult:0. Contact Technical Support.  (0x80048831) If you do some searching, you’ll find that there are a couple of MSDN articles about this error.  In KB2502710 you’re told to reinstall sign in assistant.  This one requires a reboot.  In KB2517393 you’re told to make sure that your proxy settings are working correctly.  I’m not using a proxy and everything was set up right. Rather frustrating and I couldn’t figure out what was going on.  What finally keyed me in was the error number being presented.  Rather than 80048800, which is listed in the second article, I was getting 80048831.  I did a quick search and found something that was seemingly unrelated here.  Could it really be so simple as the password having expired for my synchronization user? Turns out, it was that simple.  Once the password was reset and reentered, everything worked great again. Since this isn’t a user that humans use, I also don’t want the password to expire.  You can find the instructions for that (use Set-MsolUser –UserPrincipalName <user ID> –PasswordNeverExpires $true) here. Technorati Tags: Office 365

    Read the article

  • Unable to sync time using `ntpdate`, error: "no server suitable for synchronization found"

    - by William Ting
    My ntp.conf file: user@pc[0][07:37:40]:/etc$ cat /etc/ntp.conf idriftfile /var/lib/ntp/ntp.drift server 0.pool.ntp.org server 1.pool.ntp.org server 2.pool.ntp.org server pool.ntp.org Command output: user@pc[0][07:37:24]:/etc$ sudo ntpdate -dv pool.ntp.org 18 Jun 07:37:35 ntpdate[10737]: ntpdate [email protected] Tue Apr 19 07:15:05 UTC 2011 (1) Looking for host pool.ntp.org and service ntp host found : conquest.kjsl.com transmit(198.137.202.16) transmit(216.45.57.38) transmit(64.6.144.6) transmit(198.137.202.16) transmit(216.45.57.38) transmit(64.6.144.6) transmit(198.137.202.16) transmit(216.45.57.38) transmit(64.6.144.6) transmit(198.137.202.16) transmit(216.45.57.38) transmit(64.6.144.6) transmit(198.137.202.16) transmit(216.45.57.38) transmit(64.6.144.6) 198.137.202.16: Server dropped: no data 216.45.57.38: Server dropped: no data 64.6.144.6: Server dropped: no data server 198.137.202.16, port 123 stratum 0, precision 0, leap 00, trust 000 refid [198.137.202.16], delay 0.00000, dispersion 64.00000 transmitted 4, in filter 4 reference time: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 0:28:16.000 originate timestamp: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 0:28:16.000 transmit timestamp: d1a71a93.1f16c1e3 Sat, Jun 18 2011 7:37:39.121 filter delay: 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 filter offset: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 delay 0.00000, dispersion 64.00000 offset 0.000000 server 216.45.57.38, port 123 stratum 0, precision 0, leap 00, trust 000 refid [216.45.57.38], delay 0.00000, dispersion 64.00000 transmitted 4, in filter 4 reference time: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 0:28:16.000 originate timestamp: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 0:28:16.000 transmit timestamp: d1a71a93.524a05dd Sat, Jun 18 2011 7:37:39.321 filter delay: 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 filter offset: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 delay 0.00000, dispersion 64.00000 offset 0.000000 server 64.6.144.6, port 123 stratum 0, precision 0, leap 00, trust 000 refid [64.6.144.6], delay 0.00000, dispersion 64.00000 transmitted 4, in filter 4 reference time: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 0:28:16.000 transmitted 4, in filter 4 reference time: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 0:28:16.000 originate timestamp: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 0:28:16.000 transmit timestamp: d1a71a93.524a05dd Sat, Jun 18 2011 7:37:39.321 filter delay: 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 filter offset: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 delay 0.00000, dispersion 64.00000 offset 0.000000 server 64.6.144.6, port 123 stratum 0, precision 0, leap 00, trust 000 refid [64.6.144.6], delay 0.00000, dispersion 64.00000 transmitted 4, in filter 4 reference time: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 0:28:16.000 originate timestamp: 00000000.00000000 Thu, Feb 7 2036 0:28:16.000 transmit timestamp: d1a71a93.857c6fbd Sat, Jun 18 2011 7:37:39.521 filter delay: 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 filter offset: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 delay 0.00000, dispersion 64.00000 offset 0.000000 18 Jun 07:37:40 ntpdate[10737]: no server suitable for synchronization found

    Read the article

  • Lock-Free, Wait-Free and Wait-freedom algorithms for non-blocking multi-thread synchronization.

    - by GJ
    In multi thread programming we can find different terms for data transfer synchronization between two or more threads/tasks. When exactly we can say that some algorithem is: 1)Lock-Free 2)Wait-Free 3)Wait-Freedom I understand what means Lock-free but when we can say that some synchronization algorithm is Wait-Free or Wait-Freedom? I have made some code (ring buffer) for multi-thread synchronization and it use Lock-Free methods but: 1) Algorithm predicts maximum execution time of this routine. 2) Therad which call this routine at beginning set unique reference, what mean that is inside of this routine. 3) Other threads which are calling the same routine check this reference and if is set than count the CPU tick count (measure time) of first involved thread. If that time is to long interrupt the current work of involved thread and overrides him job. 4) Thread which not finished job because was interrupted from task scheduler (is reposed) at the end check the reference if not belongs to him repeat the job again. So this algorithm is not really Lock-free but there is no memory lock in use, and other involved threads can wait (or not) certain time before overide the job of reposed thread. Added RingBuffer.InsertLeft function: function TgjRingBuffer.InsertLeft(const link: pointer): integer; var AtStartReference: cardinal; CPUTimeStamp : int64; CurrentLeft : pointer; CurrentReference: cardinal; NewLeft : PReferencedPtr; Reference : cardinal; label TryAgain; begin Reference := GetThreadId + 1; //Reference.bit0 := 1 with rbRingBuffer^ do begin TryAgain: //Set Left.Reference with respect to all other cores :) CPUTimeStamp := GetCPUTimeStamp + LoopTicks; AtStartReference := Left.Reference OR 1; //Reference.bit0 := 1 repeat CurrentReference := Left.Reference; until (CurrentReference AND 1 = 0)or (GetCPUTimeStamp - CPUTimeStamp > 0); //No threads present in ring buffer or current thread timeout if ((CurrentReference AND 1 <> 0) and (AtStartReference <> CurrentReference)) or not CAS32(CurrentReference, Reference, Left.Reference) then goto TryAgain; //Calculate RingBuffer NewLeft address CurrentLeft := Left.Link; NewLeft := pointer(cardinal(CurrentLeft) - SizeOf(TReferencedPtr)); if cardinal(NewLeft) < cardinal(@Buffer) then NewLeft := EndBuffer; //Calcolate distance result := integer(Right.Link) - Integer(NewLeft); //Check buffer full if result = 0 then //Clear Reference if task still own reference if CAS32(Reference, 0, Left.Reference) then Exit else goto TryAgain; //Set NewLeft.Reference NewLeft^.Reference := Reference; SFence; //Try to set link and try to exchange NewLeft and clear Reference if task own reference if (Reference <> Left.Reference) or not CAS64(NewLeft^.Link, Reference, link, Reference, NewLeft^) or not CAS64(CurrentLeft, Reference, NewLeft, 0, Left) then goto TryAgain; //Calcolate result if result < 0 then result := Length - integer(cardinal(not Result) div SizeOf(TReferencedPtr)) else result := cardinal(result) div SizeOf(TReferencedPtr); end; //with end; { TgjRingBuffer.InsertLeft } RingBuffer unit you can find here: RingBuffer, CAS functions: FockFreePrimitives, and test program: RingBufferFlowTest Thanks in advance, GJ

    Read the article

  • Thread Synchronization - UI thread and Worker thread

    This article describes how a Worker thread can take the control of the UI and can update the UI, created by the UI thread. This will be useful when a worker thread needs to update the UI in the mid of the background processing or on the completion without relying on UI thread to synchronize the work

    Read the article

  • Enabling Hyper-V Integrated Services Time Sync Services versus Internet Time Synchronization

    - by cpuguru
    Should I deselect the "Synchronize with an Internet Time Server" checkbox under the VM's "Date and Time - Internet Time Settings" tab if the "Time Synchronization Service" for a Hyper-V-based Virtual Machine is enabled? One of the Integration Services that Hyper-V provides is the Time Synchronization Service, which can be enabled/disabled by going to a VM's Settings-Integration Services setting in the Management section. I believe this is checked by default. When you install a Windows Server 2008 OS in a VM on the Hyper-V server, it comes with the "Synchronize with an Internet Time Server" option set, pointing to "time.windows.com". I'd think that if the parent Hyper-V server is set to one time server, and the child VM is pointing to a different time server, there would be a momentary blip if the two are not spot on with their times when the synchronization services run. So the question is, which time sync service should I use? I'm assuming not both. And what is the advantage of one over the other? Note: This question assumes that the machines are not joined to a domain. If they were, the machines would also try to update their time against the domain controller with the primary domain controller role too, right? Thanks!

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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