Search Results

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

Page 38/66 | < Previous Page | 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  | Next Page >

• Returning from method inside a @synchronized block

  - by Michael Waterfall

  I'd just like to know if it's advised to return from a method within a @synchronized block? For example: - (id)test { @synchronized(self) { if (a) return @"A"; else return @"B"; } } As opposed to: - (id)test { NSString *value; @synchronized(self) { if (a) value = @"A"; else value = @"B"; } return value; } This sample is rather simplistic, but sometimes in a complex method it would make things simpler to be able to return from within a @synchronized block.

  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

• Java: How to test methods that call System.exit()?

  - by Chris Conway

  I've got a few methods that should call System.exit() on certain inputs. Unfortunately, testing these cases causes JUnit to terminate! Putting the method calls in a new Thread doesn't seem to help, since System.exit() terminates the JVM, not just the current thread. Are there any common patterns for dealing with this? For example, can I subsitute a stub for System.exit()? [EDIT] The class in question is actually a command-line tool which I'm attempting to test inside JUnit. Maybe JUnit is simply not the right tool for the job? Suggestions for complementary regression testing tools are welcome (preferably something that integrates well with JUnit and EclEmma).

  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

• Is catching exceptions asynchronous?

  - by Gabriel Šcerbák

  I am asking because if it is not, it can be abused as synchronizations mechanism. I am asking about Java.

  Read the article

• optimistic lock-free FIFO queues impl?

  - by uray

  is there any C++ implementation (source codes) of "optmistic approach to lock-free FIFO queues" algorithm?

  Read the article

• Polling servers at the same port - Threads and Java

  - by John

  Hi there. I'm currently busy working on an IP ban tool for the early versions of Call of Duty 1. (Apparently such a feature wasn't implemented in these versions). I've finished a single threaded application but it won't perform well enough for multiple servers, which is why I am trying to implement threading. Right now, each server has its own thread. I have a Networking class, which has a method; "GetStatus" -- this method is synchronized. This method uses a DatagramSocket to communicate with the server. Since this method is static and synchronized, I shouldn't get in trouble and receive a whole bunch of "Address already in use" exceptions. However, I have a second method named "SendMessage". This method is supposed to send a message to the server. How can I make sure "SendMessage" cannot be invoked when there's already a thread running in "GetStatus", and the other way around? If I make both synchronized, I will still get in trouble if Thread A is opening a socket on Port 99999 and invoking "SendMessage" while Thread B is opening a socket on the same port and invoking "GetStatus"? (Game servers are usually hosted on the same ports) I guess what I am really after is a way to make an entire class synchronized, so that only one method can be invoked and run at a time by a single thread. Hope that what I am trying to accomplish/avoid is made clear in this text. Any help is greatly appreciated.

  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

• Which async call use for DB connection and still responsive GUI?--

  - by Jade

  Hi, My application connects to MSSQL but sometimes it takes a while and the GUI is getting frozen. I would like to do the connection on the other thread, I guess BeginInvoke would be the best way (I know about background worker but I would like to learn this). I have studied MSDN page but I did not understand what is the best way to use? They also say that you can use only callback when the thread that called the async.method does not need to know the results...I dont understand it as I believe I can set some variable in the other thread to "pass" the result well. I would just need the GUI to be not frozen while the connection is being established. Thank you for your advice.

  Read the article

• WinForm-style Invoke() in unmanaged C++

  - by Matt Green

  I've been playing with a DataBus-type design for a hobby project, and I ran into an issue. Back-end components need to notify the UI that something has happened. My implementation of the bus delivers the messages synchronously with respect to the sender. In other words, when you call Send(), the method blocks until all the handlers have called. (This allows callers to use stack memory management for event objects.) However, consider the case where an event handler updates the GUI in response to an event. If the handler is called, and the message sender lives on another thread, then the handler cannot update the GUI due to Win32's GUI elements having thread affinity. More dynamic platforms such as .NET allow you to handle this by calling a special Invoke() method to move the method call (and the arguments) to the UI thread. I'm guessing they use the .NET parking window or the like for these sorts of things. A morbid curiosity was born: can we do this in C++, even if we limit the scope of the problem? Can we make it nicer than existing solutions? I know Qt does something similar with the moveToThread() function. By nicer, I'll mention that I'm specifically trying to avoid code of the following form: if(! this->IsUIThread()) { Invoke(MainWindowPresenter::OnTracksAdded, e); return; } being at the top of every UI method. This dance was common in WinForms when dealing with this issue. I think this sort of concern should be isolated from the domain-specific code and a wrapper object made to deal with it. My implementation consists of: DeferredFunction - functor that stores the target method in a FastDelegate, and deep copies the single event argument. This is the object that is sent across thread boundaries. UIEventHandler - responsible for dispatching a single event from the bus. When the Execute() method is called, it checks the thread ID. If it does not match the UI thread ID (set at construction time), a DeferredFunction is allocated on the heap with the instance, method, and event argument. A pointer to it is sent to the UI thread via PostThreadMessage(). Finally, a hook function for the thread's message pump is used to call the DeferredFunction and de-allocate it. Alternatively, I can use a message loop filter, since my UI framework (WTL) supports them. Ultimately, is this a good idea? The whole message hooking thing makes me leery. The intent is certainly noble, but are there are any pitfalls I should know about? Or is there an easier way to do this?

  Read the article

• How to maintain a pool of names ?

  - by Jacques René Mesrine

  I need to maintain a list of userids (proxy accounts) which will be dished out to multithreaded clients. Basically the clients will use the userids to perform actions; but for this question, it is not important what these actions are. When a client gets hold of a userid, it is not available to other clients until the action is completed. I'm trying to think of a concurrent data structure to maintain this pool of userids. Any ideas ? Would a ConcurrentQueue do the job ? Clients will dequeue a userid, and add back the userid when they are finished with it.

  Read the article

• iPhone: One Object, One Thread

  - by GingerBreadMane

  On the iPhone, I would like to do some operations on an image in a separate thread. Rather than dealing with semiphores, locking, etc., I'd like to use the 'One Object, One Thread' method of safely writing this concurrent operation. I'm not sure what is the correct way to copy my object into a new thread so that the object is not accessed in the main thread. Do I use the 'copy' method? If so, do I do this before the thread or inside the thread? ... -(void)someMethod{ UIImage *myImage; [NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(getRotatedImage:) toTarget:self withObject:myImage]; } -(void)getRotatedImage:(UIImage *)image{ ... ... UIImage *copiedImage = [image copy]; ... ... }

  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

• How do I create a thread-safe write-once read-many value in Java?

  - by Software Monkey

  This is a problem I encounter frequently in working with more complex systems and which I have never figured out a good way to solve. It usually involves variations on the theme of a shared object whose construction and initialization are necessarily two distinct steps. This is generally because of architectural requirements, similar to applets, so answers that suggest I consolidate construction and initialization are not useful. By way of example, let's say I have a class that is structured to fit into an application framework like so: public class MyClass { private /*ideally-final*/ SomeObject someObject; MyClass() { someObject=null; } public void startup() { someObject=new SomeObject(...arguments from environment which are not available until startup is called...); } public void shutdown() { someObject=null; // this is not necessary, I am just expressing the intended scope of someObject explicitly } } I can't make someObject final since it can't be set until startup() is invoked. But I would really like it to reflect it's write-once semantics and be able to directly access it from multiple threads, preferably avoiding synchronization. The idea being to express and enforce a degree of finalness, I conjecture that I could create a generic container, like so: public class WoRmObject<T> { private T object; WoRmObject() { object=null; } public WoRmObject set(T val) { object=val; return this; } public T get() { return object; } } and then in MyClass, above, do: private final WoRmObject<SomeObject> someObject; MyClass() { someObject=new WoRmObject<SomeObject>(); } public void startup() { someObject.set(SomeObject(...arguments from environment which are not available until startup is called...)); } Which raises some questions for me: Is there a better way, or existing Java object (would have to be available in Java 4)? Is this thread-safe provided that no other thread accesses someObject.get() until after it's set() has been called. The other threads will only invoke methods on MyClass between startup() and shutdown() - the framework guarantees this. Given the completely unsynchronized WoRmObject container, it is ever possible under either JMM to see a value of object which is neither null nor a reference to a SomeObject? In other words, does has the JMM always guaranteed that no thread can observe the memory of an object to be whatever values happened to be on the heap when the object was allocated.

  Read the article

• Boost::Thread or fork()

  - by osmano807

  I'm testing boost::thread on a system. It happens that I needed to act as a fork(), because one thread modifies the other variables, even member variables of class I do the project using fork() or is there some alternative still using boost::thread Basically I run this program in Linux and maybe FreeBSD

  Read the article

• How would you implement this "WorkerChain" functionality in .NET?

  - by Dan Tao

  Sorry for the vague question title -- not sure how to encapsulate what I'm asking below succinctly. (If someone with editing privileges can think of a more descriptive title, feel free to change it.) The behavior I need is this. I am envisioning a worker class that accepts a single delegate task in its constructor (for simplicity, I would make it immutable -- no more tasks can be added after instantiation). I'll call this task T. The class should have a simple method, something like GetToWork, that will exhibit this behavior: If the worker is not currently running T, then it will start doing so right now. If the worker is currently running T, then once it is finished, it will start T again immediately. GetToWork can be called any number of times while the worker is running T; the simple rule is that, during any execution of T, if GetToWork was called at least once, T will run again upon completion (and then if GetToWork is called while T is running that time, it will repeat itself again, etc.). Now, this is pretty straightforward with a boolean switch. But this class needs to be thread-safe, by which I mean, steps 1 and 2 above need to comprise atomic operations (at least I think they do). There is an added layer of complexity. I have need of a "worker chain" class that will consist of many of these workers linked together. As soon as the first worker completes, it essentially calls GetToWork on the worker after it; meanwhile, if its own GetToWork has been called, it restarts itself as well. Logically calling GetToWork on the chain is essentially the same as calling GetToWork on the first worker in the chain (I would fully intend that the chain's workers not be publicly accessible). One way to imagine how this hypothetical "worker chain" would behave is by comparing it to a team in a relay race. Suppose there are four runners, W1 through W4, and let the chain be called C. If I call C.StartWork(), what should happen is this: If W1 is at his starting point (i.e., doing nothing), he will start running towards W2. If W1 is already running towards W2 (i.e., executing his task), then once he reaches W2, he will signal to W2 to get started, immediately return to his starting point and, since StartWork has been called, start running towards W2 again. When W1 reaches W2's starting point, he'll immediately return to his own starting point. If W2 is just sitting around, he'll start running immediately towards W3. If W2 is already off running towards W3, then W2 will simply go again once he's reached W3 and returned to his starting point. The above is probably a little convoluted and written out poorly. But hopefully you get the basic idea. Obviously, these workers will be running on their own threads. Also, I guess it's possible this functionality already exists somewhere? If that's the case, definitely let me know!

  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

• Java - Call to start method on thread : how does it route to Runnable interface's run () ?

  - by Bhaskar

  Ok , I know the two standard ways to create a new thread and run it in Java : 1 Implement Runnable in a class , define run method ,and pass an instance of the class to a new Thread. When the start method on the thread instance is called , the run method of the class instance will be invoked. 2 Let the class derive from Thread, so it can to override the method run() and then when a new instance's start method is called , the call is routed to overridden method. In both methods , basically a new Thread object is created and its start method invoked. However , while in the second method , the mechanism of the call being routed to the user defined run() method is very clear ,( its a simple runtime polymorphism in play ), I dont understand how the call to start method on the Thread object gets routed to run() method of the class implementing Runnable interface. Does the Thread class have an private field of Type Runnable which it checks first , and if it is set then invokes the run method if it set to an object ? that would be a strange mechanism IMO. How does the call to start() on a thread get routed to the run method of the Runnable interface implemented by the class whose object is passed as a parameter when contructing the thread ?

  Read the article

• Proper way to have an endless worker thread?

  - by Neil N

  I have an object that requires a lot of initialization (1-2 seconds on a beefy machine). Though once it is initialized it only takes about 20 miliseconds to do a typical "job" In order to prevent it from being re-initialized every time an app wants to use it (which could be 50 times a second or not at all for minutes in typical usage), I decided to give it a job que, and have it run on its own thread, checking to see if there is any work for it in the que. However I'm not entirely sure how to make a thread that runs indefinetly with or without work. Here's what I have so far, any critique is welcomed private void DoWork() { while (true) { if (JobQue.Count > 0) { // do work on JobQue.Pop() } else { System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(50); } } } After thought: I was thinking I may need to kill this thread gracefully insead of letting it run forever, so I think I will add a Job type that tells the thread to end. Any thoughts on how to end a thread like this also appreciated.

  Read the article

• Unresponsive UI when using BeginInvoke

  - by Kazoom

  Bckground I have a networked application written in C#. my server program has a UI and several communication threads, that read from tcp sockets and display messages on controller UI. Communication with each client is done through a seprate thread. When i recieve some stream of messages from one client , the thread for that client writes on UI, which is a richtextbox on a Form. I call SetTextHelper(string text) method of the form. which looks like this private delegate void MyTextUpdateHandler(string text); public void SetTextHelper(string text) { BeginInvoke(new MyTextUpdateHandler(SetText), new object[] { text }); } public setText(string text) { richtext.Text= text; } Question - If i use BeginInvoke my UI is entirely unresponsive when i m writing large stream of data to UI - Invoke solves that problem, but i read that for multi threaded environment where many thereads are sharing same resource Invoke can lead to deadlocks I share the common ichtextbox between around 16 threads - What would be a good desing for my situation?

  Read the article

• Can getAttribute() method of Tomcat ServletContext implementation be called without synchronization?

  - by oo_olo_oo

  I would like to read some parameters during servlet initializtion (in init() method), and store them among servlet context attributes (using getServletContext().setAttribute()). I would like to read these parameters later - during some request processing (using getServletContext().getAttribute()). So, the multiple threads could do this simultaneously. My question is if such an attempt is safe? Could I be sure that multi threaded calls to the getAttribute() don't mess up any internal state of the servlet context? Please take into account that I'm not going to call the setAttribute() anywhere besides the initialization. So, only calls to the getAttribute() are going to be done from multiple threads. But depending on the internal implementation, this also could be dangerous. So, any information about Tomcat's implementation would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• Can I avoid a threaded UDP socket in Python dropping data?

  - by 666craig

  First off, I'm new to Python and learning on the job, so be gentle! I'm trying to write a threaded Python app for Windows that reads data from a UDP socket (thread-1), writes it to file (thread-2), and displays the live data (thread-3) to a widget (gtk.Image using a gtk.gdk.pixbuf). I'm using queues for communicating data between threads. My problem is that if I start only threads 1 and 3 (so skip the file writing for now), it seems that I lose some data after the first few samples. After this drop it looks fine. Even by letting thread 1 complete before running thread 3, this apparent drop is still there. Apologies for the length of code snippet (I've removed the thread that writes to file), but I felt removing code would just prompt questions. Hope someone can shed some light :-) import socket import threading import Queue import numpy import gtk gtk.gdk.threads_init() import gtk.glade import pygtk class readFromUDPSocket(threading.Thread): def __init__(self, socketUDP, readDataQueue, packetSize, numScans): threading.Thread.__init__(self) self.socketUDP = socketUDP self.readDataQueue = readDataQueue self.packetSize = packetSize self.numScans = numScans def run(self): for scan in range(1, self.numScans + 1): buffer = self.socketUDP.recv(self.packetSize) self.readDataQueue.put(buffer) self.socketUDP.close() print 'myServer finished!' class displayWithGTK(threading.Thread): def __init__(self, displayDataQueue, image, viewArea): threading.Thread.__init__(self) self.displayDataQueue = displayDataQueue self.image = image self.viewWidth = viewArea[0] self.viewHeight = viewArea[1] self.displayData = numpy.zeros((self.viewHeight, self.viewWidth, 3), dtype=numpy.uint16) def run(self): scan = 0 try: while True: if not scan % self.viewWidth: scan = 0 buffer = self.displayDataQueue.get(timeout=0.1) self.displayData[:, scan, 0] = numpy.fromstring(buffer, dtype=numpy.uint16) self.displayData[:, scan, 1] = numpy.fromstring(buffer, dtype=numpy.uint16) self.displayData[:, scan, 2] = numpy.fromstring(buffer, dtype=numpy.uint16) gtk.gdk.threads_enter() self.myPixbuf = gtk.gdk.pixbuf_new_from_data(self.displayData.tostring(), gtk.gdk.COLORSPACE_RGB, False, 8, self.viewWidth, self.viewHeight, self.viewWidth * 3) self.image.set_from_pixbuf(self.myPixbuf) self.image.show() gtk.gdk.threads_leave() scan += 1 except Queue.Empty: print 'myDisplay finished!' pass def quitGUI(obj): print 'Currently active threads: %s' % threading.enumerate() gtk.main_quit() if __name__ == '__main__': # Create socket (IPv4 protocol, datagram (UDP)) and bind to address socketUDP = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_DGRAM) host = '192.168.1.5' port = 1024 socketUDP.bind((host, port)) # Data parameters samplesPerScan = 256 packetsPerSecond = 1200 packetSize = 512 duration = 1 # For now, set a fixed duration to log data numScans = int(packetsPerSecond * duration) # Create array to store data data = numpy.zeros((samplesPerScan, numScans), dtype=numpy.uint16) # Create queue for displaying from readDataQueue = Queue.Queue(numScans) # Build GUI from Glade XML file builder = gtk.Builder() builder.add_from_file('GroundVue.glade') window = builder.get_object('mainwindow') window.connect('destroy', quitGUI) view = builder.get_object('viewport') image = gtk.Image() view.add(image) viewArea = (1200, samplesPerScan) # Instantiate & start threads myServer = readFromUDPSocket(socketUDP, readDataQueue, packetSize, numScans) myDisplay = displayWithGTK(readDataQueue, image, viewArea) myServer.start() myDisplay.start() gtk.gdk.threads_enter() gtk.main() gtk.gdk.threads_leave() print 'gtk.main finished!'

  Read the article

• How to figure out who owns a worker thread that is still running when my app exits?

  - by Dave

  Not long after upgrading to VS2010, my application won't shut down cleanly. If I close the app and then hit pause in the IDE, I see this: The problem is, there's no context. The call stack just says [External code], which isn't too helpful. Here's what I've done so far to try to narrow down the problem: deleted all extraneous plugins to minimize the number of worker threads launched set breakpoints in my code anywhere I create worker threads (and delegates + BeginInvoke, since I think they are labeled "Worker Thread" in the debugger anyway). None were hit. set IsBackground = true for all threads While I could do the next brute force step, which is to roll my code back to a point where this didn't happen and then look over all of the change logs, this isn't terribly efficient. Can anyone recommend a better way to figure this out, given the notable lack of information presented by the debugger? The only other things I can think of include: read up on WinDbg and try to use it to stop anytime a thread is started. At least, I thought that was possible... :) comment out huge blocks of code until the app closes properly, then start uncommenting until it doesn't. UPDATE Perhaps this information will be of use. I decided to use WinDbg and attach to my application. I then closed it, and switched to thread 0 and dumped the stack contents. Here's what I have: ThreadCount: 6 UnstartedThread: 0 BackgroundThread: 1 PendingThread: 0 DeadThread: 4 Hosted Runtime: no PreEmptive GC Alloc Lock ID OSID ThreadOBJ State GC Context Domain Count APT Exception 0 1 1c70 005a65c8 6020 Enabled 02dac6e0:02dad7f8 005a03c0 0 STA 2 2 1b20 005b1980 b220 Enabled 00000000:00000000 005a03c0 0 MTA (Finalizer) XXXX 3 08504048 19820 Enabled 00000000:00000000 005a03c0 0 Ukn XXXX 4 08504540 19820 Enabled 00000000:00000000 005a03c0 0 Ukn XXXX 5 08516a90 19820 Enabled 00000000:00000000 005a03c0 0 Ukn XXXX 6 08517260 19820 Enabled 00000000:00000000 005a03c0 0 Ukn 0:008> ~0s eax=c0674960 ebx=00000000 ecx=00000000 edx=00000000 esi=0040f320 edi=005a65c8 eip=76c37e47 esp=0040f23c ebp=0040f258 iopl=0 nv up ei pl nz na po nc cs=0023 ss=002b ds=002b es=002b fs=0053 gs=002b efl=00000202 USER32!NtUserGetMessage+0x15: 76c37e47 83c404 add esp,4 0:000> !clrstack OS Thread Id: 0x1c70 (0) Child SP IP Call Site 0040f274 76c37e47 [InlinedCallFrame: 0040f274] 0040f270 6baa8976 DomainBoundILStubClass.IL_STUB_PInvoke(System.Windows.Interop.MSG ByRef, System.Runtime.InteropServices.HandleRef, Int32, Int32)*** WARNING: Unable to verify checksum for C:\Windows\assembly\NativeImages_v4.0.30319_32\WindowsBase\d17606e813f01376bd0def23726ecc62\WindowsBase.ni.dll 0040f274 6ba924c5 [InlinedCallFrame: 0040f274] MS.Win32.UnsafeNativeMethods.IntGetMessageW(System.Windows.Interop.MSG ByRef, System.Runtime.InteropServices.HandleRef, Int32, Int32) 0040f2c4 6ba924c5 MS.Win32.UnsafeNativeMethods.GetMessageW(System.Windows.Interop.MSG ByRef, System.Runtime.InteropServices.HandleRef, Int32, Int32) 0040f2dc 6ba8e5f8 System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.GetMessage(System.Windows.Interop.MSG ByRef, IntPtr, Int32, Int32) 0040f318 6ba8d579 System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.PushFrameImpl(System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherFrame) 0040f368 6ba8d2a1 System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.PushFrame(System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherFrame) 0040f374 6ba7fba0 System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.Run() 0040f380 62e6ccbb System.Windows.Application.RunDispatcher(System.Object)*** WARNING: Unable to verify checksum for C:\Windows\assembly\NativeImages_v4.0.30319_32\PresentationFramewo#\7f91eecda3ff7ce478146b6458580c98\PresentationFramework.ni.dll 0040f38c 62e6c8ff System.Windows.Application.RunInternal(System.Windows.Window) 0040f3b0 62e6c682 System.Windows.Application.Run(System.Windows.Window) 0040f3c0 62e6c30b System.Windows.Application.Run() 0040f3cc 001f00bc MyApplication.App.Main() [C:\code\trunk\MyApplication\obj\Debug\GeneratedInternalTypeHelper.g.cs @ 24] 0040f608 66c421db [GCFrame: 0040f608] EDIT -- not sure if this helps, but the main thread's call stack looks like this: [Managed to Native Transition] > WindowsBase.dll!MS.Win32.UnsafeNativeMethods.GetMessageW(ref System.Windows.Interop.MSG msg, System.Runtime.InteropServices.HandleRef hWnd, int uMsgFilterMin, int uMsgFilterMax) + 0x15 bytes WindowsBase.dll!System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.GetMessage(ref System.Windows.Interop.MSG msg, System.IntPtr hwnd, int minMessage, int maxMessage) + 0x48 bytes WindowsBase.dll!System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.PushFrameImpl(System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherFrame frame = {System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherFrame}) + 0x85 bytes WindowsBase.dll!System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.PushFrame(System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherFrame frame) + 0x49 bytes WindowsBase.dll!System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.Run() + 0x4c bytes PresentationFramework.dll!System.Windows.Application.RunDispatcher(object ignore) + 0x17 bytes PresentationFramework.dll!System.Windows.Application.RunInternal(System.Windows.Window window) + 0x6f bytes PresentationFramework.dll!System.Windows.Application.Run(System.Windows.Window window) + 0x26 bytes PresentationFramework.dll!System.Windows.Application.Run() + 0x1b bytes I did a search on it and found some posts related to WPF GUIs hanging, and maybe that'll give me some more clues.

  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

• using qsub (sge) with multi-threaded applications

  - by dan12345

  i wanted to submit a multi-threaded job to the cluster network i'm working with - but the man page about qsub is not clear how this is done - By default i guess it just sends it as a normal job regardless of the multi-threading - but this might cause problems, i.e. sending many multi-threaded jobs to the same computer, slowing things down. Does anyone know how to accomplish this? thanks. The batch server system is sge.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  | Next Page >