Search Results

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

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 34/66 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

  • For single-producer, single-consumer should I use a BlockingCollection or a ConcurrentQueue?

    - by Jonathan Allen
    For single-producer, single-consumer should I use a BlockingCollection or a ConcurrentQueue? Concerns: * My goal is to pull up to 100 items at a time and send them as a batch to the next step. * If I use a ConcurrentQueue, I have to manually cause it to go asleep when there is no work to be done. Otherwise I waste CPU cycles on spinning. * If I use a BlockingQueue and I only have 99 work items, it could indefinitely block until there the 100th item arrives. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.collections.concurrent.aspx

    Read the article

  • Is Stream.Write thread-safe?

    - by Mike Spross
    I'm working on a client/server library for a legacy RPC implementation and was running into issues where the client would sometimes hang when waiting to a receive a response message to an RPC request message. It turns out the real problem was in my message framing code (I wasn't handling message boundaries correctly when reading data off the underlying NetworkStream), but it also made me suspicious of the code I was using to send data across the network, specifically in the case where the RPC server sends a large amount of data to a client as the result of a client RPC request. My send code uses a BinaryWriter to write a complete "message" to the underlying NetworkStream. The RPC protocol also implements a heartbeat algorithm, where the RPC server sends out PING messages every 15 seconds. The pings are sent out by a separate thread, so, at least in theory, a ping can be sent while the server is in the middle of streaming a large response back to a client. Suppose I have a Send method as follows, where stream is a NetworkStream: public void Send(Message message) { //Write the message to a temporary stream so we can send it all-at-once MemoryStream tempStream = new MemoryStream(); message.WriteToStream(tempStream); //Write the serialized message to the stream. //The BinaryWriter is a little redundant in this //simplified example, but here because //the production code uses it. byte[] data = tempStream.ToArray(); BinaryWriter bw = new BinaryWriter(stream); bw.Write(data, 0, data.Length); bw.Flush(); } So the question I have is, is the call to bw.Write (and by implication the call to the underlying Stream's Write method) atomic? That is, if a lengthy Write is still in progress on the sending thread, and the heartbeat thread kicks in and sends a PING message, will that thread block until the original Write call finishes, or do I have to add explicit synchronization to the Send method to prevent the two Send calls from clobbering the stream?

    Read the article

  • how to create a system-wide independent universal counter object primarily for Database keys?

    - by andora
    I would like to create/use a system-wide independent universal 'counter object' that can be called via COM in a thread-safe manner. The counter object will be passed an ID to identify which counter to return, handle the counting, 'persist' the count (occasionally), have reasonable performance (as fast as possible) perhaps capable of 1000 counts per second or better (1mS) and be accessible cross-process/out-of-process. The current count status must be persisted between object restarts/shutdowns. The counter object is liklely to be a 'singleton' type object implemented in some form of free-threaded dictionary, containing maybe 10 counters (perhaps 50 max). The count needs to be monotonic and consistent, (ie: guaranteed unique sequential values). Each counter should have a few methods, like reset, inc, dec, set, clear, remove. As a luxury, I would like to have a variable-increment (ie: 'step by' value). To support thread-safefty, perhaps some sorm of critical-section or mutex call. It just needs to return a long/4byte signed integer. I really want something that can be called from anywhere, including VBScript, so I figure COM is my preferred solution. The primary use of this is for database keys. I am unable to use autoinc or guid type keys and have ruled out database-generated counting systems at this point. I've spent days researching this and I have really struggled to find a solution. The best I can find is a free-threaded dictionary object that can be instantiated using COM+ from Motobit - it seems to offer all the 'basics' and I guess I could create some form of wrapper for this. So, here are my questions: Does such a 'general purpose counter-object already exist? Can you direct me to it? (MS did do an IIS/ASP object called 'MSWC.Counter' but this isn't 'cross-process'/ out-of-process component and isn't thread-safe. (but if it was, it would do!) What is the best way of creating such a Component? (I'd prefer VB6 right-now, [don't ask!] but can do in VB.NET2005 if I had to). I don't have the skills/knowledge/tools to use anything else. I am desparate for a workable solution. I need specific guidance! If anybody can code something up for me I am prepared to pay for it.

    Read the article

  • Are indivisible operations still indivisible on multiprocessor and multicore systems?

    - by Steve314
    As per the title, plus what are the limitations and gotchas. For example, on x86 processors, alignment for most data types is optional - an optimisation rather than a requirement. That means that a pointer may be stored at an unaligned address, which in turn means that pointer might be split over a cache page boundary. Obviously this could be done if you work hard enough on any processor (picking out particular bytes etc), but not in a way where you'd still expect the write operation to be indivisible. I seriously doubt that a multicore processor can ensure that other cores can guarantee a consistent all-before or all-after view of a written pointer in this unaligned-write-crossing-a-page-boundary situation. Am I right? And are there any similar gotchas I haven't thought of?

    Read the article

  • Java Thread Example ?

    - by JavaUser
    Hi, Anyone give example program which explains Java Threads in a simpler way.For example,we have the following threads t1 , t2 and t3 . Here I want code that shows each thread is executing simultaneously not sequentially like non-threaded java programs. Thx

    Read the article

  • Setting the default stack size on Linux globally for the program

    - by wowus
    So I've noticed that the default stack size for threads on linux is 8MB (if I'm wrong, PLEASE correct me), and, incidentally, 1MB on Windows. This is quite bad for my application, as on a 4-core processor that means 64 MB is space is used JUST for threads! The worst part is, I'm never using more than 100kb of stack per thread (I abuse the heap a LOT ;)). My solution right now is to limit the stack size of threads. However, I have no idea how to do this portably. Just for context, I'm using Boost.Thread for my threading needs. I'm okay with a little bit of #ifdef hell, but I'd like to know how to do it easily first. Basically, I want something like this (where windows_* is linked on windows builds, and posix_* is linked under linux builds) // windows_stack_limiter.c int limit_stack_size() { // Windows impl. return 0; } // posix_stack_limiter.c int limit_stack_size() { // Linux impl. return 0; } // stack_limiter.cpp int limit_stack_size(); static volatile int placeholder = limit_stack_size(); How do I flesh out those functions? Or, alternatively, am I just doing this entirely wrong? Remember I have no control over the actual thread creation (no new params to CreateThread on Windows), as I'm using Boost.Thread.

    Read the article

  • dynamically change bitmap in imageView, android

    - by Junfei Wang
    All, I have a problem related to imageView, android. I have array which contains of 10 bitmap objects, called bm. I have a imageView, called im. Now I wanna show the bitmaps in the array in im one by one, so I did the following: new Thread(new Runnable() { public void run() { for(int j=0;j<10;j++){ im.setImageBitmap(bm[j]); } } }).start(); But the result only shows the last bitmap in the array. Can someone tell me what to do with this issue? Millions of thanks!

    Read the article

  • Accessing global variable in multithreaded Tomcat server

    - by jwegan
    I have a singleton object that I construct like thus: private static volatile KeyMapper mapper = null; public static KeyMapper getMapper() { if(mapper == null) { synchronized(Utils.class) { if(mapper == null) { mapper = new LocalMemoryMapper(); } } } return mapper; } The class KeyMapper is basically a synchronized wrapper to HashMap with only two functions, one to add a mapping and one to remove a mapping. When running in Tomcat 6.24 on my 32bit Windows machine everything works fine. However when running on a 64 bit Linux machine (CentOS 5.4 with OpenJDK 1.6.0-b09) I add one mapping and print out the size of the HashMap used by KeyMapper to verify the mapping got added (i.e. verify size = 1). Then I try to retrieve the mapping with another request and I keep getting null and when I checked the size of the HashMap it was 0. I'm confident the mapping isn't accidentally being removed since I've commented out all calls to remove (and I don't use clear or any other mutators, just get and put). The requests are going through Tomcat 6.24 (configured to use 200 threads with a minimum of 4 threads) and I passed -Xnoclassgc to the jvm to ensure the class isn't inadvertently getting garbage collected (jvm is also running in -server mode). I also added a finalize method to KeyMapper to print to stderr if it ever gets garbage collected to verify that it wasn't being garbage collected. I'm at my wits end and I can't figure out why one minute the entry in HashMap is there and the next it isn't :(

    Read the article

  • [F#] Parallelize code in nested loops

    - by Juliet
    You always hear that functional code is inherently easier to parallelize than non-functional code, so I decided to write a function which does the following: Given a input of strings, total up the number of unique characters for each string. So, given the input [ "aaaaa"; "bbb"; "ccccccc"; "abbbc" ], our method will returns a: 6; b: 6; c: 8. Here's what I've written: (* seq<#seq<char>> -> Map<char,int> *) let wordFrequency input = input |> Seq.fold (fun acc text -> (* This inner loop can be processed on its own thread *) text |> Seq.choose (fun char -> if Char.IsLetter char then Some(char) else None) |> Seq.fold (fun (acc : Map<_,_>) item -> match acc.TryFind(item) with | Some(count) -> acc.Add(item, count + 1) | None -> acc.Add(item, 1)) acc ) Map.empty This code is ideally parallelizable, because each string in input can be processed on its own thread. Its not as straightforward as it looks since the innerloop adds items to a Map shared between all of the inputs. I'd like the inner loop factored out into its own thread, and I don't want to use any mutable state. How would I re-write this function using an Async workflow?

    Read the article

  • Optimizing a shared buffer in a producer/consumer multithreaded environment

    - by Etan
    I have some project where I have a single producer thread which writes events into a buffer, and an additional single consumer thread which takes events from the buffer. My goal is to optimize this thing for a single machine to achieve maximum throughput. Currently, I am using some simple lock-free ring buffer (lock-free is possible since I have only one consumer and one producer thread and therefore the pointers are only updated by a single thread). #define BUF_SIZE 32768 struct buf_t { volatile int writepos; volatile void * buffer[BUF_SIZE]; volatile int readpos;) }; void produce (buf_t *b, void * e) { int next = (b->writepos+1) % BUF_SIZE; while (b->readpos == next); // queue is full. wait b->buffer[b->writepos] = e; b->writepos = next; } void * consume (buf_t *b) { while (b->readpos == b->writepos); // nothing to consume. wait int next = (b->readpos+1) % BUF_SIZE; void * res = b->buffer[b->readpos]; b->readpos = next; return res; } buf_t *alloc () { buf_t *b = (buf_t *)malloc(sizeof(buf_t)); b->writepos = 0; b->readpos = 0; return b; } However, this implementation is not yet fast enough and should be optimized further. I've tried with different BUF_SIZE values and got some speed-up. Additionaly, I've moved writepos before the buffer and readpos after the buffer to ensure that both variables are on different cache lines which resulted also in some speed. What I need is a speedup of about 400 %. Do you have any ideas how I could achieve this using things like padding etc?

    Read the article

  • Lock free multiple readers single writer

    - by dummzeuch
    I have got an in memory data structure that is read by multiple threads and written by only one thread. Currently I am using a critical section to make this access threadsafe. Unfortunately this has the effect of blocking readers even though only another reader is accessing it. There are two options to remedy this: use TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer do away with any blocking by using a lock free approach For 2. I have got the following so far (any code that doesn't matter has been left out): type TDataManager = class private FAccessCount: integer; FData: TDataClass; public procedure Read(out _Some: integer; out _Data: double); procedure Write(_Some: integer; _Data: double); end; procedure TDataManager.Read(out _Some: integer; out _Data: double); var Data: TDAtaClass; begin InterlockedIncrement(FAccessCount); try // make sure we get both values from the same TDataClass instance Data := FData; // read the actual data _Some := Data.Some; _Data := Data.Data; finally InterlockedDecrement(FAccessCount); end; end; procedure TDataManager.Write(_Some: integer; _Data: double); var NewData: TDataClass; OldData: TDataClass; ReaderCount: integer; begin NewData := TDataClass.Create(_Some, _Data); InterlockedIncrement(FAccessCount); OldData := TDataClass(InterlockedExchange(integer(FData), integer(NewData)); // now FData points to the new instance but there might still be // readers that got the old one before we exchanged it. ReaderCount := InterlockedDecrement(FAccessCount); if ReaderCount = 0 then // no active readers, so we can safely free the old instance FreeAndNil(OldData) else begin /// here is the problem end; end; Unfortunately there is the small problem of getting rid of the OldData instance after it has been replaced. If no other thread is currently within the Read method (ReaderCount=0), it can safely be disposed and that's it. But what can I do if that's not the case? I could just store it until the next call and dispose it there, but Windows scheduling could in theory let a reader thread sleep while it is within the Read method and still has got a reference to OldData. If you see any other problem with the above code, please tell me about it. This is to be run on computers with multiple cores and the above methods are to be called very frequently. In case this matters: I am using Delphi 2007 with the builtin memory manager. I am aware that the memory manager probably enforces some lock anyway when creating a new class but I want to ignore that for the moment. Edit: It may not have been clear from the above: For the full lifetime of the TDataManager object there is only one thread that writes to the data, not several that might compete for write access. So this is a special case of MREW.

    Read the article

  • C++ VB6 interfacing problem

    - by Roshan
    Hi, I'm tearing my hair out trying to solve this one, any insights will be much appreciated: I have a C++ exe which acquires data from some hardware in the main thread and processes it in another thread (thread 2). I use a c++ dll to supply some data processing functions which are called from thread 2. I have a requirement to make another set of data processing functions in VB6. I have thus created a VB6 dll, using the add-in vbAdvance to create a standard dll. When I call functions from within this VB6 dll from the main thread, everything works exactly as expected. When I call functions from this VB6 dll in thread 2, I get an access violation. I've traced the error to the CopyMemory command, it would seem that if this is used within the call from the main thread, it's fine but in a call from the process thread, it causes an exception. Why should this be so? As far as I understand, threads share the same address space. Here is the code from my VB dll Public Sub UserFunInterface(ByVal in1ptr As Long, ByVal out1ptr As Long, ByRef nsamples As Long) Dim myarray1() As Single Dim myarray2() As Single Dim i As Integer ReDim myarray1(0 To nsamples - 1) As Single ReDim myarray2(0 To nsamples - 1) As Single With tsa1din(0) ' defined as safearray1d in a global definitions module .cDims = 1 .cbElements = 4 .cElements = nsamples .pvData = in1ptr End With With tsa1dout .cDims = 1 .cbElements = 4 .cElements = nsamples .pvData = out1ptr End With CopyMemory ByVal VarPtrArray(myarray1), VarPtr(tsa1din(0)), 4 CopyMemory ByVal VarPtrArray(myarray2), VarPtr(tsa1dout), 4 For i = 0 To nsamples - 1 myarray2(i) = myarray1(i) * 2 Next i ZeroMemory ByVal VarPtrArray(myarray1), 4 ZeroMemory ByVal VarPtrArray(myarray2), 4 End Sub

    Read the article

  • asp.net Background Threads Exception Handling

    - by Chris
    In my 3.5 .net web application I have a background thread that does a lot of work (the application is similar to mint.com in that it does a lot of account aggregation on background threads). I do extensive exception handling within the thread performing the aggregation but there's always the chance an unhandled exception will be thrown and my entire application will die. I've read some articles about this topic but they all seem fairly outdated and none of them implement a standard approach. Is there a standard approach to this nowadays? Is there any nicer way to handle this in ASP.NET 4.0?

    Read the article

  • Yet another C# Deadlock Debugging Question

    - by Roo
    Hi All, I have a multi-threaded application build in C# using VS2010 Professional. It's quite a large application and we've experienced the classing GUI cross-threading and deadlock issues before, but in the past month we've noticed the appears to lock up when left idle for around 20-30 minutes. The application is irresponsive and although it will repaint itself when other windows are dragged in front of the application and over it, the GUI still appears to be locked... interstingly (unlike if the GUI thread is being used for a considerable amount of time) the Close, Maximise and minimise buttons are also irresponsive and when clicked the little (Not Responding...) text is not displayed in the title of the application i.e. Windows still seems to think it's running fine. If I break/pause the application using the debugger, and view the threads that are running. There are 3 threads of our managed code that are running, and a few other worker threads whom the source code cannot be displayed for. The 3 threads that run are: The main/GUI thread A thread that loops indefinitely A thread that loops indefinitely If I step into threads 2 and 3, they appear to be looping correctly. They do not share locks (even with the main GUI thread) and they are not using the GUI thread at all. When stepping into the main/GUI thread however, it's broken on Application.Run... This problem screams deadlock to me, but what I don't understand is if it's deadlock, why can't I see the line of code the main/GUI thread is hanging on? Any help will be greatly appreciated! Let me know if you need more information... Cheers, Roo -----------------------------------------------------SOLUTION-------------------------------------------------- Okay, so the problem is now solved. Thanks to everyone for their suggestions! Much appreciated! I've marked the answer that solved my initial problem of determining where on the main/UI thread the application hangs (I handn't turned off the "Enable Just My Code" option). The overall issue I was experiencing was indeed Deadlock, however. After obtaining the call-stack and popping the top half of it into Google I came across this which explains exactly what I was experiencing... http://timl.net/ This references a lovely guide to debugging the issue... http://www.aaronlerch.com/blog/2008/12/15/debugging-ui/ This identified a control I was constructing off the GUI thread. I did know this, however, and was marshalling calls correctly, but what I didn't realise was that behind the scenes this Control was subscribing to an event or set of events that are triggered when e.g. a Windows session is unlocked or the screensaver exits. These calls are always made on the main/UI thread and were blocking when it saw the call was made on the incorrect thread. Kim explains in more detail here... http://krgreenlee.blogspot.com/2007/09/onuserpreferencechanged-hang.html In the end I found an alternative solution which did not require this Control off the main/UI thread. That appears to have solved the problem and the application no longer hangs. I hope this helps anyone who's confronted by a similar problem. Thanks again to everyone on here who helped! (and indirectly, the delightful bloggers I've referenced above!) Roo -----------------------------------------------------SOLUTION II-------------------------------------------------- Aren't threading issues delightful...you think you've solved it, and a month down the line it pops back up again. I still believe the solution above resolved an issue that would cause simillar behaviour, but we encountered the problem again. As we spent a while debugging this, I thought I'd update this question with our (hopefully) final solution: The problem appears to have been a bug in the Infragistics components in the WinForms 2010.1 release (no hot fixes). We had been running from around the time the freeze issue appeared (but had also added a bunch of other stuff too). After upgrading to WinForms 2010.3, we've yet to reproduce the issue (deja vu). See my question here for a bit more information: 'http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4077822/net-4-0-and-the-dreaded-onuserpreferencechanged-hang'. Hans has given a nice summary of the general issue. I hope this adds a little to the suggestions/information surrounding the nutorious OnUserPreferenceChanged Hang (or whatever you'd like to call it). Cheers, Roo

    Read the article

  • Why the performance of following code is degrading when I use threads ?

    - by DotNetBeginner
    Why the performance of following code is degrading when I use threads ? **1.Without threads int[] arr = new int[100000000]; //Array elements - [0][1][2][3]---[100000000-1] addWithOutThreading(arr); // Time required for this operation - 1.16 sec Definition for addWithOutThreading public void addWithOutThreading(int[] arr) { UInt64 result = 0; for (int i = 0; i < 100000000; i++) { result = result + Convert.ToUInt64(arr[i]); } Console.WriteLine("Addition = " + result.ToString()); } **2.With threads int[] arr = new int[100000000]; int part = (100000000 / 4); UInt64 res1 = 0, res2 = 0, res3 = 0, res4 = 0; ThreadStart starter1 = delegate { addWithThreading(arr, 0, part, ref res1); }; ThreadStart starter2 = delegate { addWithThreading(arr, part, part * 2, ref res2); }; ThreadStart starter3 = delegate { addWithThreading(arr, part * 2, part * 3, ref res3); }; ThreadStart starter4 = delegate { addWithThreading(arr, part * 3, part * 4, ref res4); }; Thread t1 = new Thread(starter1); Thread t2 = new Thread(starter2); Thread t3 = new Thread(starter3); Thread t4 = new Thread(starter4); t1.Start(); t2.Start(); t3.Start(); t4.Start(); t1.Join(); t2.Join(); t3.Join(); t4.Join(); Console.WriteLine("Addition = "+(res1+res2+res3+res4).ToString()); // Time required for this operation - 1.30 sec Definition for addWithThreading public void addWithThreading(int[] arr,int startIndex, int endIndex,ref UInt64 result) { for (int i = startIndex; i < endIndex; i++) { result = result + Convert.ToUInt64(arr[i]); } }

    Read the article

  • Does WCF use the ThreadPool to bring up new instances for a PerCall service?

    - by theburningmonk
    Hi, for a PerCall WCF service whose throttling has been set to be high (say, 200 max concurrent calls) would WCF bring up a new instance and invoke the request on a threadpool thread? If it does, then does this have an impact on the total number of concurrent calls allowed? I ask because I don't seem to ever hit the max number of concurrent calls I've set in the service throttling config but instead a fraction of that number - up to 50 on a 100 MaxConcurrentCalls setting and 160 on a 200 MaxConcurrentCalls setting. Thanks,

    Read the article

  • If I allocate memory in one thread in C++ can I de-allocate it in another

    - by Shane MacLaughlin
    If I allocate memory in one thread in C++ (either new or malloc) can I de-allocate it in another, or must both occur in the same thread? Ideally, I'd like to avoid this in the first place, but I'm curious to know is it legal, illegal or implementation dependent. Edit: The compilers I'm currently using include VS2003, VS2008 and Embedded C++ 4.0, targetting XP, Vista, Windows 7 and various flavours of Windows CE / PocketPC & Mobile. So basically all Microsoft but across an array of esoteric platforms.

    Read the article

  • How can I make a single WCF method ConcurrencyMode.Multiple when service is ConcurencyMode.Single

    - by Michael Hedgpeth
    I have a service which is defined as ConcurrencyMode.Single: [ServiceBehavior(ConcurrencyMode = ConcurrencyMode.Single, UseSynchronizationContext = false, InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.PerSession, IncludeExceptionDetailInFaults = true)] public class MyService : IMyService This service provides a method to tell the client what it's currently working on: [OperationContract] string GetCurrentTaskDescription(); Is there a way to make this particular method allowable while another long-running task is running where all other methods still follow the single-threaded concurrency model?

    Read the article

  • what happens to running/blocked runnables when executorservice is shutdown()

    - by prmatta
    I posted a question about a thread pattern today, and almost everyone suggested that I look into the ExecutorService. While I was looking into the ExecutorService, I think I am missing something. What happens if the service has a running or blocked threads, and someone calls ExecutorService.shutdown(). What happens to threads that are running or blocked? Does the ExecutorService wait for those threads to complete before it terminates? The reason I ask this is because a long time ago when I used to dabble in Java, they deprecated Thread.stop(), and I remember the right way of stopping a thread was to use sempahores and extend Thread when necessary: public void run () { while (!this.exit) { try { block(); //do something } catch (InterruptedException ie) { } } } public void stop () { this.exit = true; if (this.thread != null) { this.thread.interrupt(); this.thread = null; } } How does ExecutorService handle running threads?

    Read the article

  • Multi-Threading Question Concerning WPF

    - by Andrew
    Hello, I'm a newbie to threading, and I don't really know how to code a particular task. I would like to handle a mouse click event on a window that will kick off a while loop in a seperate thread. This thread, which is distinct from the UI thread, should call a function in the while loop which updates a label on the window being serviced by the UI thread. The while loop should stop running when the left mouse button is no longer being pressed. All the loop does is increment a counter, and then repeatedly call the function which displays the updated value in the window. The code for the window and all of the threading is given below (I keep getting some error about STA threading, but don't know where to put the attribute). Also, I'm hoping to use this solution, if it ever works, in another project that makes asynchronous calls elsewhere to a service via wcf, so I was hoping not to make any application-wide special configurations, since I'm really new to multi-threading and am quite worried about breaking other code in a larger program... Here's what I have: <Window x:Class="WpfApplication2.MainWindow" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" xmlns:local="clr-namespace:WpfApplication2" Name="MyMainWindow" Title="MainWindow" Width="200" Height="150" PreviewMouseLeftButtonDown="MyMainWindow_PreviewMouseLeftButtonDown"> <Label Height="28" Name="CounterLbl" /> </Window> And here's the code-behind: using System.Windows; using System.Windows.Input; using System.Threading; namespace WpfApplication2 { /// <summary> /// Interaction logic for MainWindow.xaml /// </summary> public partial class MainWindow : Window { private int counter = 0; public MainWindow() { InitializeComponent(); } private delegate void EmptyDelegate(); private void MyMainWindow_PreviewMouseLeftButtonDown(object sender, MouseButtonEventArgs e) { Thread counterThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(MyThread)); counterThread.Start(); } private void MyThread() { while (Mouse.LeftButton == MouseButtonState.Pressed) { counter++; Dispatcher.Invoke(new EmptyDelegate(UpdateLabelContents), null); } } private void UpdateLabelContents() { CounterLbl.Content = counter.ToString(); } } } Anyways, multi-threading is really new to me, and I don't have any experience implementing it, so any thoughts or suggestions are welcome! Thanks, Andrew

    Read the article

  • C# : What if a static method is called from multiple threads?

    - by Holli
    In my Application I have a static method that is called from multiple threads at the same time. Is there any danger of my data being mixed up? In my first attempt the method was not static and I was creating multiple instance of the class. In that case my data got mixed up somehow. I am not sure how this happens because it only happens sometimes. I am still debugging. But now the method is static on I have no problems so far. Maybe it's just luck. I don't know for sure.

    Read the article

  • WCF threading - non-responsive UI

    - by Sphynx
    Hi everyone. I'm trying to configure some WCF stuff. Currently, I have a server which allows remote users to download files, and client. In the server, I use a ServiceHost class. I assume it should be running on a separate thread, however, the server UI (WinForms) becomes locked when someone downloads a file. Is there a way to manage the WCF threading model? Thank you!

    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 | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >