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 >

• How to interrupt a thread performing a blocking socket connect?

  - by Jason R

  I have some code that spawns a pthread that attempts to maintain a socket connection to a remote host. If the connection is ever lost, it attempts to reconnect using a blocking connect() call on its socket. Since the code runs in a separate thread, I don't really care about the fact that it uses the synchronous socket API. That is, until it comes time for my application to exit. I would like to perform some semblance of an orderly shutdown, so I use thread synchronization primitives to wake up the thread and signal for it to exit, then perform a pthread_join() on the thread to wait for it to complete. This works great, unless the thread is in the middle of a connect() call when I command the shutdown. In that case, I have to wait for the connect to time out, which could be a long time. This makes the application appear to take a long time to shut down. What I would like to do is to interrupt the call to connect() in some way. After the call returns, the thread will notice my exit signal and shut down cleanly. Since connect() is a system call, I thought that I might be able to intentionally interrupt it using a signal (thus making the call return EINTR), but I'm not sure if this is a robust method in a POSIX threads environment. Does anyone have any recommendations on how to do this, either using signals or via some other method? As a note, the connect() call is down in some library code that I cannot modify, so changing to a non-blocking socket is not an option.

  Read the article

• ruby thread programming , ruby equivalent of java wait/notify/notifyAll

  - by Geo

  I would like to know what are ruby's alternatives to the Java methods : wait notify notifyAll Could you please post a small snippet or some links ?

  Read the article

• How to Perform Continues Iteration over Shared Dictionary in Multi-threaded Environment

  - by Mubashar Ahmad

  Dear Gurus. Note Pls do not tell me regarding alternative to custom session, Pls answer only relative to the Pattern Scenario I have Done Custom Session Management in my application(WCF Service) for this I have a Dictionary shared to all thread. When a specific function Gets called I add a New Session and Issue SessionId to the client so it can use that sessionId for rest of his calls until it calls another specific function, which terminates this session and removes the session from the Dictionary. Due to any reason Client may not call session terminator function so i have to implement time expiration logic so that i can remove all such sessions from the memory. For this I added a Timer Object which calls ClearExpiredSessions function after the specific period of time. which iterates on the dictionary. Problem: As this dictionary gets modified every time new client comes and leaves so i can't lock the whole dictionary while iterating over it. And if i do not lock the dictionary while iteration, if dictionary gets modified from other thread while iterating, Enumerator will throw exception on MoveNext(). So can anybody tell me what kind of Design i should follow in this case. Is there any standard pattern available.

  Read the article

• My Thread Programs Crash

  - by zp26

  I have a problem with threads objectiveC. The line of code below contains the recv block the program waiting for a datum. My intention is to launch a thread parallel to the program so that this statement does not block any application. I put this code in my program but when active switch the program crashes. Enter the code. -(IBAction)Chat{ if(switchChat.on){ buttonInvio.enabled = TRUE; fieldInvio.enabled = TRUE; [NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(riceviDatiServer) toTarget:self withObject:nil]; } else { buttonInvio.enabled = FALSE; fieldInvio.enabled = FALSE; } -(void)riceviDatiServer{ NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc]init]; int ricevuti; NSString *datiRicevuti; ricevuti = recv(temp, &datiRicevuti, datiRicevuti.length, 0); labelRicezione.text = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:@"%s.... %d", datiRicevuti, ricevuti]; [pool release]; }

  Read the article

• Simple multi-threading - combining statements to two lines.

  - by Adam

  If I have: ThreadStart starter = delegate { MessageBox.Show("Test"); }; new Thread(starter).Start(); How can I combine this into one line of code? I've tried: new Thread(delegate { MessageBox.Show("Test"); }).Start(); But I get this error: The call is ambiguous between the following methods or properties: 'System.Threading.Thread.Thread(System.Threading.ThreadStart)' and 'System.Threading.Thread.Thread(System.Threading.ParameterizedThreadStart)'

  Read the article

• Impossible to be const-correct when combining data and it's lock?

  - by Graeme

  I've been looking at ways to combine a piece of data which will be accessed by multiple threads alongside the lock provisioned for thread-safety. I think I've got to a point where I don't think its possible to do this whilst maintaining const-correctness. Take the following class for example: template <typename TType, typename TMutex> class basic_lockable_type { public: typedef TMutex lock_type; public: template <typename... TArgs> explicit basic_lockable_type(TArgs&&... args) : TType(std::forward<TArgs...>(args)...) {} TType& data() { return data_; } const TType& data() const { return data_; } void lock() { mutex_.lock(); } void unlock() { mutex_.unlock(); } private: TType data_; mutable TMutex mutex_; }; typedef basic_lockable_type<std::vector<int>, std::mutex> vector_with_lock; In this I try to combine the data and lock, marking mutex_ as mutable. Unfortunately this isn't enough as I see it because when used, vector_with_lock would have to be marked as mutable in order for a read operation to be performed from a const function which isn't entirely correct (data_ should be mutable from a const). void print_values() const { std::lock_guard<vector_with_lock>(values_); for(const int val : values_) { std::cout << val << std::endl; } } vector_with_lock values_; Can anyone see anyway around this such that const-correctness is maintained whilst combining data and lock? Also, have I made any incorrect assumptions here?

  Read the article

• JTextArea thread safe?

  - by Dhaivat Pandya

  Hello everyone, I have some code that does some initialization (including making a JTextArea object), starts three seperate threads, and then these threads try to update the JTextArea (i.e. append() to it), but its not working at all. Nothing shows up on the JTextArea (however, during the initialzation, I print some test lines onto it, and that works fine). What's going on? How can I fix this? Also, each of those threads sleeps a random amount of time every time it has to update the JTextArea. Sorry I haven't provided any code, its all spread out over several files.

  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

• 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

• HttpWebResponse get mixed up when used inside multiple threads

  - by Holli

  In my Application I have a few threads who will get data from a web service. Basically I just open an URL and get an XML output. I have a few threads who do this continuously but with different URLs. Sometimes the results are mixed up. The XML output doesn't belong to the URL of a thread but to the URL of another thread. In each thread I create an instance of the class GetWebPage and call the method Get from this instance. The method is very simple and based mostly on code from the MSDN documentation. (See below. I removed my error handling here!) public string Get(string userAgent, string url, string user, string pass, int timeout, int readwriteTimeout, WebHeaderCollection whc) { string buffer = string.Empty; HttpWebRequest myWebRequest = (HttpWebRequest)WebRequest.Create(url); if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(userAgent)) myWebRequest.UserAgent = userAgent; myWebRequest.Timeout = timeout; myWebRequest.ReadWriteTimeout = readwriteTimeout; myWebRequest.Credentials = new NetworkCredential(user, pass); string[] headers = whc.AllKeys; foreach (string s in headers) { myWebRequest.Headers.Add(s, whc.Get(s)); } using (HttpWebResponse myWebResponse = (HttpWebResponse)myWebRequest.GetResponse()) { using (Stream ReceiveStream = myWebResponse.GetResponseStream()) { Encoding encode = Encoding.GetEncoding("utf-8"); StreamReader readStream = new StreamReader(ReceiveStream, encode); // Read 1024 characters at a time. Char[] read = new Char[1024]; int count = readStream.Read(read, 0, 1024); int break_counter = 0; while (count > 0 && break_counter < 10000) { String str = new String(read, 0, count); buffer += str; count = readStream.Read(read, 0, 1024); break_counter++; } } } return buffer; As you can see I have no public properties or any other shared resources. At least I don't see any. The url is the service I call in the internet and buffer is the XML Output from the server. Like I said I have multiple instances of this class/method in a few threads (10 to 12) and sometimes buffer does not belong the the url of the same thread but another thread.

  Read the article

• Does add() on LinkedBlockingQueue notify waiting threads?

  - by obvio171

  I have a consumer thread taking elements from a LinkedBlockingQueue, and I make it sleep manually when it's empty. I use peek() to see if the queue empty because I have to do stuff because sending the thread to sleep, and I do that with queue.wait(). So, when I'm in another thread and add()an element to the queue, does that automatically notify the thread that was wait()ing on the queue?

  Read the article

• Printdialog in multithreaded wpf window thrown TargetInvocationException

  - by Nils

  I have designed a multithreaded app, which is starting most windows in an dedicated thread like this: Thread newWindowThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(ThreadStartingPoint)); newWindowThread.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.STA); newWindowThread.IsBackground = true; newWindowThread.Start(); However, if in one of those window-in-own-thread I try to print something by simply calling PrintDialog pDialog = new PrintDialog(); bool? doPrint = pDialog.ShowDialog(); I get a TargetInvocationException - it does look like the PrintDialog does not reside in the same thread as my window. Is there any way to create a thread-agnostic (or "thread-save") PrinterDialog ?

  Read the article

• Bluetooth in Java Mobile: Handling connections that go out of range

  - by Albus Dumbledore

  I am trying to implement a server-client connection over the spp. After initializing the server, I start a thread that first listens for clients and then receives data from them. It looks like that: public final void run() { while (alive) { try { /* * Await client connection */ System.out.println("Awaiting client connection..."); client = server.acceptAndOpen(); /* * Start receiving data */ int read; byte[] buffer = new byte[128]; DataInputStream receive = client.openDataInputStream(); try { while ((read = receive.read(buffer)) > 0) { System.out.println("[Recieved]: " + new String(buffer, 0, read)); if (!alive) { return; } } } finally { System.out.println("Closing connection..."); receive.close(); } } catch (IOException e){ e.printStackTrace(); } } } It's working fine for I am able to receive messages. What's troubling me is how would the thread eventually die when a device goes out of range? Firstly, the call to receive.read(buffer) blocks so that the thread waits until it receives any data. If the device goes out of range, it would never proceed onward to check if meanwhile it has been interrupted. Secondly, it would never close the connection, i.e. the server would not accept the device once it goes back in range. Thanks! Any ideas would be highly appreciated! Merry Christmas!

  Read the article

• Log RuntimeException thrown from thread created by Spring via the @Async annotation

  - by Eugen

  I'm having some difficulty logging RuntimeException from a thread. My system is: Java 7 (b118), Spring 3.0.5. The threads are not created by hand, but via Spring's @Async annotation, which creates it's own executor behind the scenes, so I don't really have the option of overriding any methods of the thread, FutureTask or anything low level. So my question is if Spring has any support or if there are any best practices for handling (logging) these type of exceptions? Any suggestions are appreciated. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Different standard streams per POSIX thread

  - by Roman Nikitchenko

  Is there any possibility to achieve different redirections for standard output like printf(3) for different POSIX thread? What about standard input? I have lot of code based on standard input/output and I only can separate this code into different POSIX thread, not process. Linux operation system, C standard library. I know I can refactor code to replace printf() to fprintf() and further in this style. But in this case I need to provide some kind of context which old code doesn't have. So doesn't anybody have better idea (look into code below)? #include <pthread.h> #include <stdio.h> void* different_thread(void*) { // Something to redirect standard output which doesn't affect main thread. // ... // printf() shall go to different stream. printf("subthread test\n"); return NULL; } int main() { pthread_t id; pthread_create(&id, NULL, different_thread, NULL); // In main thread things should be printed normally... printf("main thread test\n"); pthread_join(id, NULL); return 0; }

  Read the article

• Java Parallel Programming

  - by user578524

  Dear All, I need to parallelize a CPU intensive Java application on my multicore desktop but I am not so comfortable with threads programming. I looked at Scala but this would imply learning a new language which is really time consuming. I also looked at Ateji PX Java parallel extensions which seem very easy to use but did not have a chance yet to evaluate it. Would anyone recommend it? Other suggestions welcome. Thanks in advance for your help Bill

  Read the article

• remote function with pthread

  - by user311130

  Hi all, I wrote some code in c, using pthread (I configured the linker and compiler in eclipse IDE first). #include <pthread.h> #include "starter.h" #include "UI.h" Page* MM; Page* Disk; PCB* all_pcb_array; void* display_prompt(void *id){ printf("Hello111\n"); return NULL; } int main(int argc, char** argv) { printf("Hello\n"); pthread_t *thread = (pthread_t*) malloc (sizeof(pthread_t)); pthread_create(thread, NULL, display_prompt, NULL); printf("Hello\n"); return 1; } that works fine. However, when I move display_prompt to UI.h no "Hello111 " output is printed. anyone know how to solve that? Elad

  Read the article

• Diffrernce between BackgroundWorker.ReportProgress() and Control.Invoke()

  - by ohadsc

  What is the difference between options 1 and 2 in the following? private void BGW_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e) { for (int i=1; i<=100; i++) { string txt = i.ToString(); if (Test_Check.Checked) //OPTION 1 Test_BackgroundWorker.ReportProgress(i, txt); else //OPTION 2 this.Invoke((Action<int, string>)UpdateGUI, new object[] {i, txt}); } } private void BGW_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e) { UpdateGUI(e.ProgressPercentage, (string)e.UserState); } private void UpdateGUI(int percent, string txt) { Test_ProgressBar.Value = percent; Test_RichTextBox.AppendText(txt + Environment.NewLine); } Looking at reflector, the Control.Invoke() appears to use: this.FindMarshalingControl().MarshaledInvoke(this, method, args, 1); whereas BackgroundWorker.Invoke() appears to use: this.asyncOperation.Post(this.progressReporter, args); (I'm just guessing these are the relevant function calls.) If I understand correctly, BGW Posts to the WinForms window its progress report request, whereas Control.Invoke uses a CLR mechanism to invoke on the right thread. Am I close? And if so, what are the repercussions of using either ? Thanks

  Read the article

• Is ReaderWriterLockSlim.EnterUpgradeableReadLock() essentially the same as Monitor.Enter()?

  - by Neil Barnwell

  So I have a situation where I may have many, many reads and only the occasional write to a resource shared between multiple threads. A long time ago I read about ReaderWriterLock, and have read about ReaderWriterGate which attempts to mitigate the issue where many writes coming in trump reads and hurt performance. However, now I've become aware of ReaderWriterLockSlim... From the docs, I believe that there can only be one thread in "upgradeable mode" at any one time. In a situation where the only access I'm using is EnterUpgradeableReadLock() (which is appropriate for my scenario) then is there much difference to just sticking with lock(){}? Here's the excerpt: A thread that tries to enter upgradeable mode blocks if there is already a thread in upgradeable mode, if there are threads waiting to enter write mode, or if there is a single thread in write mode. Or, does the recursion policy make any difference to this?

  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 approach parallel processing of messages?

  - by Dan

  I am redesigning the messaging system for my app to use intel threading building blocks and am stumped trying to decide between two possible approaches. Basically, I have a sequence of message objects and for each message type, a sequence of handlers. For each message object, I apply each handler registered for that message objects type. The sequential version would be something like this (pseudocode): for each message in message_sequence <- SEQUENTIAL for each handler in (handler_table for message.type) apply handler to message <- SEQUENTIAL The first approach which I am considering processes the message objects in turn (sequentially) and applies the handlers concurrently. Pros: predictable ordering of messages (ie, we are guaranteed a FIFO processing order) (potentially) lower latency of processing each message Cons: more processing resources available than handlers for a single message type (bad parallelization) bad use of processor cache since message objects need to be copied for each handler to use large overhead for small handlers The pseudocode of this approach would be as follows: for each message in message_sequence <- SEQUENTIAL parallel_for each handler in (handler_table for message.type) apply handler to message <- PARALLEL The second approach is to process the messages in parallel and apply the handlers to each message sequentially. Pros: better use of processor cache (keeps the message object local to all handlers which will use it) small handlers don't impose as much overhead (as long as there are other handlers also to be run) more messages are expected than there are handlers, so the potential for parallelism is greater Cons: Unpredictable ordering - if message A is sent before message B, they may both be processed at the same time, or B may finish processing before all of A's handlers are finished (order is non-deterministic) The pseudocode is as follows: parallel_for each message in message_sequence <- PARALLEL for each handler in (handler_table for message.type) apply handler to message <- SEQUENTIAL The second approach has more advantages than the first, but non-deterministic ordering is a big disadvantage.. Which approach would you choose and why? Are there any other approaches I should consider (besides the obvious third approach: parallel messages and parallel handlers, which has the disadvantages of both and no real redeeming factors as far as I can tell)? Thanks!

  Read the article

• How to save objects using Multi-Threading in Core Data?

  - by Konstantin

  I'm getting some data from the web service and saving it in the core data. This workflow looks like this: get xml feed go over every item in that feed, create a new ManagedObject for every feed item download some big binary data for every item and save it into ManagedObject call [managedObjectContext save:] Now, the problem is of course the performance - everything runs on the main thread. I'd like to re-factor as much as possible to another thread, but I'm not sure where I should start. Is it OK to put everything (1-4) to the separate thread?

  Read the article

• How do I make my ArrayList Thread-Safe? Another approach to problem in Java?

  - by thechiman

  I have an ArrayList that I want to use to hold RaceCar objects that extend the Thread class as soon as they are finished executing. A class, called Race, handles this ArrayList using a callback method that the RaceCar object calls when it is finished executing. The callback method, addFinisher(RaceCar finisher), adds the RaceCar object to the ArrayList. This is supposed to give the order in which the Threads finish executing. I know that ArrayList isn't synchronized and thus isn't thread-safe. I tried using the Collections.synchronizedCollection(c Collection) method by passing in a new ArrayList and assigning the returned Collection to an ArrayList. However, this gives me a compiler error: Race.java:41: incompatible types found : java.util.Collection required: java.util.ArrayList finishingOrder = Collections.synchronizedCollection(new ArrayList(numberOfRaceCars)); Here is the relevant code: public class Race implements RaceListener { private Thread[] racers; private ArrayList finishingOrder; //Make an ArrayList to hold RaceCar objects to determine winners finishingOrder = Collections.synchronizedCollection(new ArrayList(numberOfRaceCars)); //Fill array with RaceCar objects for(int i=0; i<numberOfRaceCars; i++) { racers[i] = new RaceCar(laps, inputs[i]); //Add this as a RaceListener to each RaceCar ((RaceCar) racers[i]).addRaceListener(this); } //Implement the one method in the RaceListener interface public void addFinisher(RaceCar finisher) { finishingOrder.add(finisher); } What I need to know is, am I using a correct approach and if not, what should I use to make my code thread-safe? Thanks for the help!

  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

• How do I execute QTcpSocket in a different thread?

  - by Regof

  How do I execute QTcpSocket functions in a different thread?

  Read the article

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