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 >

  • Protecting critical sections based on a condition in C#

    - by NAADEV
    Hello, I'm dealing with a courious scenario. I'm using EntityFramework to save (insert/update) into a SQL database in a multithreaded environment. The problem is i need to access database to see whether a register with a particular key has been already created in order to set a field value (executing) or it's new to set a different value (pending). Those registers are identified by a unique guid. I've solved this problem by setting a lock since i do know entity will not be present in any other process, in other words, i will not have same guid in different processes and it seems to be working fine. It looks something like that: static readonly object LockableObject = new object(); static void SaveElement(Entity e) { lock(LockableObject) { Entity e2 = Repository.FindByKey(e); if (e2 != null) { Repository.Insert(e2); } else { Repository.Update(e2); } } } But this implies when i have a huge ammount of requests to be saved, they will be queued. I wonder if there is something like that (please, take it just as an idea): static void SaveElement(Entity e) { (using ThisWouldBeAClassToProtectBasedOnACondition protector = new ThisWouldBeAClassToProtectBasedOnACondition(e => e.UniqueId) { Entity e2 = Repository.FindByKey(e); if (e2 != null) { Repository.Insert(e2); } else { Repository.Update(e2); } } } The idea would be having a kind of protection that protected based on a condition so each entity e would have its own lock based on e.UniqueId property. Any idea?

    Read the article

  • Using lock(obj) inside a recursive call

    - by Amby
    As per my understanding a lock is not released until the runtime completes the code block of the lock(obj) ( because when the block completes it calls Monitor.Exit(obj). With this understanding i am not able to understand the reason behind the behaviour of the following code. private static string obj = ""; private static void RecurseSome(int number) { Console.WriteLine(number); lock (obj) { RecurseSome(++number); } } //Call: RecurseSome(0) //Output: 0 1 2 3...... stack overflow exception There must be some concept that i am missing. Please help.

    Read the article

  • Why in the following code the output is different when I compile or run it more than once

    - by Sanjeev
    class Name implements Runnable { public void run() { for (int x = 1; x <= 3; x++) { System.out.println("Run by " + Thread.currentThread().getName() + ", x is " + x); } } } public class Threadtest { public static void main(String [] args) { // Make one Runnable Name nr = new Name(); Thread one = new Thread(nr); Thread two = new Thread(nr); Thread three = new Thread(nr); one.setName("A"); two.setName("B"); three.setName("C"); one.start(); two.start(); three.start(); } } The answer is different while compiling and running more then one time I don't know why? any idea.

    Read the article

  • Best ASP.NET Background Service Implementation

    - by Jason N. Gaylord
    What's the best implementation for more than one background service in an ASP.NET application? Timer Callback Timer timer = new Timer(new TimerCallback(MyWorkCallback), HttpContext, 5000, 5000); Thread or ThreadPool Thread thread = new Thread(Work); thread.IsBackground = true; thread.Start(); BackgroundWorker BackgroundWorker worker = new BackgroundWorker(); worker.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(DoMyWork); worker.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(DoMyWork_Completed); worker.RunWorkerAsync(); Caching like http://www.codeproject.com/KB/aspnet/ASPNETService.aspx (located in Jeff Atwood's post here) I need to run multiple background "services" at a given time. One service may run every 5 minutes where another may be once a day. It will never be more than 10 services running at a time.

    Read the article

  • performSelectorInBackground, notify other viewcontroller when done.

    - by Michiel
    Hi, I have a method used to save an image when the user clicks Save. I use performSelectorInBackground to save the image, the viewcontroller is popped and the previous viewcontroller is shown. I want the table (on the previousUIViewController) to reload its data when the imagesaving is done. How can I do this? The save method is called like this: [self performSelectorInBackground:@selector(saveImage) withObject:nil]; [self.navigationController popViewControllerAnimated:YES];

    Read the article

  • What are some good ways to do intermachine locking?

    - by mike
    Our server cluster consists of 20 machines, each with 10 pids of 5 threads. We'd like some way to prevent any two threads, in any pid, on any machine, from modifying the same object at the same time. Our code's written in Python and runs on Linux, if that helps narrow things down. Also, it's a pretty rare case that two such threads want to do this, so we'd prefer something that optimizes the "only one thread needs this object" case to be really fast, even if it means that the "one thread has locked this object and another one needs it" case isn't great. What are some of the best practices?

    Read the article

  • BackgroundWorker

    - by vdh_ant
    Hi guys I'm working on some code that calls a service. This service call could fail and if it does I want the system to try again until it works or too much time has passed. I am wondering where I am going wrong as the following code doesn't seem to be working correctly... It randomly only does one to four loops... protected virtual void ProcessAsync(object data, int count) { var worker = new BackgroundWorker(); worker.DoWork += (sender, e) => { throw new InvalidOperationException("oh shiznit!"); }; worker.RunWorkerCompleted += (sender, e) => { //If an error occurs we need to tell the data about it if (e.Error != null) { count++; System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(count * 5000); if (count <= 10) { if (count % 5 == 0) this.Logger.Fatal("LOAD ERROR - The system can't load any data", e.Error); else this.Logger.Error("LOAD ERROR - The system can't load any data", e.Error); this.ProcessAsync(data, count); } } }; worker.RunWorkerAsync(); } Cheers Anthony

    Read the article

  • Servlet 3 spec and ThreadLocal

    - by mindas
    As far as I know, Servlet 3 spec introduces asynchronous processing feature. Among other things, this will mean that the same thread can and will be reused for processing another, concurrent, HTTP request(s). This isn't revolutionary, at least for people who worked with NIO before. Anyway, this leads to another important thing: no ThreadLocal variables as a temporary storage for the request data. Because if the same thread suddenly becomes the carrier thread to a different HTTP request, request-local data will be exposed to another request. All of that is my pure speculation based on reading articles, I haven't got time to play with any Servlet 3 implementations (Tomcat 7, GlassFish 3.0.X, etc.). So, the questions: Am I correct to assume that ThreadLocal will cease to be a convenient hack to keep the request data? Has anybody played with any of Servlet 3 implementations and tried using ThreadLocals to prove the above? Apart from storing data inside HTTP Session, are there any other similar easy-to-reach hacks you could possibly advise?

    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

  • Parallel software?

    - by mavric
    What is the meaning of "parallel software" and what are the differences between "parallel software" and "regular software"? What are its advantages and disadvantages? Does writing "parallel software" require a specific hardware or programming language ?

    Read the article

  • ReaderWriterLockSlim question.

    - by Kamarey
    There are lots written about the ReaderWriterLockSlim class which allows multiple read and a single write. All of these (at least that I had found) tell how to use it without much explanation why and how it works. The standard code sample is: lock.EnterUpgradeableReadLock(); try { if (test if write is required) { lock.EnterWriteLock(); try { change the resourse here. } finally { lock.ExitWriteLock(); } } } finally { lock.ExitUpgradeableReadLock(); } The question is: if upgradeable lock permits only a single thread to enter its section, why I should call EnterWriteLock method within? What will happen if I don't? Or what will happen if instead of EnterUpgradeableReadLock I will call EnterWriteLock and will write to a resource without using upgradeable lock at all?

    Read the article

  • C++ - how does Sleep() and cin work?

    - by quano
    Just curious. How does actually the function Sleep() work (declared in windows.h)? Maybe not just that implementation, but anyone. With that I mean - how is it implemented? How can it make the code "stop" for a specific time? Also curious about how cin and those actually work. What do they do exactly? The only way I know how to "block" something from continuing to run is with a while loop, but considering that that takes a huge amount of processing power in comparison to what's happening when you're invoking methods to read from stdin (just compare a while (true) to a read from stdin), I'm guessing that isn't what they do.

    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

  • Are there any tools to optimize the number of consumer and producer threads on a JMS queue?

    - by lindelof
    I'm working on an application that is distributed over two JBoss instances and that produces/consumes JMS messages on several JMS queues. When we configured the application we had to determine which threading model we would use, in particular the number of producing and consuming threads per queue. We have done this in a rather ad-hoc fashion but after reading the most recent columns by Herb Sutter in Dr Dobbs (in particular this one) I would like to size our threads in a more rigorous manner. Are there any methods/tools to measure the throughput of JMS queues (in particular JBoss Messaging queues) as a function of the number of producing/consuming threads?

    Read the article

  • Why does this threading approach not work?

    - by Tomas Lycken
    I have a wierd problem with threading in an ASP.NET application. For some reason, when I run the code in the request thread, everything works as expected. But when I run it in a separate thread, nothing happens. This is verified by calling the below handler with the three flags "on", "off" and "larma" respectively - in the two first cases everything works, but in the latter nothing happens. What am I doing wrong here? In the web project I have a generic handler with the following code: If task = "on" Then Alarm.StartaLarm(personId) context.Response.Write("Larmet är PÅ") ElseIf task = "off" Then Alarm.StoppaLarm(personId) context.Response.Write("Larmet är AV") ElseIf task = "larma" Then Alarm.Larma(personId) context.Response.Write("Larmar... (stängs av automagiskt)") Else context.Response.Write("inget hände - task: " & task) End If The Alarm class has the following methods: Private Shared Sub Larma_Thread(ByVal personId As Integer) StartaLarm(personId) Thread.Sleep(1000 * 30) StoppaLarm(personId) End Sub Public Shared Sub StartaLarm(ByVal personId As Integer) SandSMS(True, personId) End Sub Public Shared Sub StoppaLarm(ByVal personId As Integer) SandSMS(False, personId) End Sub Public Shared Sub SandSMS(ByVal setOn As Boolean, ByVal personId As Integer) ... End Sub

    Read the article

  • Race condition for thread startup

    - by Ozzah
    A similar question was asked here, but the answers generally all seem to relate to the lambda notation. I get a similar result without the lambda so I thought I'd ask for some clarification: Say I have something like this: for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) (new Thread(new ThreadStart(delegate() { Console.WriteLine("Thread " + i); }))).Start(); One would expect the following output: Thread 0 Thread 1 Thread 2 Thread 3 Thread 4 Now I realise that the threads aren't started in any particular order, so let's just assume that the above lines can come out in any order. But that is not what happens. What instead happens: Thread 3 Thread 4 Thread 4 Thread 4 Thread 4 or something similar, which leads me to believe that rather than passing the value if i, it is passing the reference. (Which is weird, since an int is a value type). Doing something like this: for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) (new Thread(new ThreadStart(delegate() { int j = i; Console.WriteLine("Thread " + j); }))).Start(); does not help either, even though we have made a copy of i. I am assuming the reason is that it hasn't made a copy of i in time. Doing something like this: for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { (new Thread(new ThreadStart(delegate() { Console.WriteLine("Thread " + i); }))).Start(); Thread.Sleep(50); } seems to fix the problem, however it is extremely undesirable as we're wasting 50ms on each iteration, not to mention the fact that if the computer is heavily loaded then maybe 50ms may not be enough. Here is a sample with my current, specific problem: Thread t = new Thread(new ThreadStart(delgate() { threadLogic(param1, param2, param3, param4); })); t.Start(); param1 = param2 = param3 = param4 = null; with: void threadLogic(object param1, object param2, object param3, object param4) { // Do some stuff here... } I want threadLogic() to run in its own thread, however the above code gives a null reference exception. I assume this is because the values are set to null before the thread has had a chance to start. Again, putting a Thread.Sleep(100) works, but it is an awful solution from every aspect. What do you guys recommend for this particular type of race condition?

    Read the article

  • non blocking client server chat application in java using nio

    - by Amith
    I built a simple chat application using nio channels. I am very much new to networking as well as threads. This application is for communicating with server (Server / Client chat application). My problem is that multiple clients are not supported by the server. How do I solve this problem? What's the bug in my code? public class Clientcore extends Thread { SelectionKey selkey=null; Selector sckt_manager=null; public void coreClient() { System.out.println("please enter the text"); BufferedReader stdin=new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in)); SocketChannel sc = null; try { sc = SocketChannel.open(); sc.configureBlocking(false); sc.connect(new InetSocketAddress(8888)); int i=0; while (!sc.finishConnect()) { } for(int ii=0;ii>-22;ii++) { System.out.println("Enter the text"); String HELLO_REQUEST =stdin.readLine().toString(); if(HELLO_REQUEST.equalsIgnoreCase("end")) { break; } System.out.println("Sending a request to HelloServer"); ByteBuffer buffer = ByteBuffer.wrap(HELLO_REQUEST.getBytes()); sc.write(buffer); } } catch (IOException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } finally { if (sc != null) { try { sc.close(); } catch (Exception e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } } } public void run() { try { coreClient(); } catch(Exception ej) { ej.printStackTrace(); }}} public class ServerCore extends Thread { SelectionKey selkey=null; Selector sckt_manager=null; public void run() { try { coreServer(); } catch(Exception ej) { ej.printStackTrace(); } } private void coreServer() { try { ServerSocketChannel ssc = ServerSocketChannel.open(); try { ssc.socket().bind(new InetSocketAddress(8888)); while (true) { sckt_manager=SelectorProvider.provider().openSelector(); ssc.configureBlocking(false); SocketChannel sc = ssc.accept(); register_server(ssc,SelectionKey.OP_ACCEPT); if (sc == null) { } else { System.out.println("Received an incoming connection from " + sc.socket().getRemoteSocketAddress()); printRequest(sc); System.err.println("testing 1"); String HELLO_REPLY = "Sample Display"; ByteBuffer buffer = ByteBuffer.wrap(HELLO_REPLY.getBytes()); System.err.println("testing 2"); sc.write(buffer); System.err.println("testing 3"); sc.close(); }}} catch (IOException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } finally { if (ssc != null) { try { ssc.close(); } catch (IOException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } } } catch(Exception E) { System.out.println("Ex in servCORE "+E); } } private static void printRequest(SocketChannel sc) throws IOException { ReadableByteChannel rbc = Channels.newChannel(sc.socket().getInputStream()); WritableByteChannel wbc = Channels.newChannel(System.out); ByteBuffer b = ByteBuffer.allocate(1024); // read 1024 bytes while (rbc.read(b) != -1) { b.flip(); while (b.hasRemaining()) { wbc.write(b); System.out.println(); } b.clear(); } } public void register_server(ServerSocketChannel ssc,int selectionkey_ops)throws Exception { ssc.register(sckt_manager,selectionkey_ops); }} public class HelloClient { public void coreClientChat() { Clientcore t=new Clientcore(); new Thread(t).start(); } public static void main(String[] args)throws Exception { HelloClient cl= new HelloClient(); cl.coreClientChat(); }} public class HelloServer { public void coreServerChat() { ServerCore t=new ServerCore(); new Thread(t).start(); } public static void main(String[] args) { HelloServer st= new HelloServer(); st.coreServerChat(); }}

    Read the article

  • Capturing stdout from an imported module in wxpython and sending it to a textctrl, without blocking the GUI

    - by splafe
    There are alot of very similar questions to this but I can't find one that applies specifically to what I'm trying to do. I have a simulation (written in SimPy) that I'm writing a GUI for, the main output of the simulation is text - to the console from 'print' statements. Now, I thought the simplest way would be to create a seperate module GUI.py, and import my simulation program into it: import osi_model I want all the print statements to be captured by the GUI and appear inside a Textctrl, which there's countless examples of on here, along these lines: class MyFrame(wx.Frame): def __init__(self, *args, **kwds): <general frame initialisation stuff..> redir=RedirectText(self.txtCtrl_1) sys.stdout=redir class RedirectText: def __init__(self,aWxTextCtrl): self.out=aWxTextCtrl def write(self,string): self.out.WriteText(string) I am also starting my simulation from a 'Go' button: def go_btn_click(self, event): print 'GO' self.RT = threading.Thread(target=osi_model.RunThis()) self.RT.start() This all works fine, and the output from the simulation module is captured by the TextCtrl, except the GUI locks up and becomes unresponsive - I still need it to be accessible (at the very minimum to have a 'Stop' button). I'm not sure if this is a botched attempt at creating a new thread that I've done here, but I assume a new thread will be needed at some stage in this process. People suggest using wx.CallAfter, but I'm not sure how to go about this considering the imported module doesn't know about wx, and also I can't realistically go through the entire simulation architecture and change all the print statements to wx.CallAfter, and any attempt to capture the shell from inside the imported simulation program leads to the program crashing. Does anybody have any ideas about how I can best achieve this? So all I really need is for all console text to be captured by a TextCtrl while the GUI remains responsive, and all text is solely coming from an imported module. (Also, secondary question regarding a Stop button - is it bad form to just kill the simulation thread?). Thanks, Duncan

    Read the article

  • Need help understanding .net ThreadPool

    - by Meredith
    I am trying to understand what ThreadPool does, I have this .NET example: class Program { static void Main() { int c = 2; // Use AutoResetEvent for thread management AutoResetEvent[] arr = new AutoResetEvent[50]; for (int i = 0; i < arr.Length; ++i) { arr[i] = new AutoResetEvent(false); } // Set the number of minimum threads ThreadPool.SetMinThreads(c, 4); // Enqueue 50 work items that run the code in this delegate function for (int i = 0; i < arr.Length; i++) { ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(delegate(object o) { Thread.Sleep(100); arr[(int)o].Set(); // Signals completion }, i); } // Wait for all tasks to complete WaitHandle.WaitAll(arr); } } Does this run 50 "tasks", in groups of 2 (int c) until they all finish? Or I am not understanding what it really does.

    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

  • 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

  • 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

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 >