Search Results

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

Page 36/66 | < Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >

• Swing: what to do when a GUI update takes too long and freezes other GUI elements?

  - by java.is.for.desktop

  Hello, everyone! I know that GUI code in Java Swing must be put inside SwingUtilities.invokeAndWait or SwingUtilities.invokeLater. This way threading works fine. Sadly, in my situation, the GUI update it that thing which takes much longer than background thread(s). More specific: I update a JTree with about just 400 entries, nesting depth is maximum 4, so should be nothing scary, right? But it takes sometimes one second! I need to ensure that the user is able to type in a JTextPane without delays. Well, guess what, the slow JTree updates do cause delays for JTextPane during input. It refreshes only as soon as the tree gets updated. I am using Netbeans and know empirically that a Java app can update lots of information without freezing the rest of the UI. How can it be done? NOTE 1: All those DefaultMutableTreeNodes are prepared outside the invokeAndWait. NOTE 2: When I replace invokeAndWait with invokeLater the tree doesn't get updated.

  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

• 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

• Creating WPF components in background thread

  - by mizipzor

  Im working on a reporting system, a series of DocumentPage are to be created through a DocumentPaginator. These documents include a number of WPF components that are to be instantiated so the paginator includes the correct things when later sent to the XpsDocumentWriter (which in turn is sent to the actual printer). My problem now is that the DocumentPage instances take quite a while to create (enough for Windows to mark the application as frozen) so I tried to create them in a background thread, which is problematic since WPF expects the attributes on them to be set from the GUI thread. I would also like to have a progress bar showing up, indicating how many pages have been created so far. Thus, it looks like Im trying to get two things to happen in parallell on the GUI. The problem is hard to explain and Im really not sure how to tackle it. In short: Create a series of DocumentPage's. These include WPF components These are to be created on a background thread, or use some other trick so the application isnt frozen. After each page is created, a WPF ProgressBar should be updated. If there is no decent way to do this, alternate solutions and approaches are more than welcome.

  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 synchronize threads in python?

  - by Eric

  I have two threads in python (2.7). I start them at the beginning of my program. While they execute, my program reaches the end and exits, killing both of my threads before waiting for resolution. I'm trying to figure out how to wait for both threads to finish before exiting. def connect_cam(ip, execute_lock): try: conn = TelnetConnection.TelnetClient(ip) execute_lock.acquire() ExecuteUpdate(conn, ip) execute_lock.release() except ValueError: pass execute_lock = thread.allocate_lock() thread.start_new_thread(connect_cam, ( headset_ip, execute_lock ) ) thread.start_new_thread(connect_cam, ( handcam_ip, execute_lock ) ) In .NET I would use something like WaitAll() but I haven't found the equivalent in python. In my scenario, TelnetClient is a long operation which may result in a failure after a timeout.

  Read the article

• Does UIActivityIndicator require manual threading on iPhone

  - by Akusete

  I am running creating an iPhone application which performs a costly operation and I wanted to create an activityIndicator to let the user know the application has not frozen. The operation is performed entirely in one event call... so there is no chance for the UI framework to receive control to actually display and animate this indicator. The sample apps which use the UIActivityIndicator (or any other similar animation) start and stop the animation in different events, triggered separately at different stages of the program. Do I need to manually create a separate thread to run my operation in, or is there already default support for this kind of behavior?

  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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• Dynamically refresh JTextArea as processing occurs?

  - by digiarnie

  I am trying to create a very simple Swing UI that logs information onto the screen via a JTextArea as processing occurs in the background. When the user clicks a button, I want each call to: textArea.append(someString + "\n"); to immediately show up in the UI. At the moment, the JTextArea does not show all log information until the processing has completed after clicking the button. How can I get it to refresh dynamically?

  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

• passing pipe to threads

  - by alaamh

  I see it's easy to open pipe between two process using fork, but how we can passing open pipe to threads. Assume we need to pass out of PROGRAM A to PROGRAM B "may by more than one thread", PROGRAM B send his output to PROGRAM C #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <pthread.h> struct targ_s { int fd_reader; }; void *thread1(void *arg) { struct targ_s *targ = (struct targ_s*) arg; int status, fd[2]; pid_t pid; pipe(fd); pid = fork(); if (pid == 0) { dup2(STDIN_FILENO, targ->fd_reader); close(fd[0]); dup2(fd[1], STDOUT_FILENO); close(fd[1]); execvp ("PROGRAM B", NULL); exit(1); } else { close(fd[1]); dup2(fd[0], STDIN_FILENO); close(fd[0]); execl("PROGRAM C", NULL); wait(&status); return NULL; } } int main(void) { FILE *fpipe; char *command = "PROGRAM A"; char buffer[1024]; if (!(fpipe = (FILE*) popen(command, "r"))) { perror("Problems with pipe"); exit(1); } char* outfile = "out.dat"; FILE* f = fopen (outfile, "wb"); int fd = fileno( f ); struct targ_s targ; targ.fd_reader = fd; pthread_t thid; if (pthread_create(&thid, NULL, thread1, &targ) != 0) { perror("pthread_create() error"); exit(1); } int len; while (read(fpipe, buffer, sizeof (buffer)) != 0) { len = strlen(buffer); write(fd, buffer, len); } pclose(fpipe); return (0); }

  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

• C++ threaded class design from non-threaded class

  - by macs

  I'm working on a library doing audio encoding/decoding. The encoder shall be able to use multiple cores (i.e. multiple threads, using boost library), if available. What i have right now is a class that performs all encoding-relevant operations. The next step i want to take is to make that class threaded. So i'm wondering how to do this. I thought about writing a thread-class, creating n threads for n cores and then calling the encoder with the appropriate arguments. But maybe this is an overkill and there is no need for another class, so i'm going to make use of the "user interface" for thread-creation. I hope there are any suggestions.

  Read the article

• Is System.nanoTime() consistent across threads?

  - by obvio171

  I want to count the time elapsed between two events in nanoseconds. To do that, I can use System.nanoTime() as mentioned here. The problem is that the two events are happening in different threads. Since nanoTime() doesn't return an absolute timestamp but instead can only be used to calculate time differences, I'd like to know if the values I get on the two different threads are consistent with the physical time elapsed between the two events.

  Read the article

• Which is more robust and scalable method?

  - by Dhruv Arya

  I am implementing a distributed chat system, in this system we have the following options : Make the client and server running at each node run as separate threads. The server acting as the receiver will be running as the daemon thread and the client taking the user input as a normal thread. Fork two processes one for the client and one for the server. I am not able to reason out with which one to proceed. Any insight would be great !

  Read the article

• Capture RTSP stream to fixed sized files

  - by Ankur Chauhan

  Hi, I want to capture a RTSP stream from a camera into a series of fixed sized file 1MB each. and then send it to a storage server via Http POST. How do i do this. Target languages - any, prefer: JAVA.

  Read the article

• Is Work Stealing always the most appropriate user-level thread scheduling algorithm?

  - by Il-Bhima

  I've been investigating different scheduling algorithms for a thread pool I am implementing. Due to the nature of the problem I am solving I can assume that the tasks being run in parallel are independent and do not spawn any new tasks. The tasks can be of varying sizes. I went immediately for the most popular scheduling algorithm "work stealing" using lock-free deques for the local job queues, and I am relatively happy with this approach. However I'm wondering whether there are any common cases where work-stealing is not the best approach. For this particular problem I have a good estimate of the size of each individual task. Work-stealing does not make use of this information and I'm wondering if there is any scheduler which will give better load-balancing than work-stealing with this information (obviously with the same efficiency). NB. This question ties up with a previous question.

  Read the article

• Asynchronous Delegates Vs Thread/ThreadPool?

  - by claws

  Hello, I need to execute 3 parallel tasks and after completion of each task they should call the same function which prints out the results. I don't understand in .net why we have Asychronous calling (delegate.BeginInvoke() & delegate.EndInvoke()) as well as Thread class? I'm little confused which one to use when? Now in this particular case, what should I use Asychronous calling or Thread class? I'm using C#.

  Read the article

• Limiting the number of threads executing a method at a single time.

  - by Steve_

  We have a situation where we want to limit the number of paralell requests our application can make to its application server. We have potentially 100+ background threads running that will want to at some point make a call to the application server but only want 5 threads to be able to call SendMessage() (or whatever the method will be) at any one time. What is the best way of achieving this? I have considered using some sort of gatekeeper object that blocks threads coming into the method until the number of threads executing in it has dropped below the threshold. Would this be a reasonable solution or am I overlooking the fact that this might be dirty/dangerous? We are developing in C#.NET 3.5. Thanks, Steve

  Read the article

• How do I create a Thread Manager for an Android App ?

  - by MrBuBBLs

  Hi, I would like to know how to start and code a thread manager for my Android App. My app is going to fill a list with a network I/O and I have to manage threads for that. I never done this before and I don't know where to start. I heard about Thread Pool and other stuff, but I'm quite confused. Could someone please help me make my way through ? Thanks

  Read the article

• ReaderWriterLockSlim and Pulse/Wait

  - by Jono

  Is there an equivalent of Monitor.Pulse and Monitor.Wait that I can use in conjunction with a ReaderWriterLockSlim? I have a class where I've encapsulated multi-threaded access to an underlying queue. To enqueue something, I acquire a lock that protects the underlying queue (and a couple of other objects) then add the item and Monitor.Pulse the locked object to signal that something was added to the queue. public void Enqueue(ITask task) { lock (mutex) { underlying.Enqueue(task); Monitor.Pulse(mutex); } } On the other end of the queue, I have a single background thread that continuously processes messages as they arrive on the queue. It uses Monitor.Wait when there are no items in the queue, to avoid unnecessary polling. (I consider this to be good design, but any flames (within reason) are welcome if they help me learn otherwise.) private void DequeueForProcessing(object state) { while (true) { ITask task; lock (mutex) { while (underlying.Count == 0) { Monitor.Wait(mutex); } task = underlying.Dequeue(); } Process(task); } } As more operations are added to this class (requiring read-only access to the lock protected underlying), someone suggested using ReaderWriterLockSlim. I've never used the class before, and assuming it can offer some performance benefit, I'm not against it, but only if I can keep the Pulse/Wait design.

  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

< Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >