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 >

  • 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

  • C# parameter count mismatch when trying to add AsyncCallback into BeginInvoke()

    - by PunX
    I have main form (PrenosForm) and I am trying to run Form2 asynchronously. It works without callback delegate: this.BeginInvoke(cp, new object[] { datoteke, this.treeView1.SelectedNode.FullPath.ToString(), this, efekt }, null); //works 1. Doesn't work with callback delegate (parameter count mismatch): this.BeginInvoke(cp, new object[] { datoteke, this.treeView1.SelectedNode.FullPath.ToString(), this, efekt }, new AsyncCallback(callBackDelegate), null); //doesn't work parameter count mismatch 2. Works with callback delegate if I do it like this: cp.BeginInvoke(datoteke, this.treeView1.SelectedNode.FullPath.ToString(), this, efekt, new AsyncCallback(callBackDelegate), null); //works 3. My question is why does one way work and the other doesn't? I'm new at this. Would anyone be so kind as to answer my question and point out my mistakes? private delegate void copyDelegat(List<ListViewItem> datoteke, string path, PrenosForm forma, DragDropEffects efekt); private delegate void callBackDelegat(IAsyncResult a); public void doCopy(List<ListViewItem> datoteke, string path, PrenosForm forma, DragDropEffects efekt) { new Form2(datoteke, path, forma, efekt); } public void callBackFunc(IAsyncResult a) { AsyncResult res = a.AsyncState as AsyncResult; copyDelegat delegat = res.AsyncDelegate as copyDelegat; delegat.EndInvoke(a); } public void kopiraj(List<ListViewItem> datoteke, DragDropEffects efekt) { copyDelegat cp = new copyDelegat(doCopy); callBackDelegat callBackDelegate = new callBackDelegat(callBackFunc); this.BeginInvoke(cp, new object[] { datoteke, this.treeView1.SelectedNode.FullPath.ToString(), this, efekt }, new AsyncCallback(callBackDelegate), null); //doesn't work parameter count missmatch 2. this.BeginInvoke(cp, new object[] { datoteke, this.treeView1.SelectedNode.FullPath.ToString(), this, efekt }, null); //works 1. cp.BeginInvoke(datoteke, this.treeView1.SelectedNode.FullPath.ToString(), this, efekt, new AsyncCallback(callBackDelegate), null); //works 3. }

    Read the article

  • Java threads, wait time always 00:00:00-Producer/Consumer

    - by user3742254
    I am currently doing a producer consumer problem with a number of threads and have had to set priorities and waits to them to ensure that one thread, the security thread, runs last. I have managed to do this and I have managed to get the buffer working. The last thing that I am required to do is to show the wait time of threads that are too large for the buffer and to calculate the average wait time. I have included code to do so, but everything I run the program, the wait time is always returned as 00:00:00, and by extension, the average is returned as the same. I was speaking to one of my colleagues who said that it is not a matter of the code but rather a matter of the computer needing to work off of one processor, which can be adjusted in the task manager settings. He has an HP like myself but his program prints the wait time 180 times, whereas mine prints usually about 3-7 times and is only 00:00:01 on one instance before finishing when I have made the processor adjustments. My other colleague has an iMac and hers puts out an average of 42:00:34(42 minutes??) I am very confused about this because I can see no difference between our codes and like my colleague said, I was wondering is it a computer issue. I am obviously concerned as I wanted to make sure that my code correctly calculated an average wait time, but that is impossible to tell when the wait times always show as 00:00:00. To calculate the thread duration, including the time it entered and exited the buffer was done by using a timestamp import, and then subtracting start time from end time. Is my code correct for this issue or is there something which is missing? I would be very grateful for any solutions. Below is my code: My buffer class package com.Com813cw; import java.text.DateFormat; import java.text.SimpleDateFormat; /** * Created by Rory on 10/08/2014. */ class Buffer { private int contents, count = 0, process = 200; private int totalRam = 1000; private boolean available = false; private long start, end, wait, request = 0; private DateFormat time = new SimpleDateFormat("ss:SSS"); public int avWaitTime =0; public void average(){ System.out.println("Average Application Request wait time: "+ time.format(request/count)); } public synchronized int get() { while (process <= 500) { try { wait(); } catch (InterruptedException e) { } } process -= 200; System.out.println("CPU After Process " + process); notifyAll(); return contents; } public synchronized void put(int value) { if (process <= 500) { process += value; } else { start = System.currentTimeMillis(); try { wait(); } catch (InterruptedException e) { } end = System.currentTimeMillis(); wait = end - start; count++; request += wait; System.out.println("Application Request Wait Time: " + time.format(wait)); process += value; contents = value; calcWait(wait, count); } notifyAll(); } public void calcWait(long wait, int count){ this.avWaitTime = (int) (wait/count); } public void printWait(){ System.out.println("Wait time is " + time.format(this.avWaitTime)); } } My spotify class package com.Com813cw; import java.sql.Timestamp; /** * Created by Rory on 11/08/2014. */ class Spotify extends Thread { private Buffer buffer; private int number; private int bytes = 250; public Spotify(Buffer c, int number) { buffer = c; this.number = number; } long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis(); public void run() { for (int i = 0; i < 20; i++) { buffer.put(bytes); System.out.println(getName() + this.number + " put: " + bytes + " bytes "); try { sleep(1000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { } } long endTime = System.currentTimeMillis(); long timeTaken = endTime - startTime; java.util.Date date = new java.util.Date(); System.out.println("-----------------------------"); System.out.println("Spotify has finished executing."); System.out.println("Time taken to execute was " + timeTaken + " milliseconds"); System.out.println("Time that Spotify thread exited Buffer was " + new Timestamp(date.getTime())); System.out.println("-----------------------------"); } } My BubbleWitch class package com.Com813cw; import java.lang.*; import java.lang.System; import java.sql.Timestamp; /** * Created by Rory on 10/08/2014. */ class BubbleWitch2 extends Thread { private Buffer buffer; private int number; private int bytes = 100; public BubbleWitch2(Buffer c, int number) { buffer = c; this.number=number ; } long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis(); public void run() { for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { buffer.put(bytes); System.out.println(getName() + this.number + " put: " + bytes + " bytes "); try { sleep(1000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { } } long endTime = System.currentTimeMillis(); long timeTaken = endTime - startTime; java.util.Date date = new java.util.Date(); System.out.println("-----------------------------"); System.out.println("BubbleWitch2 has finished executing."); System.out.println("Time taken to execute was " +timeTaken+ " milliseconds"); System.out.println("Time Bubblewitch2 thread exited Buffer was " + new Timestamp(date.getTime())); System.out.println("-----------------------------"); } } My Test class package com.Com813cw; /** * Created by Rory on 10/08/2014. */ public class ProducerConsumerTest { public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException { Buffer c = new Buffer(); BubbleWitch2 p1 = new BubbleWitch2(c,1); Processor c1 = new Processor(c, 1); Spotify p2 = new Spotify(c, 2); SystemManagement p3 = new SystemManagement(c, 3); SecurityUpdate p4 = new SecurityUpdate(c, 4, p1, p2, p3); p1.setName("BubbleWitch2 "); p2.setName("Spotify "); p3.setName("System Management "); p4.setName("Security Update "); p1.setPriority(10); p2.setPriority(10); p3.setPriority(10); p4.setPriority(5); c1.start(); p1.start(); p2.start(); p3.start(); p4.start(); p2.join(); p3.join(); p4.join(); c.average(); System.exit(0); } } My security update package com.Com813cw; import java.lang.*; import java.lang.System; import java.sql.Timestamp; /** * Created by Rory on 11/08/2014. */ class SecurityUpdate extends Thread { private Buffer buffer; private int number; private int bytes = 150; private int process = 0; public SecurityUpdate(Buffer c, int number, BubbleWitch2 bubbleWitch2, Spotify spotify, SystemManagement systemManagement) throws InterruptedException { buffer = c; this.number = number; bubbleWitch2.join(); spotify.join(); systemManagement.join(); } long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis(); public void run() { for (int i = 0; i < 15; i++) { buffer.put(bytes); System.out.println(getName() + this.number + " put: " + bytes + " bytes"); try { sleep(1500); } catch (InterruptedException e) { } } long endTime = System.currentTimeMillis(); long timeTaken = endTime - startTime; java.util.Date date = new java.util.Date(); System.out.println("-----------------------------"); System.out.println("Security Update has finished executing."); System.out.println("Time taken to execute was " + timeTaken + " milliseconds"); System.out.println("Time that SecurityUpdate thread exited Buffer was " + new Timestamp(date.getTime())); System.out.println("------------------------------"); } } I'd be grateful as I said for any help as this is the last and most frustrating obstacle.

    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

  • 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

  • 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++ 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • How can one manage to fully use the newly enhanced Parallelism features in .NET 4.0?

    - by Will Marcouiller
    I am pretty much interested into using the newly enhanced Parallelism features in .NET 4.0. I have also seen some possibilities of using it in F#, as much as in C#. Despite, I can only see what PLINQ has to offer with, for example, the following: var query = from c in Customers.AsParallel() where (c.Name.Contains("customerNameLike") select c; There must for sure be some other use of this parallelism thing. Have you any other examples of using it? Is this particularly turned toward PLINQ, or are there other usage as easy as PLINQ? Thanks! =)

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Multithreaded Unit Testing

    - by scope-creep
    Hi, Can anybody recommend any good books on unit testing for multitesting applications. Also can any body recommend appplications or utilities which can be used for multithreaded testing, similar to the java tool ConTest, (which i've not used but a fried recommended) Any help particularly related to C# unit testing for multithreaded apps in particularly welcome. thanks. Bob.

    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

  • Threading vs single thread

    - by user177883
    Is it always guaranteed that a multi-threaded application would run faster than a single threaded application? I have two threads that populates data from a data source but different entities (eg: database, from two different tables), seems like single threaded version of the application is running faster than the version with two threads. Why would the reason be? when i look at the performance monitor, both cpu s are very spikey ? is this due to context switching? what are the best practices to jack the CPU and fully utilize it? I hope this is not ambiguous.

    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

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