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 41/66 | < Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >

  • handling activity destruction in multithreaded android app

    - by Jayesh
    Hi, I have a multithreded app where background threads are used to load data over network or from disk/db. Every once in a while user will perform some action e.g. fetch news over network, which will spawn a background AsyncTask, but for some reason user will quit the app (press back button so that activity gets destroyed). In most such scenarios, I make appropriate checks in the background thread after it returns from n/w i/o, so that it won't crash by accessing members of the activity that is destroyed by now. However some corner cases are left where crashes happen, because the background thread would access some member of activity that is now null. Do other Android developers have some generic/recommended framework to handle such scenarios? These are the times when I wish android would have guaranteed termination of all threads when activity destroys (in the same way that regular linux process cleans up when it's quit)... but I guess Android devs had good reasons for not exposing process lifetimes through the api.

    Read the article

  • Several client waiting for the same event

    - by ff8mania
    I'm developing a communication API to be used by a lot of generic clients to communicate with a proprietary system. This proprietary system exposes an API, and I use a particular classes to send and wait messages from this system: obviously the system alert me that a message is ready using an event. The event is named OnMessageArrived. My idea is to expose a simple SendSyncMessage(message) method that helps the user/client to simply send a message and the method returns the response. The client: using ( Communicator c = new Communicator() ) { response = c.SendSync(message); } The communicator class is done in this way: public class Communicator : IDisposable { // Proprietary system object ExternalSystem c; String currentRespone; Guid currentGUID; private readonly ManualResetEvent _manualResetEvent; private ManualResetEvent _manualResetEvent2; String systemName = "system"; String ServerName = "server"; public Communicator() { _manualResetEvent = new ManualResetEvent(false); //This methods are from the proprietary system API c = SystemInstance.CreateInstance(); c.Connect(systemName , ServerName); } private void ConnectionStarter( object data ) { c.OnMessageArrivedEvent += c_OnMessageArrivedEvent; _manualResetEvent.WaitOne(); c.OnMessageArrivedEvent-= c_OnMessageArrivedEvent; } public String SendSync( String Message ) { Thread _internalThread = new Thread(ConnectionStarter); _internalThread.Start(c); _manualResetEvent2 = new ManualResetEvent(false); String toRet; int messageID; currentGUID = Guid.NewGuid(); c.SendMessage(Message, "Request", currentGUID.ToString()); _manualResetEvent2.WaitOne(); toRet = currentRespone; return toRet; } void c_OnMessageArrivedEvent( int Id, string root, string guid, int TimeOut, out int ReturnCode ) { if ( !guid.Equals(currentGUID.ToString()) ) { _manualResetEvent2.Set(); ReturnCode = 0; return; } object newMessage; c.FetchMessage(Id, 7, out newMessage); currentRespone = newMessage.ToString(); ReturnCode = 0; _manualResetEvent2.Set(); } } I'm really noob in using waithandle, but my idea was to create an instance that sends the message and waits for an event. As soon as the event arrived, checks if the message is the one I expect (checking the unique guid), otherwise continues to wait for the next event. This because could be (and usually is in this way) a lot of clients working concurrently, and I want them to work parallel. As I implemented my stuff, at the moment if I run client 1, client 2 and client 3, client 2 starts sending message as soon as client 1 has finished, and client 3 as client 2 has finished: not what I'm trying to do. Can you help me to fix my code and get my target? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Java Executor: Small tasks or big ones?

    - by Arash Shahkar
    Consider one big task which could be broken into hundreds of small, independently-runnable tasks. To be more specific, each small task is to send a light network request and decide upon the answer received from the server. These small tasks are not expected to take longer than a second, and involve a few servers in total. I have in mind two approaches to implement this using the Executor framework, and I want to know which one's better and why. Create a few, say 5 to 10 tasks each involving doing a bunch of send and receives. Create a single task (Callable or Runnable) for each send & receive and schedule all of them (hundreds) to be run by the executor. I'm sorry if my question shows that I'm lazy to test these and see for myself what's better (at least performance-wise). My question, while looking after an answer to this specific case, has a more general aspect. In situations like these when you want to use an executor to do all the scheduling and other stuff, is it better to create lots of small tasks or to group those into a less number of bigger tasks?

    Read the article

  • Handling Incoming Data from Multiple Sockets in Python

    - by user859434
    Background: I have a current implementation that receives data from about 120 different socket connections in python. In my current implementation, I handle each of these separate socket connections with a dedicated thread for each. Each of these threads parse the data and eventually store it within a shared locked dictionary. These sockets DO NOT have uniform data rates, some sockets get more data than others. Question: Is this the best way to handle incoming data in python, or does python have a better way on handling multiple sockets per thread?

    Read the article

  • Thread sleep and thread join.

    - by Dhruv Gairola
    hi guys, if i put a thread to sleep in a loop, netbeans gives me a caution saying Invoking Thread.sleep in loop can cause performance problems. However, if i were to replace the sleep with join, no such caution is given. Both versions compile and work fine tho. My code is below (check the last few lines for "Thread.sleep() vs t.join()"). public class Test{ //Display a message, preceded by the name of the current thread static void threadMessage(String message) { String threadName = Thread.currentThread().getName(); System.out.format("%s: %s%n", threadName, message); } private static class MessageLoop implements Runnable { public void run() { String importantInfo[] = { "Mares eat oats", "Does eat oats", "Little lambs eat ivy", "A kid will eat ivy too" }; try { for (int i = 0; i < importantInfo.length; i++) { //Pause for 4 seconds Thread.sleep(4000); //Print a message threadMessage(importantInfo[i]); } } catch (InterruptedException e) { threadMessage("I wasn't done!"); } } } public static void main(String args[]) throws InterruptedException { //Delay, in milliseconds before we interrupt MessageLoop //thread (default one hour). long patience = 1000 * 60 * 60; //If command line argument present, gives patience in seconds. if (args.length > 0) { try { patience = Long.parseLong(args[0]) * 1000; } catch (NumberFormatException e) { System.err.println("Argument must be an integer."); System.exit(1); } } threadMessage("Starting MessageLoop thread"); long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis(); Thread t = new Thread(new MessageLoop()); t.start(); threadMessage("Waiting for MessageLoop thread to finish"); //loop until MessageLoop thread exits while (t.isAlive()) { threadMessage("Still waiting..."); //Wait maximum of 1 second for MessageLoop thread to //finish. /*******LOOK HERE**********************/ Thread.sleep(1000);//issues caution unlike t.join(1000) /**************************************/ if (((System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime) > patience) && t.isAlive()) { threadMessage("Tired of waiting!"); t.interrupt(); //Shouldn't be long now -- wait indefinitely t.join(); } } threadMessage("Finally!"); } } As i understand it, join waits for the other thread to complete, but in this case, arent both sleep and join doing the same thing? Then why does netbeans throw the caution?

    Read the article

  • .NET threading: how can I capture an abort on an unstarted thread?

    - by Groxx
    I have a chunk of threads I wish to run in order, on an ASP site running .NET 2.0 with Visual Studio 2008 (no idea how much all that matters, but there it is), and they may have aborted-clean-up code which should be run regardless of how far through their task they are. So I make a thread like this: Thread t = new Thread(delegate() { try { /* do things */ System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("try"); } catch (ThreadAbortException) { /* cleanup */ System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("catch"); } }); Now, if I wish to abort the set of threads part way through, the cleanup may still be desirable later on down the line. Looking through MSDN implies you can .Abort() a thread that has not started, and then .Start() it, at which point it will receive the exception and perform normally. Or you can .Join() the aborted thread to wait for it to finish aborting. Presumably you can combine them. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ty8d3wta(v=VS.80).aspx To wait until a thread has aborted, you can call the Join method on the thread after calling the Abort method, but there is no guarantee the wait will end. If Abort is called on a thread that has not been started, the thread will abort when Start is called. If Abort is called on a thread that is blocked or is sleeping, the thread is interrupted and then aborted. Now, when I debug and step through this code: t.Abort(); // ThreadState == Unstarted | AbortRequested t.Start(); // throws ThreadStartException: "Thread failed to start." // so I comment it out, and t.Join(); // throws ThreadStateException: "Thread has not been started." At no point do I see any output, nor do any breakpoints on either the try or catch block get reached. Oddly, ThreadStartException is not listed as a possible throw of .Start(), from here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/a9fyxz7d(v=VS.80).aspx (or any other version) I understand this could be avoided by having a start parameter, which states if the thread should jump to cleanup code, and foregoing the Abort call (which is probably what I'll do). And I could .Start() the thread, and then .Abort() it. But as an indeterminate amount of time may pass between .Start and .Abort, I'm considering it unreliable, and the documentation seems to say my original method should work. Am I missing something? Is the documentation wrong? edit: ow. And you can't call .Start(param) on a non-parameterized Thread(Start). Is there a way to find out if a thread is parameterized or not, aside from trial and error? I see a private m_Delegate, but nothing public...

    Read the article

  • How to handle all unhandled exceptions when using Task Parallel Library?

    - by Buu Nguyen
    I'm using the TPL (Task Parallel Library) in .NET 4.0. I want to be able to centralize the handling logic of all unhandled exceptions by using the Thread.GetDomain().UnhandledException event. However, in my application, the event is never fired for threads started with TPL code, e.g. Task.Factory.StartNew(...). The event is indeed fired if I use something like new Thread(threadStart).Start(). This MSDN article suggests to use Task#Wait() to catch the AggregateException when working with TPL, but that is not I want because it is not "centralized" enough a mechanism. Does anyone experience same problem at all or is it just me? Do you have any solution for this?

    Read the article

  • Do something else if ReadWriteSlimlock is held

    - by user43838
    Hi everyone, I have implemented ReaderWriterLockSlim, Now i don't want it to wait at the lock. I want to do something else if the lock is held. I considered using is isWriterLockHeld but it does not makes much sense to me, Since if two threads come in at the same time and enter the if statement at the same time one will still be waiting at the lock here is my code. ReaderWriterLockSlim rw = GetLoadingLock(parameters); rw = GetLoadingLock(parameters); try { rw.EnterWriteLock(); item = this.retrieveCacheItem(parameters.ToString(), false); if (item != null) { parameters.DataCameFromCache = true; // if the data was found in the cache, return it immediately return item.data; } else { try { object loaditem = null; itemsLoading[parameters.ToString()] = true; loaditem = this.retrieveDataFromStore(parameters); return loaditem; } finally { itemsLoading.Remove(parameters.ToString()); } } } finally { rw.ExitWriteLock(); } Can anyone please guide me in the right direction with this. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to wait for thread to finish with .NET?

    - by Maxim Z.
    I've never really used threading before in C# where I need to have two threads, as well as the main UI thread. Basically, I have the following. public void StartTheActions() { //Starting thread 1.... Thread t1 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(action1)); t1.Start(); //Now, I want for the main thread (which is calling StartTheActions() ) to wait for t1 to finish (I have created an event in action1() for this) and then start t2... //HOW DO I DO THIS? Thread t2 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(action2)); t2.Start(); } So, essentially, my question is how to have a thread wait for another one to finish. What is the best way to do this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Background thread in C#

    - by Xodarap
    When the user saves some data, I want to spin off a background thread to update my indexes and do some other random stuff. Even if there is an error in this indexing the user can't do anything about it, so there is no point in forcing the main thread to wait until the background thread finishes. I'm doing this from a ASP.NET process, so I think I should be able to do this (as the main thread exiting won't kill the process). When I set a breakpoint in the background thread's method though, the main thread also appears to stop. Is this just an artifact of visual studio's debugger, or is the main thread really not going to return until the background thread stops?

    Read the article

  • Is a new thread in a Visual Studio test project aborted when the test ends?

    - by Michel
    Hi, i have to do some message exchange with a 3rd party (in a website). When the client posts a page, i start the message exchange. When that doesn't succeed for some reason, i report this to the client by rendering the page with a message. On the background, in a separate thread, i start a process to send abort messages to the 3rd party. I can't do this while the user is waiting for the page to come back, because it might take a few minutes. But in a test project, the test ends when the message to the 3rd party is sent, and after the new thread is started. But it seems that the new thread also ends, when the test is done. Is that normal behaviour? I do start the thread in a new class with a reference to 2 objects from the class which tries to send the message in the first place, may that be a problem?

    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

  • Threads to make video out of images

    - by masood
    updates: I think/ suspect the imageIO is not thread safe. shared by all threads. the read() call might use resources that are also shared. Thus it will give the performance of a single thread no matter how many threads used. ? if its correct . what is the solution (in practical code) Single request and response model at one time do not utilizes full network/internet bandwidth, thus resulting in low performance. (benchmark is of half speed utilization or even lower) This is to make a video out of an IP cam that gives a new image on each request. http://149.5.43.10:8001/snapshot.jpg It makes a delay of 3 - 8 seconds no matter what I do. Changed thread no. and thread time intervals, debugged the code by System.out.println statements to see if threads work. All seems normal. Any help? Please show some practical code. You may modify mine. This code works (javascript) with much smoother frame rate and max bandwidth usage. but the later code (java) dont. same 3 to 8 seconds gap. <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <script type="text/javascript"> (function(){ var img="/*url*/"; var interval=50; var pointer=0; function showImg(image,idx) { if(idx<=pointer) return; document.body.replaceChild(image,document.getElementsByTagName("img")[0]); pointer=idx; preload(); } function preload() { var cache=null,idx=0;; for(var i=0;i<5;i++) { idx=Date.now()+interval*(i+1); cache=new Image(); cache.onload=(function(ele,idx){return function(){showImg(ele,idx);};})(cache,idx); cache.src=img+"?"+idx; } } window.onload=function(){ document.getElementsByTagName("img")[0].onload=preload; document.getElementsByTagName("img")[0].src="/*initial url*/"; }; })(); </script> </head> <body> <img /> </body> </html> and of java (with problem) : package camba; import java.applet.Applet; import java.awt.Button; import java.awt.Graphics; import java.awt.Image; import java.awt.Label; import java.awt.Panel; import java.awt.TextField; import java.awt.event.ActionEvent; import java.awt.event.ActionListener; import java.net.URL; import java.security.Timestamp; import java.util.Date; import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit; import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicBoolean; import javax.imageio.ImageIO; public class Camba extends Applet implements ActionListener{ Image img; TextField textField; Label label; Button start,stop; boolean terminate = false; long viewTime; public void init(){ label = new Label("please enter camera URL "); add(label); textField = new TextField(30); add(textField); start = new Button("Start"); add(start); start.addActionListener(this); stop = new Button("Stop"); add(stop); stop.addActionListener(this); } public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e){ Button source = (Button)e.getSource(); if(source.getLabel() == "Start"){ for (int i = 0; i < 7; i++) { myThread(50*i); } System.out.println("start..."); } if(source.getLabel() == "Stop"){ terminate = true; System.out.println("stop..."); } } public void paint(Graphics g) { update(g); } public void update(Graphics g){ try{ viewTime = System.currentTimeMillis(); g.drawImage(img, 100, 100, this); } catch(Exception e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } public void myThread(final int sleepTime){ new Thread(new Runnable() { public void run() { while(!terminate){ try { TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS.sleep(sleepTime); } catch (InterruptedException ex) { ex.printStackTrace(); } long requestTime= 0; Image tempImage = null; try { URL pic = null; requestTime= System.currentTimeMillis(); pic = new URL(getDocumentBase(), textField.getText()); tempImage = ImageIO.read(pic); } catch(Exception e) { e.printStackTrace(); } if(requestTime >= /*last view time*/viewTime){ img = tempImage; Camba.this.repaint(); } } }}).start(); System.out.println("thread started..."); } }

    Read the article

  • different thread accessing MemoryStream

    - by Wayne
    There's a bit of code which writes data to a MemoryStream object directly into it's data buffer by calling GetBuffer(). It also uses and updates the Position and SetLength() properties appropriately. This code works purposes 99.9999% of the time. Literally. Only every so many 100,000's of iterations it will barf. The specific problem is that the memory.Position property suddenly returns zero instead of the appropriate value. However, code was added that checks for the 0 and throws an exception which include log of the MemoryStream properties like Position and Length in a separate method. Those return the correct value. Further addition shows that when this rare condition occurs, the memory.Position only has zero inside this particular method. Okay. Obviously, this must be a threading issue. But this code is well locked. However, the nature of this software is that it's organized by "tasks" with a scheduler and so any one of several actual O/S thread may run this code at any give time--but never more than one at a time. So it's my guess that ordinarily it so happens that the same thread keeps getting used for this method and then on a rare occasion a different thread get used. Then due to compiler optimizations, the different thread never gets the correct value. It gets a "stale" value. Ordinarily in a situation like this I would apply a "volatile" keyword to the variable in question. But that (those) variables are inside the MemoryStream object. Does anyone have any other idea? Or does this mean we have to implement our own MemoryStream object? (Just like we end up having to do with practically every collection in .NET?) It's a shame to have such an awesome platform as .NET and have virtually the entire system useless as-is for seriously parallelized applications. If I'm wrong or you have other ideas, please advise. Sincerely, Wayne

    Read the article

  • Efficiently display file status when using background thread

    - by schmoopy
    How can i efficiently display the status of a file when using a background thread? For instance, lets say i have a 100MB file: when i do the code below via a thread (just as an example) it runs in about 1 min: foreach(byte b in file.bytes) { WriteByte(b, xxx); } But... if i want to update the user i have to use a delegate to update the UI from the main thread, the code below takes - FOREVER - literally i don't know how long im still waiting, ive created this post and its not even 30% done. int total = file.length; int current = 0; foreach(byte b in file.bytes) { current++; UpdateCurrentFileStatus(current, total); WriteByte(b, xxx); } public delegate void UpdateCurrentFileStatus(int cur, int total); public void UpdateCurrentFileStatus(int cur, int total) { // Check if invoke required, if so create instance of delegate // the update the UI if(this.InvokeRequired) { } else { UpdateUI(...) } }

    Read the article

  • tiemout for a function that waits indefiinitely (like listen())

    - by Fantastic Fourier
    Hello, I'm not quite sure if it's possible to do what I'm about to ask so I thought I'd ask. I have a multi-threaded program where threads share a memory block to communicate necessary information. One of the information is termination of threads where threads constantly check for this value and when the value is changed, they know it's time for pthread_exit(). One of the threads contains listen() function and it seems to wait indefinitely. This can be problematic if there are nobody who wants to make connection and the thread needs to exit but it can't check the value whether thread needs to terminate or not since it's stuck on listen() and can't move beyond. while(1) { listen(); ... if(value == 1) pthread_exit(NULL); } My logic is something like that if it helps illustrate my point better. What I thought would solve the problem is to allow listen() to wait for a duration of time and if nothing happens, it moves on to next statement. Unfortunately, none of two args of listen() involves time limit. I'm not even sure if I'm going about the right way with multi-threaded programming, I'm not much experienced at all. So is this a good approach? Perhaps there is a better way to go about it? Thanks for any insightful comments.

    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

  • Queue access to the database to avoid multiple cache items

    - by MikeJ
    I have a music related ASP.NET web site which caches a lot of static information from the database on the first request. Sometimes, the application is reset and cache is cleared while the application is on heavy load and then all http requests go to the database to retrieve that static data and cache it for other requests. How can I ensure that only one request go to the database and cache the results, so that other request simply read that info from cache and not needlessly retrieve the same info over and over again. Can I use thread locking? For example, can I do something like lock(this) { db access here }?

    Read the article

  • Best way to implement game loop without freezing UI thread

    - by Matt H
    I'm trying to make a simple 2D game in Java. So far I have a JFrame, with a menubar, and a class which extends JPanel and overrides it's paint method. Now, I need to get a game loop going, where I will update the position of images and so on. However, I'm stuck at how best to achieve this. Should I use multi-threading, because surely, if you put an infinite loop on the main thread, the UI (and thus my menu bar) will freeze up? Here's my code so far: import java.awt.Color; import java.awt.Graphics; import javax.swing.JPanel; @SuppressWarnings("serial") public class GameCanvas extends JPanel { public void paint(Graphics g) { while (true) { g.setColor(Color.DARK_GRAY); try { Thread.sleep(100); } catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } } } import javax.swing.JFrame; import javax.swing.JMenu; import javax.swing.JMenuBar; import javax.swing.JMenuItem; @SuppressWarnings("serial") public class Main extends JFrame { GameCanvas canvas = new GameCanvas(); final int FRAME_HEIGHT = 400; final int FRAME_WIDTH = 400; public static void main(String args[]) { new Main(); } public Main() { super("Game"); JMenuBar menuBar = new JMenuBar(); JMenu fileMenu = new JMenu("File"); JMenuItem startMenuItem = new JMenuItem("Pause"); menuBar.add(fileMenu); fileMenu.add(startMenuItem); super.add(canvas); super.setVisible(true); super.setSize(FRAME_WIDTH, FRAME_WIDTH); super.setDefaultCloseOperation(JFrame.EXIT_ON_CLOSE); super.setJMenuBar(menuBar); } } Any pointers/tips? Also, where should I put my loop? In my main class, or my GameCanvas class? Any help is appreciated, thanks.

    Read the article

  • Should I pass a SqlDataReader by reference or not when passing it out to multiple threads.

    - by deroby
    Hi all, being new to c# I've run into this 'conundrum' when passing around a SqlDataReader between different threads. Without going into too much detail, the idea is to have a main thread fetching data from the database (a large recordset) and then have a helper-task run through this record by record and doing some stuff based upon the contents of this. There is no feedback to the recordset, it simply wades through until no records are left. This works fine, but given the nature of the job at hand it should be possible to have this job spread over different threads (CPUs) to maximize throughput (the order of execution is of no significance). The question then becomes, when I pass this recordset in a SqlDataReader, do I have to use ref or not ? It kind of boils down to the question : if I pass the object around without specifying ref, won't it create new copies in memory and have records processed n times ? Or, don't I risk having the record-position being moved forward while not all fields have been fully read yet ? The latter seems more like a 'data racing' issue and probably is covered by the lock()ing mechanism (or not?). My initial take on the problem was that it doesn't really hurt passing the variable using ref, yet as a colleague put it : "you only need ref when you're doing something wrong" =) Additionally using ref restricts me from applying a Using() construction too which isn't very nice either. I thus create a "basic" project that tackles the same approach but without the ref notation. Tests so far show that it works flawlessly on a Core2Duo (2cpu) using any number of threads, yet I'm still a bit wary... What do you experts think about this ? Use ref or not ? You can find the test-project here as it seems I can't upload it to this question directly ?!? ps: it's just a test-project and I'm new to c#, so please be gentle on me when breaking down the code =P

    Read the article

  • JNI String Corruption

    - by Chris Dennett
    Hi everyone, I'm getting weird string corruption across JNI calls which is causing problems on the the Java side. Every so often, I'll get a corrupted string in the passed array, which sometimes has existing parts of the original non-corrupted string. The C++ code is supposed to set the first index of the array to the address, it's a nasty hack to get around method call limitations. Additionally, the application is multi-threaded. remoteaddress[0]: 10.1.1.2:49153 remoteaddress[0]: 10.1.4.2:49153 remoteaddress[0]: 10.1.6.2:49153 remoteaddress[0]: 10.1.2.2:49153 remoteaddress[0]: 10.1.9.2:49153 remoteaddress[0]: {garbage here} java.lang.NullPointerException at kokuks.KKSAddress.<init>(KKSAddress.java:139) at kokuks.KKSAddress.createAddress(KKSAddress.java:48) at kokuks.KKSSocket._recvFrom(KKSSocket.java:963) at kokuks.scheduler.RecvOperation$1.execute(RecvOperation.java:144) at kokuks.scheduler.RecvOperation$1.execute(RecvOperation.java:1) at kokuks.KKSEvent.run(KKSEvent.java:58) at kokuks.KokuKS.handleJNIEventExpiry(KokuKS.java:872) at kokuks.KokuKS.handleJNIEventExpiry_fjni(KokuKS.java:880) at kokuks.KokuKS.runSimulator_jni(Native Method) at kokuks.KokuKS$1.run(KokuKS.java:773) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:717) remoteaddress[0]: 10.1.7.2:49153 The null pointer exception comes from trying to use the corrupt string. In C++, the address prints to standard out normally, but doing this reduces the rate of errors, from what I can see. The C++ code (if it helps): /* * Class: kokuks_KKSSocket * Method: recvFrom_jni * Signature: (Ljava/lang/String;[Ljava/lang/String;Ljava/nio/ByteBuffer;IIJ)I */ JNIEXPORT jint JNICALL Java_kokuks_KKSSocket_recvFrom_1jni (JNIEnv *env, jobject obj, jstring sockpath, jobjectArray addrarr, jobject buf, jint position, jint limit, jlong flags) { if (addrarr && env->GetArrayLength(addrarr) > 0) { env->SetObjectArrayElement(addrarr, 0, NULL); } jboolean iscopy; const char* cstr = env->GetStringUTFChars(sockpath, &iscopy); std::string spath = std::string(cstr); env->ReleaseStringUTFChars(sockpath, cstr); // release me! if (KKS_DEBUG) { std::cout << "[kks-c~" << spath << "] " << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << std::endl; } ns3::Ptr<ns3::Socket> socket = ns3::Names::Find<ns3::Socket>(spath); if (!socket) { std::cout << "[kks-c~" << spath << "] " << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << " socket not found for path!!" << std::endl; return -1; // not found } if (!addrarr) { std::cout << "[kks-c~" << spath << "] " << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << " array to set sender is null" << std::endl; return -1; } jsize arrsize = env->GetArrayLength(addrarr); if (arrsize < 1) { std::cout << "[kks-c~" << spath << "] " << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << " array too small to set sender!" << std::endl; return -1; } uint8_t* bufaddr = (uint8_t*)env->GetDirectBufferAddress(buf); long bufcap = env->GetDirectBufferCapacity(buf); uint8_t* realbufaddr = bufaddr + position; uint32_t remaining = limit - position; if (KKS_DEBUG) { std::cout << "[kks-c~" << spath << "] " << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << " bufaddr: " << bufaddr << ", cap: " << bufcap << std::endl; } ns3::Address aaddr; uint32_t mflags = flags; int ret = socket->RecvFrom(realbufaddr, remaining, mflags, aaddr); if (ret > 0) { if (KKS_DEBUG) std::cout << "[kks-c~" << spath << "] " << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << " addr: " << aaddr << std::endl; ns3::InetSocketAddress insa = ns3::InetSocketAddress::ConvertFrom(aaddr); std::stringstream ss; insa.GetIpv4().Print(ss); ss << ":" << insa.GetPort() << std::ends; if (KKS_DEBUG) std::cout << "[kks-c~" << spath << "] " << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << " addr: " << ss.str() << std::endl; jsize index = 0; const char *cstr = ss.str().c_str(); jstring jaddr = env->NewStringUTF(cstr); if (jaddr == NULL) std::cout << "[kks-c~" << spath << "] " << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << " jaddr is null!!" << std::endl; //jaddr = (jstring)env->NewGlobalRef(jaddr); env->SetObjectArrayElement(addrarr, index, jaddr); //if (env->ExceptionOccurred()) { // env->ExceptionDescribe(); //} } jint jret = ret; return jret; } The Java code (if it helps): /** * Pass an array of size 1 into remote address, and this will be set with * the sender of the packet (hax). This emulates C++ references. * * @param remoteaddress * @param buf * @param flags * @return */ public int _recvFrom(final KKSAddress remoteaddress[], ByteBuffer buf, long flags) { if (!kks.isCurrentlyThreadSafe()) throw new RuntimeException( "Not currently thread safe for ns-3 functions!" ); //lock.lock(); try { if (!buf.isDirect()) return -6; // not direct!! final String[] remoteAddrStr = new String[1]; int ret = 0; ret = recvFrom_jni( path.toPortableString(), remoteAddrStr, buf, buf.position(), buf.limit(), flags ); if (ret > 0) { System.out.println("remoteaddress[0]: " + remoteAddrStr[0]); remoteaddress[0] = KKSAddress.createAddress(remoteAddrStr[0]); buf.position(buf.position() + ret); } return ret; } finally { errNo = _getErrNo(); //lock.unlock(); } } public int recvFrom(KKSAddress[] fromaddress, final ByteBuffer bytes, long flags, long timeoutMS) { if (KokuKS.DEBUG_MODE) printMessage("public synchronized int recvFrom(KKSAddress[] fromaddress, final ByteBuffer bytes, long flags, long timeoutMS)"); if (kks.isCurrentlyThreadSafe()) { return _recvFrom(fromaddress, bytes, flags); // avoid event } fromaddress[0] = null; RecvOperation ro = new RecvOperation( kks, this, flags, true, bytes, timeoutMS ); ro.start(); fromaddress[0] = ro.getFrom(); return ro.getRetCode(); }

    Read the article

  • How to detect whether an EventWaitHandle is waiting?

    - by AngryHacker
    I have a fairly well multi-threaded winforms app that employs the EventWaitHandle in a number of places to synchronize access. So I have code similar to this: List<int> _revTypes; EventWaitHandle _ewh = new EventWaitHandle(false, EventResetMode.ManualReset); void StartBackgroundTask() { _ewh.Reset(); Thread t = new Thread(new ThreadStart(LoadStuff)); t.Start(); } void LoadStuff() { _revTypes = WebServiceCall.GetRevTypes() // ...bunch of other calls fetching data from all over the place // using the same pattern _ewh.Set(); } List<int> RevTypes { get { _ewh.WaitOne(); return _revTypes; } } Then I just call .RevTypes somewehre from the UI and it will return data to me when LoadStuff has finished executing. All this works perfectly correctly, however RevTypes is just one property - there are actually several dozens of these. And one or several of these properties are holding up the UI from loading in a fast manner. Short of placing benchmark code into each property, is there a way to see which property is holding the UI from loading? Is there a way to see whether the EventWaitHandle is forced to actually wait?

    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 | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >