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 >

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • c# multi threaded file processing

    - by user177883
    There is a folder that contains 1000 of small text files. I aim to parse and process all of them while more files are being populated in to the folder. My intention is to multithread this operation as the single threaded prototype took 6 minutes to process 1000 files. I like to have reader and writer thread(s) as following : while the reader thread(s) are reading the files, I d like to have writer thread(s) to process them. Once the reader is started reading a file, I d like to mark it as being processed, such as by renaming it, once it s read, rename it to completed. How to approach such multithreaded application ? Is it better to use a distributed hash table or a queue? Which data structure to use that would avoid locks? Would you have a better approach to this scheme that you like to share?

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Multi threading in WCF RIA Services

    - by synergetic
    I use WCF RIA Services to update customer database. In domain service: public void UpdateCustomer(Customer customer) { this.ObjectContext.Customers.AttachAsModified(customer); syncCustomer(customer); } After update, a database trigger launches and depending on the columns updated it may insert a new record in CustomerChange table. syncCustomer(customer) method is executed to check for a new record in the CustomerChange table and if found it will create a text file which contains customer information and forwards that file to external system for import. Now this synchronization may take a time so I wanted to execute it in different thread. So: private void syncCustomer(Customer customer) { this.ObjectContext.SaveChanges(); new Thread(() => syncCustomerInfo(customer.CustomerID)) { IsBackground = true }.Start(); } private void syncCustomerInfo(int customerID) { //Thread.Sleep(2000); //does real job here ... ... } The problem is in most cases syncCustomerInfo method cannot find any new CustomerChange record even if it was definitely there. If I force thread sleep then it finds a new record. I also looked Entity Framework events but the only event provided by object context is SavingChanges which occur before changes are saved. Please suggest me what else to try.

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Async call Objective C iphone

    - by Sam
    Hi guys, I'm trying to get data from a website- xml. Everything works fine. But the UIButton remains pressed until the xml data is returned and thus if theres a problem with the internet service, it cant be corrected and the app is virtually unusable. here are the calls: { AppDelegate *appDelegate = (AppDelegate *)[[UIApplication sharedApplication] delegate]; if(!appDelegate.XMLdataArray.count > 0){ [UIApplication sharedApplication].networkActivityIndicatorVisible = YES; [appDelegate GetApps]; //function that retrieves data from Website and puts into the array - XMLdataArray. } XMLViewController *controller = [[XMLViewController alloc] initWithNibName:@"MedGearsApps" bundle:nil]; [self.navigationController pushViewController:controller animated:YES]; [controller release]; } It works fine, but how can I make the view buttons functional with getting stuck. In other words, I just want the UIButton and other UIButtons to be functional whiles the thing works in the background. I heard about performSelectorInMainThread but i cant put it to practice correctly any help is appreciated :)

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Thread runs only once

    - by folone
    When a Thread is finished, you cannot run it once more, using start() method: it throws an Exception. Could anyone explain, why? What stands behind such an architectural decision?

    Read the article

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