Search Results

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

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 37/66 | < Previous Page | 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • How to update GUI thread/class from worker thread/class?

    - by user315182
    First question here so hello everyone. The requirement I'm working on is a small test application that communicates with an external device over a serial port. The communication can take a long time, and the device can return all sorts of errors. The device is nicely abstracted in its own class that the GUI thread starts to run in its own thread and has the usual open/close/read data/write data basic functions. The GUI is also pretty simple - choose COM port, open, close, show data read or errors from device, allow modification and write back etc. The question is simply how to update the GUI from the device class? There are several distinct types of data the device deals with so I need a relatively generic bridge between the GUI form/thread class and the working device class/thread. In the GUI to device direction everything works fine with [Begin]Invoke calls for open/close/read/write etc. on various GUI generated events. I've read the thread here (How to update GUI from another thread in C#?) where the assumption is made that the GUI and worker thread are in the same class. Google searches throw up how to create a delegate or how to create the classic background worker but that's not at all what I need, although they may be part of the solution. So, is there a simple but generic structure that can be used? My level of C# is moderate and I've been programming all my working life, given a clue I'll figure it out (and post back)... Thanks in advance for any help.

    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

  • help me reason about F# threads

    - by Kevin Cantu
    In goofing around with some F# (via MonoDevelop), I have written a routine which lists files in a directory with one thread: let rec loop (path:string) = Array.append ( path |> Directory.GetFiles ) ( path |> Directory.GetDirectories |> Array.map loop |> Array.concat ) And then an asynchronous version of it: let rec loopPar (path:string) = Array.append ( path |> Directory.GetFiles ) ( let paths = path |> Directory.GetDirectories if paths <> [||] then [| for p in paths -> async { return (loopPar p) } |] |> Async.Parallel |> Async.RunSynchronously |> Array.concat else [||] ) On small directories, the asynchronous version works fine. On bigger directories (e.g. many thousands of directories and files), the asynchronous version seems to hang. What am I missing? I know that creating thousands of threads is never going to be the most efficient solution -- I only have 8 CPUs -- but I am baffled that for larger directories the asynchronous function just doesn't respond (even after a half hour). It doesn't visibly fail, though, which baffles me. Is there a thread pool which is exhausted? How do these threads actually work?

    Read the article

  • Issue with Java join() method.

    - by gmunk
    First of all here are some code snippets: http://pastebin.com/9ZCwekXs http://pastebin.com/TtLLXPYP I'm trying to animate some images. The thing is that I want the main thread to wait for the animation thread to finish and then to continue. I searched around, read a little bit and decided to use the join() method. It perfectly waits for the thread to finish but I doesn't animate correctly. The repaint() method gets called 2 times instead of nine. I think maybe the problem is because I used singletons. Here is the singleton implementation. http://pastebin.com/bA3qLZJE

    Read the article

  • How to manage db connections on server?

    - by simpatico
    I have a severe problem with my database connection in my web application. Since I use a single database connection for the whole application from singleton Database class, if i try concurrent db operations (two users) the database rollsback the transactions. This is my static method used: All threads/servlets call static Database.doSomething(...) methods, which in turn call the the below method. private static /* synchronized*/ Connection getConnection(final boolean autoCommit) throws SQLException { if (con == null) { con = new MyRegistrationBean().getConnection(); } con.setAutoCommit(true); //TODO return con; } What's the recommended way to manage this db connection/s I have, so that I don't incurr in the same problem.

    Read the article

  • .NET Windows Service, threads and garbage collection (possible memory leaks)

    - by Evgeny
    I am developing a .NET Windows service that is creating a couple of threads and then uses these threads to send print jobs to printers (there is a thread for each printer). I have some issues which sometimes can be fixed by restarting the service. Some issues also arise when the service has been running for a while. This makes me suspect a possible memory leak. So, a couple of questions: Would a garbage collector collect an object if it was created inside a thread, or will the object exist until the thread is stopped/terminated? What tools can I use to monitor the amount of memory used by a Windows service and by a thread that I am starting programmatically?

    Read the article

  • Parallel Task In C#.net

    - by Test123
    I have C#.net application. I wanted to run my application In Thread. But because of third party dll it dont allow to use application in multiThread. There is one object in thrid party dll ,which only allow to create instance at one time only. When i manually run application exe instnace multiple time & process my data it process successfully..(might because of each exe run with its application domain) Same thing i require to implement from C# code. for that i have created dll which can accessible by Type.GetTypeFromProgID()..but multiple dll instnace creating same problem. Is there any way i could achive manual parallelism through code to process same exe code in multiple application domain?

    Read the article

  • Thread.sleep vs Monitor.Wait vs RegisteredWaitHandle?

    - by Royi Namir
    (the following items has different goals , but im interesting knowing how they "PAUSEd") questions Thread.sleep - Does it impact performance on a system ?does it tie up a thread with its wait ? what about Monitor.Wait ? what is the difference in the way they "wait"? do they tie up a thread with their wait ? what aboutRegisteredWaitHandle ? This method accepts a delegate that is executed when a wait handle is signaled. While it’s waiting, it doesn’t tie up a thread. so some thread are paused and can be woken by a delegate , while others just wait ? spin ? can someone please make things clearer ? edit http://www.albahari.com/threading/part2.aspx

    Read the article

  • Testing approach for multi-threaded software

    - by Shane MacLaughlin
    I have a piece of mature geospatial software that has recently had areas rewritten to take better advantage of the multiple processors available in modern PCs. Specifically, display, GUI, spatial searching, and main processing have all been hived off to seperate threads. The software has a pretty sizeable GUI automation suite for functional regression, and another smaller one for performance regression. While all automated tests are passing, I'm not convinced that they provide nearly enough coverage in terms of finding bugs relating race conditions, deadlocks, and other nasties associated with multi-threading. What techniques would you use to see if such bugs exist? What techniques would you advocate for rooting them out, assuming there are some in there to root out? What I'm doing so far is running the GUI functional automation on the app running under a debugger, such that I can break out of deadlocks and catch crashes, and plan to make a bounds checker build and repeat the tests against that version. I've also carried out a static analysis of the source via PC-Lint with the hope of locating potential dead locks, but not had any worthwhile results. The application is C++, MFC, mulitple document/view, with a number of threads per doc. The locking mechanism I'm using is based on an object that includes a pointer to a CMutex, which is locked in the ctor and freed in the dtor. I use local variables of this object to lock various bits of code as required, and my mutex has a time out that fires my a warning if the timeout is reached. I avoid locking where possible, using resource copies where possible instead. What other tests would you carry out?

    Read the article

  • Lockless queue implementation ends up having a loop under stress

    - by Fozi
    I have lockless queues written in C in form of a linked list that contains requests from several threads posted to and handled in a single thread. After a few hours of stress I end up having the last request's next pointer pointing to itself, which creates an endless loop and locks up the handling thread. The application runs (and fails) on both Linux and Windows. I'm debugging on Windows, where my COMPARE_EXCHANGE_PTR maps to InterlockedCompareExchangePointer. This is the code that pushes a request to the head of the list, and is called from several threads: void push_request(struct request * volatile * root, struct request * request) { assert(request); do { request->next = *root; } while(COMPARE_EXCHANGE_PTR(root, request, request->next) != request->next); } This is the code that gets a request from the end of the list, and is only called by a single thread that is handling them: struct request * pop_request(struct request * volatile * root) { struct request * volatile * p; struct request * request; do { p = root; while(*p && (*p)->next) p = &(*p)->next; // <- loops here request = *p; } while(COMPARE_EXCHANGE_PTR(p, NULL, request) != request); assert(request->next == NULL); return request; } Note that I'm not using a tail pointer because I wanted to avoid the complication of having to deal with the tail pointer in push_request. However I suspect that the problem might be in the way I find the end of the list. There are several places that push a request into the queue, but they all look generaly like this: // device->requests is defined as struct request * volatile requests; struct request * request = malloc(sizeof(struct request)); if(request) { // fill out request fields push_request(&device->requests, request); sem_post(device->request_sem); } The code that handles the request is doing more than that, but in essence does this in a loop: if(sem_wait_timeout(device->request_sem, timeout) == sem_success) { struct request * request = pop_request(&device->requests); // handle request free(request); } I also just added a function that is checking the list for duplicates before and after each operation, but I'm afraid that this check will change the timing so that I will never encounter the point where it fails. (I'm waiting for it to break as I'm writing this.) When I break the hanging program the handler thread loops in pop_request at the marked position. I have a valid list of one or more requests and the last one's next pointer points to itself. The request queues are usually short, I've never seen more then 10, and only 1 and 3 the two times I could take a look at this failure in the debugger. I thought this through as much as I could and I came to the conclusion that I should never be able to end up with a loop in my list unless I push the same request twice. I'm quite sure that this never happens. I'm also fairly sure (although not completely) that it's not the ABA problem. I know that I might pop more than one request at the same time, but I believe this is irrelevant here, and I've never seen it happening. (I'll fix this as well) I thought long and hard about how I can break my function, but I don't see a way to end up with a loop. So the question is: Can someone see a way how this can break? Can someone prove that this can not? Eventually I will solve this (maybe by using a tail pointer or some other solution - locking would be a problem because the threads that post should not be locked, I do have a RW lock at hand though) but I would like to make sure that changing the list actually solves my problem (as opposed to makes it just less likely because of different timing).

    Read the article

  • Fixed strptime exception with thread lock, but slows down the program

    - by eWizardII
    I have the following code, which when is running inside of a thread (the full code is here - https://github.com/eWizardII/homobabel/blob/master/lovebird.py) for null in range(0,1): while True: try: with open('C:/Twitter/tweets/user_0_' + str(self.id) + '.json', mode='w') as f: f.write('[') threadLock.acquire() for i, seed in enumerate(Cursor(api.user_timeline,screen_name=self.ip).items(200)): if i>0: f.write(", ") f.write("%s" % (json.dumps(dict(sc=seed.author.statuses_count)))) j = j + 1 threadLock.release() f.write("]") except tweepy.TweepError, e: with open('C:/Twitter/tweets/user_0_' + str(self.id) + '.json', mode='a') as f: f.write("]") print "ERROR on " + str(self.ip) + " Reason: ", e with open('C:/Twitter/errors_0.txt', mode='a') as a_file: new_ii = "ERROR on " + str(self.ip) + " Reason: " + str(e) + "\n" a_file.write(new_ii) break Now without the thread lock I generate the following error: Exception in thread Thread-117: Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python27\lib\threading.py", line 530, in __bootstrap_inner self.run() File "C:/Twitter/homobabel/lovebird.py", line 62, in run for i, seed in enumerate(Cursor(api.user_timeline,screen_name=self.ip).items(200)): File "build\bdist.win-amd64\egg\tweepy\cursor.py", line 110, in next self.current_page = self.page_iterator.next() File "build\bdist.win-amd64\egg\tweepy\cursor.py", line 85, in next items = self.method(page=self.current_page, *self.args, **self.kargs) File "build\bdist.win-amd64\egg\tweepy\binder.py", line 196, in _call return method.execute() File "build\bdist.win-amd64\egg\tweepy\binder.py", line 182, in execute result = self.api.parser.parse(self, resp.read()) File "build\bdist.win-amd64\egg\tweepy\parsers.py", line 75, in parse result = model.parse_list(method.api, json) File "build\bdist.win-amd64\egg\tweepy\models.py", line 38, in parse_list results.append(cls.parse(api, obj)) File "build\bdist.win-amd64\egg\tweepy\models.py", line 49, in parse user = User.parse(api, v) File "build\bdist.win-amd64\egg\tweepy\models.py", line 86, in parse setattr(user, k, parse_datetime(v)) File "build\bdist.win-amd64\egg\tweepy\utils.py", line 17, in parse_datetime date = datetime(*(time.strptime(string, '%a %b %d %H:%M:%S +0000 %Y')[0:6])) File "C:\Python27\lib\_strptime.py", line 454, in _strptime_time return _strptime(data_string, format)[0] File "C:\Python27\lib\_strptime.py", line 300, in _strptime _TimeRE_cache = TimeRE() File "C:\Python27\lib\_strptime.py", line 188, in __init__ self.locale_time = LocaleTime() File "C:\Python27\lib\_strptime.py", line 77, in __init__ raise ValueError("locale changed during initialization") ValueError: locale changed during initialization The problem is with thread lock on, each thread runs itself serially basically, and it takes way to long for each loop to run for there to be any advantage to having a thread anymore. So if there isn't a way to get rid of the thread lock, is there a way to have it run the for loop inside of the try statement faster?

    Read the article

  • C#, Can I check on a lock without trying to acquire it?

    - by Biff MaGriff
    Hello, I have a lock in my c# web app that prevents users from running the update script once it has started. I was thinking I would put a notification in my master page to let the user know that the data isn't all there yet. Currently I do my locking like so. protected void butRefreshData_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { Thread t = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart(UpdateDatabase)); t.Start(this); //sleep for a bit to ensure that javascript has a chance to get rendered Thread.Sleep(100); } public static void UpdateDatabase(object con) { if (Monitor.TryEnter(myLock)) { Updater.RepopulateDatabase(); Monitor.Exit(myLock); } else { Common.RegisterStartupScript(con, AlreadyLockedJavaScript); } } And I do not want to do if(Monitor.TryEnter(myLock)) Monitor.Exit(myLock); else //show processing labal As I imagine there is a slight possibility that it might display the notification when it isn't actually running. Is there an alternative I can use? Edit: Hi Everyone, thanks a lot for your suggestions! Unfortunately I couldn't quite get them to work... However I combined the ideas on 2 answers and came up with my own solution.

    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

  • pthread_exit and/or pthread_join causing Abort and SegFaults.

    - by MJewkes
    The following code is a simple thread game, that switches between threads causing the timer to decrease. It works fine for 3 threads, causes and Abort(core dumped) for 4 threads, and causes a seg fault for 5 or more threads. Anyone have any idea why this might be happening? #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <pthread.h> #include <errno.h> #include <assert.h> int volatile num_of_threads; int volatile time_per_round; int volatile time_left; int volatile turn_id; int volatile thread_running; int volatile can_check; void * player (void * id_in){ int id= (int)id_in; while(1){ if(can_check){ if (time_left<=0){ break; } can_check=0; if(thread_running){ if(turn_id==id-1){ turn_id=random()%num_of_threads; time_left--; } } can_check=1; } } pthread_exit(NULL); } int main(int argc, char *args[]){ int i; int buffer; pthread_t * threads =(pthread_t *)malloc(num_of_threads*sizeof(pthread_t)); thread_running=0; num_of_threads=atoi(args[1]); can_check=0; time_per_round = atoi(args[2]); time_left=time_per_round; srandom(time(NULL)); //Create Threads for (i=0;i<num_of_threads;i++){ do{ buffer=pthread_create(&threads[i],NULL,player,(void *)(i+1)); }while(buffer == EAGAIN); } can_check=1; time_left=time_per_round; turn_id=random()%num_of_threads; thread_running=1; for (i=0;i<num_of_threads;i++){ assert(!pthread_join(threads[i], NULL)); } return 0; }

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44  | Next Page >