Search Results

Search found 2299 results on 92 pages for 'hyper threading'.

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 35/92 | < Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >

  • How to terminate a thread which has spawned another thread which is sleeping?

    - by Bobb
    I have a long running thread made from Thread.Start(). It spawns a background thread using QueueUserWorkItem which sleeps most of the time. Then the class-owner get disposed I call thread1.Join() but naturally it doesnt return because its child background thread is sleeping. What would be the right solution to gracefully terminate a thread which has other threads with little hassle?

    Read the article

  • Is there any point in using a volatile long?

    - by Adamski
    I occasionally use a volatile instance variable in cases where I have two threads reading from / writing to it and don't want the overhead (or potential deadlock risk) of taking out a lock; for example a timer thread periodically updating an int ID that is exposed as a getter on some class: public class MyClass { private volatile int id; public MyClass() { ScheduledExecutorService execService = Executors.newScheduledThreadPool(1); execService.scheduleAtFixedRate(new Runnable() { public void run() { ++id; } }, 0L, 30L, TimeUnit.SECONDS); } public int getId() { return id; } } My question: Given that the JLS only guarantees that 32-bit reads will be atomic is there any point in ever using a volatile long? (i.e. 64-bit). Caveat: Please do not reply saying that using volatile over synchronized is a case of pre-optimisation; I am well aware of how / when to use synchronized but there are cases where volatile is preferable. For example, when defining a Spring bean for use in a single-threaded application I tend to favour volatile instance variables, as there is no guarantee that the Spring context will initialise each bean's properties in the main thread.

    Read the article

  • Call event from original thread ??

    - by user311883
    Hi all, Here is my problem, I have a class which have a object who throw an event and in this event I throw a custom event from my class. But unfortunately the original object throw the event from another thread and so my event is also throw on another thread. This cause a exception when my custom event try to access from controls. Here is a code sample to better understand : class MyClass { // Original object private OriginalObject myObject; // My event public delegate void StatsUpdatedDelegate(object sender, StatsArgs args); public event StatsUpdatedDelegate StatsUpdated; public MyClass() { // Original object event myObject.AnEvent += new EventHandler(myObject_AnEvent); } // This event is called on another thread private void myObject_AnEvent(object sender, EventArgs e) { // Throw my custom event here StatsArgs args = new StatsArgs(..........); StatsUpdated(this, args); } } So when on my windows form I call try to update a control from the event StatsUpdated I get a cross thread exception cause it has been called on another thread. What I want to do is throw my custom event on the original class thread, so control can be used within it. Anyone can help me ?

    Read the article

  • creating QT gui using a thread in c++?

    - by rashid
    I am trying to create this QT gui using a thread but no luck. Below is my code. Problem is gui never shows up. /*INCLUDES HERE... .... */ using namespace std; struct mainStruct { int s_argc;<br> char ** s_argv; }; typedef struct mainStruct mas; void *guifunc(void * arg); int main(int argc, char * argv[]) { mas m;<br> m.s_argc = argc;<br> m.s_argv = argv;<br> pthread_t threadGUI; //start a new thread for gui int result = pthread_create(&threadGUI, NULL, guifunc, (void *) &m); if (result) {<br> printf("Error creating gui thread"); exit(0); } return 0; } void *guifunc(void * arg) { mas m = *(mas *)arg; QApplication app(m.s_argc,m.s_argv); //object instantiation<br> guiClass *gui = new guiClass(); //show gui<br> gui->show(); app.exec(); <br> }

    Read the article

  • Invalid Cross-Thread Operations from BackgroundWorker2_RunWorkerCompleted in C#

    - by Jim Fell
    Hello. I'm getting an error that does not make sense. Cross-thread operation not valid: Control 'buttonOpenFile' accessed from a thread other than the thread it was created on. In my application, the UI thread fires off backgroundWorker1, which when almost complete fires off backgroundWorker2 and waits for it to complete. backgroundWorker1 waits for backgroundWorker2 to complete, before it completes. AutoResetEvent variables are used to flag when each of the workers complete. In backgroundWorker2_RunWorkerComplete a function is called that resets the form controls. It is in this ResetFormControls() function where the exception is thrown. I thought it was safe to modify form controls in the RunWorkerCompleted function. Both background workers are instantiated from the UI thread. Here is a greatly summarized version of what I am doing: AutoResetEvent evtProgrammingComplete_c = new AutoResetEvent(false); AutoResetEvent evtResetComplete_c = new AutoResetEvent(false); private void ResetFormControls() { toolStripProgressBar1.Enabled = false; toolStripProgressBar1.RightToLeftLayout = false; toolStripProgressBar1.Value = 0; buttonInit.Enabled = true; buttonOpenFile.Enabled = true; // Error occurs here. buttonProgram.Enabled = true; buttonAbort.Enabled = false; buttonReset.Enabled = true; checkBoxPeripheryModule.Enabled = true; checkBoxVerbose.Enabled = true; comboBoxComPort.Enabled = true; groupBoxToolSettings.Enabled = true; groupBoxNodeSettings.Enabled = true; } private void buttonProgram_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { while (backgroundWorkerProgram.IsBusy) backgroundWorkerProgram.CancelAsync(); backgroundWorkerProgram.RunWorkerAsync(); } private void backgroundWorkerProgram_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e) { // Does a bunch of stuff... if (tProgramStat_c == eProgramStat_t.DONE) { tProgramStat_c = eProgramStat_t.RESETTING; while (backgroundWorkerReset.IsBusy) backgroundWorkerReset.CancelAsync(); backgroundWorkerReset.RunWorkerAsync(); evtResetComplete_c.WaitOne(LONG_ACK_WAIT * 2); if (tResetStat_c == eResetStat_t.COMPLETED) tProgramStat_c = eProgramStat_t.DONE; } } private void backgroundWorkerProgram_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e) { // Updates form to report complete. No problems here. evtProgrammingComplete_c.Set(); backgroundWorkerProgram.Dispose(); } private void backgroundWorkerReset_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e) { // Does a bunch of stuff... if (tResetStat_c == eResetStat_t.COMPLETED) if (tProgramStat_c == eProgramStat_t.RESETTING) evtProgrammingComplete_c.WaitOne(); } private void backgroundWorkerReset_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e) { CloseAllComms(); ResetFormControls(); evtResetComplete_c.Set(); backgroundWorkerReset.Dispose(); } Any thoughts or suggestions you may have would be appreciated. I am using Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How long is the time frame between context switches on Windows?

    - by mattcodes
    Reading CLR via C# 2.0 (I dont have 3.0 with me at the moment) Is this still the case: If there is only one CPU in a computer, only one thread can run at any one time. Windows has to keep track of the thread objects, and every so often, Windows has to decide which thread to schedule next to go to the CPU. This is additional code that has to execute once every 20 milliseconds or so. When Windows makes a CPU stop executing one thread's code and start executing another thread's code, we call this a context switch. A context switch is fairly expensive because the operating system has to: So circa CLR via C# 2.0 lets say we are on Pentium 4 2.4ghz 1 core non-HT, XP. Every 20 milliseconds? Where a CLR thread or Java thread is mapped to an OS thread only a maximum of 50 threads per second may get a chance to to run? I've read that context switching is very fast in mircoseconds here on SO, but how often roughly (magnitude style guesses) will say a modest 5 year old server Windows 2003 Pentium Xeon single core give the OS the opportunity to context switch? 20ms in the right area? I dont need exact figures I just want to be sure that's in the right area, seems rather long to me.

    Read the article

  • creating a QT gui using a thread in c++?

    - by rashid
    I am trying to create this QT gui using a thread but no luck. Below is my code. Problem is gui never shows up. But if i put QApplication app(m.s_argc,m.s_argv); //object instantiation guiClass *gui = new guiClass(); //show gui gui-show(); app.exec(); in main() then it works. /*INCLUDES HERE... .... */ using namespace std; struct mainStruct { int s_argc; char ** s_argv; }; typedef struct mainStruct mas; void *guifunc(void * arg); int main(int argc, char * argv[]) { mas m; m.s_argc = argc; m.s_argv = argv; pthread_t threadGUI; //start a new thread for gui int result = pthread_create(&threadGUI, NULL, guifunc, (void *) &m); if (result) { printf("Error creating gui thread"); exit(0); } return 0; } void *guifunc(void * arg) { mas m = *(mas *)arg; QApplication app(m.s_argc,m.s_argv); //object instantiation guiClass *gui = new guiClass(); //show gui gui-show(); app.exec(); }

    Read the article

  • Threadpool design question

    - by ZeroVector
    I have a design question. I want some feedback to know if a ThreadPool is appropriate for the client program I am writing. I am having a client running as a service processing database records. Each of these records contains connection information to external FTP sites [basically it is a queue of files to transfer]. A lot of them are to the same host, just moving different files. Therefore, I am grouping them together by host. I want to be able to create a new thread per host. I really don't care when the transfers finish, they just need to do all the work (or try to do) they were assigned, and then terminate once they are finished, cleaning up all resources they used in the process. I anticipate no more than 10-25 connections to be established. Once the transfer queue is empty, the program will simply wait until there are records in the queue again. Is the ThreadPool a good candidate for this or should I use a different approach? Edit: For the most part, this is the only significant custom application running on the server.

    Read the article

  • How to show progressbar in win32 application?please help me!

    - by kiddo
    Hi all,I am trying to display a progress bar with some informations in it,say for example am reading files ..I want to display the progress bar progressing with the filename that is being read etc..I am doing this in an win 32 application.I know that we should do it using thread but am not quite familiar with that,check the below picture example,thats what i need it exactly.

    Read the article

  • C#: Populating a UI using separate threads.

    - by Andrew
    I'm trying to make some sense out of an application Ive been handed in order to track down the source of an error. Theres a bit of code (simplified here) which creates four threads which in turn populate list views on the main form. Each method gets data from the database and retrieves graphics from a resource dll in order to directly populate an imagelist and listview. From what Ive read on here (link) updating UI elements from any thread other than the UI thread should not be done, and yet this appears to work? Thread t0 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(PopulateListView1)); t0.IsBackground = true; t0.Start(); Thread t1 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(PopulateListView2)); t1.Start(); Thread t2 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(PopulateListView3)); t2.Start(); Thread t3 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(PopulateListView4)); t3.Start(); The error itself is a System.InvalidOperationException "Image cannot be added to the ImageList." which has me wondering if the above code is linked in some way. Iis this method of populating the UI recommended and if not what are the possible complications resulting from it?

    Read the article

  • C++ setTimout function ?

    - by Quandary
    What's the cheapest way for a JavaScript like setTimeout-function in C++? I would need this: 5000 miliseconds from now, start function xy (no parameters, no return value). The reason for this is I need to initialize COM for text to speech, but when I do it on dll attach, it crashes. It works fine however if I do not call CoInitialize from dllmain. I just need to call CoInitialize and CoCreateInstance, and then use the instance in other functions. I can catch the uninitialized instance by checking for NULL, but I need to initialize COM - without crashing.

    Read the article

  • UI Thread .Invoke() causing handle leak?

    - by JYelton
    In what circumstances would updating a UI control from a non-UI thread could cause the processes' handles to continually increase, when using a delegate and .InvokeRequired? For example: public delegate void DelegateUIUpdate(); private void UIUpdate() { if (someControl.InvokeRequired) { someControl.Invoke(new DelegateUIUpdate(UIUpdate)); return; } // do something with someControl } When this is called in a loop or on timer intervals, the handles for the program consistently increase.

    Read the article

  • Wait between tasks with SingleThreadExecutor

    - by Lord.Quackstar
    I am trying to (simply) make a blocking thread queue, where when a task is submitted the method waits until its finished executing. The hard part though is the wait. Here's my 12:30 AM code that I think is overkill: public void sendMsg(final BotMessage msg) { try { Future task; synchronized(msgQueue) { task = msgQueue.submit(new Runnable() { public void run() { sendRawLine("PRIVMSG " + msg.channel + " :" + msg.message); } }); //Add a seperate wait so next runnable doesn't get executed yet but //above one unblocks msgQueue.submit(new Runnable() { public void run() { try { Thread.sleep(Controller.msgWait); } catch (InterruptedException e) { log.error("Wait to send message interupted", e); } } }); } //Block until done task.get(); } catch (ExecutionException e) { log.error("Couldn't schedule send message to be executed", e); } catch (InterruptedException e) { log.error("Wait to send message interupted", e); } } As you can see, there's alot of extra code there just to make it wait 1.7 seconds between tasks. Is there an easier and cleaner solution out there or is this it?

    Read the article

  • TerminateProcess and deadlocks

    - by Tony
    Is it real that the TerminateProcess function in Windows could hang because the threads inside the process were stuck in a deadlock? Example: Process A is running under Process B's control, now Process A gets into a deadlock and Process B detects this and decides to 'Kill' process A using TerminateProcess. Would it be successful in killing the hung Process A?

    Read the article

  • C# BackgroundWorker RunWorkerCompleted Event

    - by Jim Fell
    My C# application has several background workers. Sometimes one background worker will fire off another. When the first background worker completes and the RunWorkerCompleted event is fired, on which thread will that event fire, the UI or the first background worker from which RunWorkerAsync was called? I am using Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition. Any thoughts or suggestions you may have would be appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Does Monitor.Wait ensure that fields are re-read?

    - by Marc Gravell
    It is generally accepted (I believe!) that a lock will force any values from fields to be reloaded (essentially acting as a memory-barrier or fence - my terminology in this area gets a bit loose, I'm afraid), with the consequence that fields that are only ever accessed inside a lock do not themselves need to be volatile. (If I'm wrong already, just say!) A good comment was raised here, questioning whether the same is true if code does a Wait() - i.e. once it has been Pulse()d, will it reload fields from memory, or could they be in a register (etc). Or more simply: does the field need to be volatile to ensure that the current value is obtained when resuming after a Wait()? Looking at reflector, Wait calls down into ObjWait, which is managed internalcall (the same as Enter). The scenario in question was: bool closing; public bool TryDequeue(out T value) { lock (queue) { // arbitrary lock-object (a private readonly ref-type) while (queue.Count == 0) { if (closing) { // <==== (2) access field here value = default(T); return false; } Monitor.Wait(queue); // <==== (1) waits here } ...blah do something with the head of the queue } } Obviously I could just make it volatile, or I could move this out so that I exit and re-enter the Monitor every time it gets pulsed, but I'm intrigued to know if either is necessary.

    Read the article

  • Is my way of doing threads in Android correct?

    - by Charlie
    Hi, I'm writing a live wallpaper, and I'm forking off two separate threads in my main wallpaper service. One updates, and the other draws. I was under the impression that once you call thread.start(), it took care of everything for you, but after some trial and error, it seems that if I want my update and draw threads to keep running, I have to manually keep calling their run() methods? In other words, instead of calling start() on both threads and forgetting, I have to manually set up a delayed handler event that calls thread.run() on both the update and draw threads every 16 milliseconds. Is this the correct way of having a long running thread? Also, to kill threads, I'm just setting them to be daemons, then nulling them out. Is this method ok? Most examples I see use some sort of join() / interrupt() in a while loop...I don't understand that one...

    Read the article

  • Push notification or thread with timer

    - by neha
    Hi all, In my application, I'm having functionality like twitter that when you have not refreshed your screen, and if there're new messages then you get this message that "You have n new messages" and a refresh button, which on press will refresh the screen. I'm basically fetching all the data from an xml with some url. In case of thread, I need to call a timer after some time period which might affect the app performance. Can anybody please suggest wheather what will be better to use push notifications or thread with timer? Thanx in advance.

    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 | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >