Search Results

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

Page 35/66 | < Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >

• Question about how to implement a c# host application with a plugin-like architecture

  - by devoured elysium

  I want to have an application that works as a Host to many other small applications. Each one of those applications should work as kind of plugin to this main application. I call them plugins not in the sense they add something to the main application, but because they can only work with this Host application as they depend on some of its services. My idea was to have each of those plugins run in a different app domain. The problem seems to be that my host application should have a set of services that my plugins will want to use and from what is my understanding making data flow in and out from different app domains is not that great of a thing. On one hand I'd like them to behave as stand-alone applications(although, as I said, they need to use lots of times the host application services), but on the other hand I'd like that if any of them crashes, my main application wouldn't suffer from it. What is the best (.NET) approach to this kind of situation? Make them all run on the same AppDomain but each one in a different Thread? Use different AppDomains? One for each "plugin"? How would I make them communicate with the Host Application? Any other way of doing this? Although speed is not an issue here, I wouldn't like for function calls to be that much slower than they are when we're working with just a regular .NET application. Thanks

  Read the article

• What is Erlang's concurrency model actually ?

  - by arun_suresh

  I was reading a paper recently Why Events are Bad. The paper is a comparative study of Event based and thread based highly concurrent servers and finally concludes stating that Threads are better than events in that scenario. I find that I am not able to classify what sort of concurrency model erlang exposes. Erlang provides Light Weight Processes, but those processes are suspended most of the time until it has received some event/message of some sort. /Arun

  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

• 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

• 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

• What is the JVM Scheduling algorithm ?

  - by IHawk

  Hello ! I am really curious about how does the JVM work with threads ! In my searches in internet, I found some material about RTSJ, but I don't know if it's the right directions for my answers. I also found this topic in sun's forums, http://forums.sun.com/thread.jspa?forumID=513&threadID=472453, but that's not satisfatory. Can someone give me some directions, material, articles or suggestion about the JVM scheduling algorithm ? I am also looking for information about the default configurations of Java threads in the scheduler, like 'how long does it take for every thread' in case of time-slicing. And this stuff. I would appreciate any help ! Thank you !

  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

• 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

• 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

• Singleton & Multi-threading

  - by ronan

  Friends I have the following class that class Singleton { private: static Singleton *p_inst; Singleton(); public: static Singleton * instance() { if (!p_inst) { p_inst = new Singleton(); } return p_inst; } }; Please do elaborate on precautions taken while implementing Singleton in multi-threaded environment .. Many thanks

  Read the article

• Is a HashMap thread-safe for different keys?

  - by obvio171

  If I have two multiple threads accessing a HashMap, but guarantee that they'll never be accessing the same key at the same time, could that still lead to a race condition?

  Read the article

• What is the difference between a process and a thread

  - by James Fassett

  What is the technical difference between a process and a thread? I get the feeling a word like 'process' is over used and there is also hardware and software threads. How about light-weight processes in languages like Erlang? Is there a definitive reason to use one term over the other?

  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

• Java: Stopping a thread that has run for too long?

  - by Thomas King

  Say I've got something like this public void run(){ Thread behaviourThread = new Thread(abstractBehaviours[i]); behaviourThread.start(); } And I want to wait until abstractBehaviours[i] run method has either finished or run for 5000 milliseconds. How do I do that? behaviourThread.join(5000) doesn't seem to do that afaik (something is wrong with my code and I've put it down to that). All the abstract abstractBehaviour class is of course Runnable. I don't want to implement it inside each run method as that seems ugly and there are many different behaviours, I'd much rather have it in the calling/executing thread and do it just once. Solutions? First time doing something as threaded as this. Thanks!

  Read the article

• What limits scaling in this simple OpenMP program?

  - by Douglas B. Staple

  I'm trying to understand limits to parallelization on a 48-core system (4xAMD Opteron 6348, 2.8 Ghz, 12 cores per CPU). I wrote this tiny OpenMP code to test the speedup in what I thought would be the best possible situation (the task is embarrassingly parallel): // Compile with: gcc scaling.c -std=c99 -fopenmp -O3 #include <stdio.h> #include <stdint.h> int main(){ const uint64_t umin=1; const uint64_t umax=10000000000LL; double sum=0.; #pragma omp parallel for reduction(+:sum) for(uint64_t u=umin; u<umax; u++) sum+=1./u/u; printf("%e\n", sum); } I was surprised to find that the scaling is highly nonlinear. It takes about 2.9s for the code to run with 48 threads, 3.1s with 36 threads, 3.7s with 24 threads, 4.9s with 12 threads, and 57s for the code to run with 1 thread. Unfortunately I have to say that there is one process running on the computer using 100% of one core, so that might be affecting it. It's not my process, so I can't end it to test the difference, but somehow I doubt that's making the difference between a 19~20x speedup and the ideal 48x speedup. To make sure it wasn't an OpenMP issue, I ran two copies of the program at the same time with 24 threads each (one with umin=1, umax=5000000000, and the other with umin=5000000000, umax=10000000000). In that case both copies of the program finish after 2.9s, so it's exactly the same as running 48 threads with a single instance of the program. What's preventing linear scaling with this simple program?

  Read the article

• Does my Dictionary must use locking mechanism?

  - by theateist

  Many threads have access to summary. Each thread will have an unique key for accessing the dictionary; Dictionary<string, List<Result>> summary; Do I need locking for following operations? summary[key] = new List<Result>() summary[key].Add(new Result()); It seems that I don't need locking because each thread will access dictionary with different key, but won't the (1) be problematic because of adding concurrently new record to dictionary with other treads?

  Read the article

• Socket.Recieve Failing When Multithreaded

  - by Qua

  The following piece of code runs fine when parallelized to 4-5 threads, but starts to fail as the number of threads increase somewhere beyond 10 concurrentthreads int totalRecieved = 0; int recieved; StringBuilder contentSB = new StringBuilder(4000); while ((recieved = socket.Receive(buffer, SocketFlags.None)) > 0) { contentSB.Append(Encoding.ASCII.GetString(buffer, 0, recieved)); totalRecieved += recieved; } The Recieve method returns with zero bytes read, and if I continue calling the recieve method then I eventually get a 'An established connection was aborted by the software in your host machine'-exception. So I'm assuming that the host actually sent data and then closed the connection, but for some reason I never recieved it. I'm curious as to why this problem arises when there are a lot of threads. I'm thinking it must have something to do with the fact that each thread doesn't get as much execution time and therefore there are some idle time for the threads which causes this error. Just can't figure out why idle time would cause the socket not to recieve any data.

  Read the article

• Running code when all threads are finished processing.

  - by rich97

  Quick note: Java and Android noob here, I'm open to you telling me I'm stupid (as long as you tell me why.) I have an android application which requires me start multiple threads originating from various classes and only advance to the next activity once all threads have done their job. I also want to add a "failsafe" timeout in case one the the threads takes too long (HTTP request taking too long or something.) I searched Stack Overflow and found a post saying that I should create a class to keep a running total of open threads and then use a timer to poll for when all the threads are completed. I think I've created a working class to do this for me, it's untested as of yet but has no errors showing in eclipse. Is this a correct implementation? Are there any APIs that I should be made aware of (such as classes in the Java or Android APIs that could be used in place of the abstract classes at the bottom of the class?) package com.dmp.geofix.libs; import java.util.ArrayList; import java.util.Iterator; import java.util.Timer; import java.util.TimerTask; public class ThreadMonitor { private Timer timer = null; private TimerTask timerTask = null; private OnSuccess onSuccess = null; private OnError onError = null; private static ArrayList<Thread> threads; private final int POLL_OPEN_THREADS = 100; private final int TIMEOUT = 10000; public ThreadMonitor() { timerTask = new PollThreadsTask(); } public ThreadMonitor(OnSuccess s) { timerTask = new PollThreadsTask(); onSuccess = s; } public ThreadMonitor(OnError e) { timerTask = new PollThreadsTask(); onError = e; } public ThreadMonitor(OnSuccess s, OnError e) { timerTask = new PollThreadsTask(); onSuccess = s; onError = e; } public void start() { Iterator<Thread> i = threads.iterator(); while (i.hasNext()) { i.next().start(); } timer = new Timer(); timer.schedule(timerTask, 0, POLL_OPEN_THREADS); } public void finish() { Iterator<Thread> i = threads.iterator(); while (i.hasNext()) { i.next().interrupt(); } threads.clear(); timer.cancel(); } public void addThread(Thread t) { threads.add(t); } public void removeThread(Thread t) { threads.remove(t); t.interrupt(); } class PollThreadsTask extends TimerTask { private int timeElapsed = 0; @Override public void run() { timeElapsed += POLL_OPEN_THREADS; if (timeElapsed <= TIMEOUT) { if (threads.isEmpty() == false) { if (onSuccess != null) { onSuccess.run(); } } } else { if (onError != null) { onError.run(); } finish(); } } } public abstract class OnSuccess { public abstract void run(); } public abstract class OnError { public abstract void run(); } }

  Read the article

• How to implement cancellable worker thread

  - by Arnold Zokas

  Hi, I'm trying to implement a cancellable worker thread using the new threading constructs in System.Threading.Tasks namespace. So far I have have come up with this implementation: public sealed class Scheduler { private CancellationTokenSource _cancellationTokenSource; public System.Threading.Tasks.Task Worker { get; private set; } public void Start() { _cancellationTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource(); Worker = System.Threading.Tasks.Task.Factory.StartNew( () => RunTasks(_cancellationTokenSource.Token), _cancellationTokenSource.Token ); } private static void RunTasks(CancellationToken cancellationToken) { while (!cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested) { Thread.Sleep(1000); // simulate work } } public void Stop() { try { _cancellationTokenSource.Cancel(); Worker.Wait(_cancellationTokenSource.Token); } catch (OperationCanceledException) { // OperationCanceledException is expected when a Task is cancelled. } } } When Stop() returns I expect Worker.Status to be TaskStatus.Canceled. My unit tests have shown that under certain conditions Worker.Status remains set to TaskStatus.Running. Is this a correct way to implement a cancellable worker thread?

  Read the article

• uh-oh windows mobile threading issues!

  - by violet313

  specifically WM6x, winCE5x Now my current understanding from trawling the msdn etal is that the IMAPIAdviseSink::OnNotify callback can be made from any old thread; from (ce)mapi or perhaps even from a third-party service provider. Under WM6x, i cannot seem to coax an in-thread response by invoking HrThisThreadAdviseSink, since while this function is declared in mapiutil.h, a definition appears not to exist (in cemapi.lib or wherever??) ~But i notice that all the OnNotify callbacks i get, derive from windows messages that i am receiving on my thread (=looks to me like an in-thread implementation in any case under cemapi)... So, can anyone confirm that this is infact always the case -or am i just getting lucky right now? ah, i should add that my advise source is IMAPISession::Advise (ActiveSync) erm i should also say that i might have cross-posted this on the msdn forum -but they're mostly numptys over there,,

  Read the article

• Multi-threaded library calls in ASP.NET page request.

  - by ProfK

  I have an ASP.NET app, very basic, but right now too much code to post if we're lucky and I don't have to. We have a class called ReportGenerator. On a button click, method GenerateReports is called. It makes an async call to InternalGenerateReports using ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem and returns, ending the ASP.NET response. It doesn't provide any completion callback or anything. InternalGenerateReports creates and maintains five threads in the threadpool, one report per thread, also using QueueUserWorkItem, by 'creating' five threads, also with and waiting until calls on all of them complete, in a loop. Each thread uses an ASP.NET ReportViewer control to render a report to HTML. That is, for 200 reports, InternalGenerateReports should create 5 threads 40 times. As threads complete, report data is queued, and when all five have completed, report data is flushed to disk. My biggest problems are that after running for just one report, the aspnet process is 'hung', and also that at around 200 reports, the app just hangs. I just simplified this code to run in a single thread, and this works fine. Before we get into details like my code, is there anything obvious in the above scendario that might be wrong?

  Read the article

• Detecting a stale Mutex

  - by sum1stolemyname

  Is there any technique or tool available to detect this kind of a deadlock during runtime? picture this in a worker thread (one of several, normally 4-6) try WaitForSingleObject(myMutex); DoSTuffThatMightCauseAnException; Except ReleaseMutex(myMutex); end; or more generally is there a design-pattern to avoid these kind of bugs? I coded the above code in the little hous after a longer hacking run

  Read the article

• How to detect that the internet connection has got disconnected through a java desktop application?

  - by Yatendra Goel

  I am developing a Java Desktop Application that access internet. It is a multi-threaded application, each thread do the same work (means each thread is an instance of same Thread class). Now, as all the threads need internet connection to be active, there should be some mechanism that detects whether an internet connection is active or not. Q1. How to detect whether the internet connection is active or not? Q2. Where to implement this internet-status-check-mechanism code? Should I start a separate thread for checking internet status regularly and notifies all the threads when the status changes from one state to another? Or should I let each thread check for the internet-status itself? Q3. This issue should be a very common issue as every application accessing an internet should deal with this problem. So how other developers usually deal with this problem? Q4. If you could give me a reference to a good demo application that addresses this issue then it would greatly help me.

  Read the article

• What is wrong with locking non-static fields? What is the correct way to lock a particular instance?

  - by smartcaveman

  Why is it considered bad practice to lock non-static fields? And, if I am not locking non-static fields, then how do I lock an instance method without locking the method on all other instances of the same or derived class? I wrote an example to make my question more clear. public abstract class BaseClass { private readonly object NonStaticLockObject = new object(); private static readonly object StaticLockObject = new object(); protected void DoThreadSafeAction<T>(Action<T> action) where T: BaseClass { var derived = this as T; if(derived == null) { throw new Exception(); } lock(NonStaticLockObject) { action(derived); } } } public class DerivedClass :BaseClass { private readonly Queue<object> _queue; public void Enqueue(object obj) { DoThreadSafeAction<DerivedClass>(x=>x._queue.Enqueue(obj)); } } If I make the lock on the StaticLockObject, then the DoThreadSafeAction method will be locked for all instances of all classes that derive from BaseClass and that is not what I want. I want to make sure that no other threads can call a method on a particular instance of an object while it is locked.

  Read the article

• How to Stop Current Playing Song When using one thread with JLayer?

  - by mcnemesis

  I recently used a solution to the one-thread-at-a-time problem whe using Jlayer to play mp3 songs in Java. But this solution by Kaleb Brasee didn't hint at how you could stop the player, i.e how could one then call player.close()? Kaleb's code was: Executor executor = Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor(); executor.execute(new Runnable() { public void run() { /* do something */ } }); and this is the code I put in run() if(player != null) player.close(); try{ player = new Player(new FileInputStream(musicD.getPath())); player.play(); }catch(Exception e){} The problem is that much as this solves the problem of keeping the gui active while the music plays (in only one other thread -- what i'd wanted), I can't start playing another song :-( What could I do?

  Read the article

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