Search Results

Search found 14383 results on 576 pages for 'double checked locking'.

Page 3/576 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Explain the code: c# locking feature and threads

    - by Mendy
    I used this pattern in a few projects, (this snipped of code is from CodeCampServer), I understand what it does, but I'm really interesting in an explanation about this pattern. Specifically: Why is the double check of _dependenciesRegistered. Why to use lock (Lock){}. Thanks. public class DependencyRegistrarModule : IHttpModule { private static bool _dependenciesRegistered; private static readonly object Lock = new object(); public void Init(HttpApplication context) { context.BeginRequest += context_BeginRequest; } public void Dispose() { } private static void context_BeginRequest(object sender, EventArgs e) { EnsureDependenciesRegistered(); } private static void EnsureDependenciesRegistered() { if (!_dependenciesRegistered) { lock (Lock) { if (!_dependenciesRegistered) { new DependencyRegistrar().ConfigureOnStartup(); _dependenciesRegistered = true; } } } } }

    Read the article

  • JAXB, BigDecimal or double?

    - by Alex
    I working on different web-services, and I always use WSDL First. JAXB generates for a Type like: <xsd:simpleType name="CurrencyFormatTyp"> <xsd:restriction base="xsd:decimal"> <xsd:totalDigits value="13"/> <xsd:fractionDigits value="2"/> <xsd:minInclusive value="0.01"/> </xsd:restriction> </xsd:simpleType> a Java binding type BigDecimal (as it's mentioned in JAXB specification). When I then do some simple arithmetic operation with values of the type double (which are stored in a database and mapped via hibernate to the type double) I run into trouble. <ns5:charge>0.200000000000000011102230246251565404236316680908203125</ns5:charge> <ns5:addcharge>0.0360000000000000042188474935755948536098003387451171875</ns5:addcharge> <ns5:tax>0.047199999999999998900879205621095024980604648590087890625</ns5:tax> <ns5:totalextax>0.2360000000000000153210777398271602578461170196533203125</ns5:totalextax> What would be the right way? Convert all my values into double (JAXB binding from BigDecimal to double) Hibernate mapping double to Bigdecimal and do all my arithmetic operations in one object type.

    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

  • Spring Weblfow 2 - Double Submit

    - by John W.
    Hello All, I am investigating a possible issue with double submits and I am looking at the possibilty of a double submit from a webflow execution. I have read many times that webflow will handle double submits, there are plenty references here. However I then came across I a forum response on the spring source forums contradicting what I read saying, SWF synchronizes on the conversation. Only one request will be processed at a time per conversation. Take note that if you're using snapshots, then it's possible repeatedly clicking on the submit button will generate a second request. I would recommend setting history to invalidate or discard in the transition from your view-state. We do have snapshots enabled but the book notes that using snapshots actually allows to solve the double submits. Does anyone have any insight on this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Long Double in C

    - by reubensammut
    I've been reading the C Primer Plus book and got to this example #include <stdio.h> int main(void) { float aboat = 32000.0; double abet = 2.14e9; long double dip = 5.32e-5; printf("%f can be written %e\n", aboat, aboat); printf("%f can be written %e\n", abet, abet); printf("%f can be written %e\n", dip, dip); return 0; } After I ran this on my macbook I was quite shocked at the output: 32000.000000 can be written 3.200000e+04 2140000000.000000 can be written 2.140000e+09 2140000000.000000 can be written 2.140000e+09 So I looked round and found out that the correct format to display long double is to use %Lf. However I still can't understand why I got the double abet value instead of what I got when I ran it on Cygwin, Ubuntu and iDeneb which is roughly -1950228512509697486020297654959439872418023994430148306244153100897726713609 013030397828640261329800797420159101801613476402327600937901161313172717568.0 00000 can be written 2.725000e+02 Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Double.Parse - Internationalization problem

    - by oz
    This is driving me crazy. I have the following string in a ASP.NET 2.0 WebForm Page string s = "0.009"; Simple enough. Now, if my culture is Spanish - which is "es-ES" - and I try to convert the string to Double, I do the following: double d = Double.Parse(s, new CultureInfo("es-ES")); what I'd expect is 0,009. Instead, I get 9. I understand that .NET thinks it is a thousand separator, which in en-US is a comma, but shouldn't it take the culture info I'm passing to the parse method and apply the correct format to the conversion? If I do double d = 0.009D; string formatted = d.ToString(new CultureInfo("es-ES")); formatted is now 0,009. Anybody?

    Read the article

  • double precision in Ada?

    - by yCalleecharan
    Hi, I'm very new to Ada and was trying to see if it offers double precision type. I see that we have float and Put( Integer'Image( Float'digits ) ); on my machine gives a value of 6, which is not enough for numerical computations. Does Ada has double and long double types as in C? Thanks a lot...

    Read the article

  • erroneous Visual C float / double conversion?

    - by RED SOFT ADAIR
    In Visual C++ i wrote the following sample in a C++ program: float f1 = 42.48f; double d1 = 42.48; double d2 = f1; I compiled the program with Visual Studio 2005. In the debugger i see the following values: f1 42.480000 float d1 42.479999999999997 double d2 42.479999542236328 double d1 by my knowledege is OK, but d2 is wrong. The problem occurs as well with /fp=precise as with /fp=strict as with /fp=fast. Whats the problem here? Any hint how to avoid this Problem? This leads to serious numerical problems.

    Read the article

  • is memset(ary,0,length) a portable way of inputting zero in double array

    - by monkeyking
    The following code uses memset to set all the bits to zero #include <iostream> #include <cstring> int main(){ int length = 5; double *array = new double[length]; memset(array,0,sizeof(double)*length); for(int i=0;i<length;i++) if(array[i]!=0.0) std::cerr<< "not zero in: " <<i <<std::endl; return 0; } Can I assume that this will work on all platforms? Does the double datatype always correspond to the ieee-754 standard? thanks

    Read the article

  • printing double in binary

    - by Happy Mittal
    In Thinking in C++ by Bruce eckel, there is a program given to print a double value in binary.(Chapter 3, page no. 189) int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { if(argc != 2) { cout << "Must provide a number" << endl; exit(1); } double d = atof(argv[1]); unsigned char* cp = reinterpret_cast<unsigned char*>(&d); for(int i = sizeof(double); i > 0 ; i -= 2) { printBinary(cp[i-1]); printBinary(cp[i]); } } Here while printing cp[i] when i=8(assuming double is of 8 bytes), wouldn't it be undefined behaviour? I mean this code doesn't work as it doesn't print cp[0].

    Read the article

  • Converting a const char* into a double

    - by Koning Baard
    I am trying to convert a const char* to a double precision floating point number: int main(const int argc, const char *argv[]) { int i; double numbers[argc - 1]; for(i = 1; i < argc, i += 1) { /* -- Convert each argv into a double and put it in `number` */ } /* ... */ return 0; } Can anyone help me? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Saving Double.MinValue in SQLServer

    - by PatrickL
    Using a TSQL update command against a SQLServer database, how can I update a column of type FLOAT with the smallest possible double value? The smallest possible double value in hex notation being 3ff0 0000 0000 0001 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double%5Fprecision)

    Read the article

  • Converting a string into a double

    - by Koning Baard
    I am trying to convert a string (const char* argv[]) to a double precision floating point number: int main(const int argc, const char *argv[]) { int i; double numbers[argc - 1]; for(i = 1; i < argc; i += 1) { /* -- Convert each argv into a double and put it in `number` */ } /* ... */ return 0; } Can anyone help me? Thanks

    Read the article

  • why assign null value or another default value firstly?

    - by Phsika
    i try to generate some codes. i face to face delegates. Everythings is ok.(Look below) But appearing a warning: you shold assing value why? but second code below is ok. namespace Delegates { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { HesapMak hesapla = new HesapMak(); hesapla.Calculator = new HesapMak.Hesap(hesapla.Sum); double sonuc = hesapla.Calculator(34, 2); Console.WriteLine("Toplama Sonucu:{0}",sonuc.ToString()); Console.ReadKey(); } } class HesapMak { public double Sum(double s1, double s2) { return s1 + s2; } public double Cikarma(double s1, double s2) { return s1 - s2; } public double Multiply(double s1, double s2) { return s1 * s2; } public double Divide(double s1, double s2) { return s1 / s2; } public delegate double Hesap(double s1, double s2); public Hesap Calculator; ----&#60; they want me assingn value } } namespace Delegates { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { HesapMak hesapla = new HesapMak(); hesapla.Calculator = new HesapMak.Hesap(hesapla.Sum); double sonuc = hesapla.Calculator(34, 2); Console.WriteLine("Toplama Sonucu:{0}",sonuc.ToString()); Console.ReadKey(); } } class HesapMak { public double Sum(double s1, double s2) { return s1 + s2; } public double Cikarma(double s1, double s2) { return s1 - s2; } public double Multiply(double s1, double s2) { return s1 * s2; } public double Divide(double s1, double s2) { return s1 / s2; } public delegate double Hesap(double s1, double s2); public Hesap Calculator=null; } }

    Read the article

  • How to show that the double-checked-lock pattern with Dictionary's TryGetValue is not threadsafe in

    - by Amir
    Recently I've seen some C# projects that use a double-checked-lock pattern on a Dictionary. Something like this: private static readonly object _lock = new object(); private static volatile IDictionary<string, object> _cache = new Dictionary<string, object>(); public static object Create(string key) { object val; if (!_cache.TryGetValue(key, out val)) { lock (_lock) { if (!_cache.TryGetValue(key, out val)) { val = new object(); // factory construction based on key here. _cache.Add(key, val); } } } return val; } This code is incorrect, since the Dictionary can be "growing" the collection in _cache.Add() while _cache.TryGetValue (outside the lock) is iterating over the collection. It might be extremely unlikely in many situations, but is still wrong. Is there a simple program to demonstrate that this code fails? Does it make sense to incorporate this into a unit test? And if so, how?

    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

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