Search Results

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

Page 48/66 | < Previous Page | 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55  | Next Page >

  • Multi-threading concept and lock in c#

    - by Neeraj
    I read about lock, though not understood nothing at all. My question is why do we use a un-used object and lock that and how this makes something thread-safe or how this helps in multi-threading ? Isn't there other way to make thread-safe code. public class test { private object Lock { get; set; } ... lock (this.Lock) { ... } ... } Sorry is my question is very stupid, but i don't understand, although i've used it many times.

    Read the article

  • how to emulate thread local storage at user space in C++ ?

    - by vprajan
    I am working on a mobile platform over Nucleus RTOS. It uses Nucleus Threading system but it doesn't have support for explicit thread local storage i.e, TlsAlloc, TlsSetValue, TlsGetValue, TlsFree APIs. The platform doesn't have user space pthreads as well. I found that __thread storage modifier is present in most of the C++ compilers. But i don't know how to make it work for my kind of usage. How does __thread keyword can be mapped with explicit thread local storage? I read many articles but nothing is so clear for giving me the following basic information will __thread variable different for each thread ? How to write to that and read from it ? does each thread has exactly one copy of the variable ? following is the pthread based implementation: pthread_key_t m_key; struct Data : Noncopyable { Data(T* value, void* owner) : value(value), owner(owner) {} int* value; }; inline ThreadSpecific() { int error = pthread_key_create(&m_key, destroy); if (error) CRASH(); } inline ~ThreadSpecific() { pthread_key_delete(m_key); // Does not invoke destructor functions. } inline T* get() { Data* data = static_cast<Data*>(pthread_getspecific(m_key)); return data ? data->value : 0; } inline void set(T* ptr) { ASSERT(!get()); pthread_setspecific(m_key, new Data(ptr, this)); } How to make the above code use __thread way to set & get specific value ? where/when does the create & delete happen? If this is not possible, how to write custom pthread_setspecific, pthread_getspecific kind of APIs. I tried using a C++ global map and index it uniquely for each thread and retrieved data from it. But it didn't work well.

    Read the article

  • Does the managed main UI thread stay on the same (unmanaged) Operation System thread?

    - by Daniel Rose
    I am creating a managed WPF UI front-end to a legacy Win32-application. The WPF front-end is the executable; as part of its startup routines I start the legacy app as a DLL in a second thread. Any UI-operation (including CreateWindowsEx, etc.) by the legacy app is invoked back on the main UI-thread. As part of the shutdown process of the app I want to clean up properly. Among other things, I want to call DestroyWindow on all unmanaged windows, so they can properly clean themselves up. Thus, during shutdown I use EnumWindows to try to find all my unmanaged windows. Then I call DestroyWindow one the list I generate. These run on the main UI-thread. After this background knowledge, on to my actual question: In the enumeration procedure of EnumWindows, I have to check if one of the returned top-level windows is one of my unmanaged windows. I do this by calling GetWindowThreadProcessId to get the process id and thread id of the window's creator. I can compare the process id with Process.GetCurrentProcess().Id to check if my app created it. For additional security, I also want to see if my main UI-thread created the window. However, the returned thread id is the OS's ThreadId (which is different than the managed thread id). As explained in this question, the CLR reserves the right to re-schedule the managed thread to different OS threads. Can I rely on the CLR to be "smart enough" to never do this for the main UI thread (due to thread-affinity of the UI)? Then I could call GetCurrentThreadId to get the main UI-thread's unmanaged thread id for comparison.

    Read the article

  • Java Thread - Synchronization issue

    - by Yatendra Goel
    From Sun's tutorial: Synchronized methods enable a simple strategy for preventing thread interference and memory consistency errors: if an object is visible to more than one thread, all reads or writes to that object's variables are done through synchronized methods. (An important exception: final fields, which cannot be modified after the object is constructed, can be safely read through non-synchronized methods, once the object is constructed) This strategy is effective, but can present problems with liveness, as we'll see later in this lesson. Q1. Is the above statements mean that if an object of a class is going to be shared among multiple threads, then all instance methods of that class (except getters of final fields) should be made synchronized, since instance methods process instance variables?

    Read the article

  • C# WinForms populating TreeView from List<myObj>

    - by user743354
    I have this structure of classes: public class L3Message { public int Number { get; set; } public string MessageName { get; set; } public string Device { get; set; } public string Time { get; set; } public string ScramblingCode { get; set; } public List<Parameter> Parameters { get; set; } public L3Message() { Parameters = new List<Parameter>(); } } public class Parameter { public int numOfWhitespaces { get; set; } public string ParameterName { get; set; } public string ParameterValue { get; set; } public Parameter Parent { get; set; } public List<Parameter> SubParameters { get; set; } public Parameter() { SubParameters = new List<Parameter>(); } } So, as return type from one of my Methods I have List of L3Messages (List < L3Message ), and I need to map that to TreeView in WinForms (populate TreeView from that List). If possible, I would like to that in separate thread. How can I achieve that?

    Read the article

  • Limiting object allocation over multiple threads

    - by John
    I have an application which retrieves and caches the results of a clients query. The client then requests different chunks of data and the application sends the relevant results and removes them from the cache. A new requirement for this application is that there needs to be a run-time configurable maximum number of results which may be cached. I've taken the naive approach and implemented this by using a counter under a lock which is incremented every time a result is cached and decremented whenever a result is removed from the cache. Unfortunately, this has drastically reduced the applications performance when processing a large number of concurrent requests. I have tried both a critical section lock and spin-lock; the performance improves a bit with a spin-lock, but is still unacceptably slow. Is there a better way to solve this problem which may improve performance? Right now I have a thread pool that services requests and each request is tied to a Request object which stores that cached results for that particular request. Here is a simplified pseudo code version of my current implementation: void ResultCallback( Result result, Request *request ) { lock totalResultsCached lock cachedLimit if( totalResultsCached + 1 > cachedLimit ) { unlock cachedLimit unlock totalResultsCached //cancel the request return; } ++totalResultsCached; unlock cachedLimit unlock totalResultsCached request.add(result) } void SendResults( int resultsToSend, Request *request ) { while ( resultsToSend > 0 ) { send(request.remove()) lock totalResultsCached --totalResultsCached unlock totalResultsCached --resultsToSend; } }

    Read the article

  • OGNL thread safety

    - by Dewfy
    I'm going to reuse OGNL library out of Struts2 scope. I have rather large set of formulas, that is why I would like to precompile all of them: Ognl.parseExpression(expressionString); But I'm not sure if precompiled expression can be used in multi-thread environment. Does anybody knows if it can be used?

    Read the article

  • Pointer inside a struct / thread

    - by bruno
    Hi! I have this warning "warning: assignment from incompatible pointer type " in this line: data1->transformed_block[l] = &transformed_block[l]; - void print_message_function ( void *ptr ) { dt *data; data = (dt *) ptr; printf("Dentro da thread Numero0: %ld\n", data->L_norm_NewBlock); pthread_exit(0); } typedef struct data_thread { long L_norm_NewBlock; int Bsize_X; int Bsize_Y; int *transformed_block[MAX_LEVEL]; long L_norm_OrigBlock; } dt; void function() { int *transformed_block[MAX_LEVEL]; pthread_t thread1; dt *data1; pthread_attr_t attr; pthread_attr_init(&attr); //Fills structure data1 = (dt *) malloc(sizeof(dt)); data1->transformed_block[l] = &transformed_block[l]; data1->L_norm_NewBlock=0; data1->Bsize_Y = Bsize_Y; data1->Bsize_X = Bsize_X; pthread_create(&thread1, &attr, (void *) &print_message_function, (void *) &data1); } I want to get rid of that warning, and the values i get inside the thread are wrong. For example data1-L_norm_NewBlock=0; in the thread guives me a differente value (not 0 like it should be).

    Read the article

  • pthread_create followed by pthread_detach still results in possibly lost error in Valgrind.

    - by alesplin
    I'm having a problem with Valgrind telling me I have some memory possible lost: ==23205== 544 bytes in 2 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 156 of 265 ==23205== at 0x6022879: calloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==23205== by 0x540E209: allocate_dtv (in /lib/ld-2.12.1.so) ==23205== by 0x540E91D: _dl_allocate_tls (in /lib/ld-2.12.1.so) ==23205== by 0x623068D: pthread_create@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (in /lib/libpthread-2.12.1.so) ==23205== by 0x758D66: MTPCreateThreadPool (MTP.c:290) ==23205== by 0x405787: main (MServer.c:317) The code that creates these threads (MTPCreateThreadPool) basically gets an index into a block of waiting pthread_t slots, and creates a thread with that. TI becomes a pointer to a struct that has a thread index and a pthread_t. (simplified/sanitized): for (tindex = 0; tindex < NumThreads; tindex++) { int rc; TI = &TP->ThreadInfo[tindex]; TI->ThreadID = tindex; rc = pthread_create(&TI->ThreadHandle,NULL,MTPHandleRequestsLoop,TI); /* check for non-success that I've omitted */ pthread_detach(&TI->ThreadHandle); } Then we have a function MTPDestroyThreadPool that loops through all the threads we created and cancels them (since the MTPHandleRequestsLoop doesn't exit). for (tindex = 0; tindex < NumThreads; tindex++) { pthread_cancel(TP->ThreadInfo[tindex].ThreadHandle); } I've read elsewhere (including other questions here on SO) that detaching a thread explicitly would prevent this possibly lost error, but it clearly isn't. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Fast way to pass a simple java object from one thread to another

    - by Adal
    I have a callback which receives an object. I make a copy of this object, and I must pass it on to another thread for further processing. It's very important for the callback to return as fast as possible. Ideally, the callback will write the copy to some sort of lock-free container. I only have the callback called from a single thread and one processing thread. I only need to pass a bunch of doubles to the other thread, and I know the maximum number of doubles (around 40). Any ideas? I'm not very familiar with Java, so I don't know the usual ways to pass stuff between threads.

    Read the article

  • Why is volatile not considered useful in multithreaded C or C++ programming?

    - by Michael E
    As demonstrated in this answer I recently posted, I seem to be confused about the utility (or lack thereof) of volatile in multi-threaded programming contexts. My understanding is this: any time a variable may be changed outside the flow of control of a piece of code accessing it, that variable should be declared to be volatile. Signal handlers, I/O registers, and variables modified by another thread all constitute such situations. So, if you have a global int foo, and foo is read by one thread and set atomically by another thread (probably using an appropriate machine instruction), the reading thread sees this situation in the same way it sees a variable tweaked by a signal handler or modified by an external hardware condition and thus foo should be declared volatile (or, for multithreaded situations, accessed with memory-fenced load, which is probably a better a solution). How and where am I wrong?

    Read the article

  • What happens to an instance of ServerSocket blocked inside accept(), when I drop all references to i

    - by Hanno Fietz
    In a multithreaded Java application, I just tracked down a strange-looking bug, realizing that what seemed to be happening was this: one of my objects was storing a reference to an instance of ServerSocket on startup, one thread would, in its main loop in run(), call accept() on the socket while the socket was still waiting for a connection, another thread would try to restart the component under some conditions, the restart process missed the cleanup sequence before it reached the initialization sequence as a result, the reference to the socket was overwritten with a new instance, which then wasn't able to bind() anymore the socket which was blocking inside the accept() wasn't accessible anymore, leaving a complete shutdown and restart of the application as the only way to get rid of it. Which leaves me wondering: with no references left to the ServerSocket instance, what would free the socket for a new connection? At what point would the ServerSocket become garbage collected? In general, what are good practices I can follow to avoid this type of bug?

    Read the article

  • Help me find article on Multi-threading and Event Handling in Java

    - by JDR
    I once read an article on how to properly write event handlers for multi-threading in Java, but I can't for the life of me find it anymore. It described the pitfalls and potentials for deadlocks that can occur when firing events (not Swing events mind you, but general events like model update notifications). To clarify, the situation would be as such: // let's say this is code from an MVC model somewhere public void setSomeProperty(String myProperty){ if(!this.myProperty.equals(myProperty)){ this.myProperty = myProperty; fireMyPropertyChangedEvent(...); } } The article described how passing control to arbitrary external listener code was a potential cause for deadlock. I now find myself in a situation where I need to fire such events in a multithreaded environment and I would very much like to read the article again to see what it has to say before I continue. Does anyone know the article I'm referring to? I believe it came as a (fairly short) PDF. It started off with an initial naive implementation and incrementally pointed out flaws and improved upon it. It ended with a sort of final proper-way-to-fire-multithreaded-events. I've searched endlessly in my browse history and on google, but all I could find were endless amounts topics on Swing event dispatch threads. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How to stop Interruptible Threads in Java

    - by Dr.Lesh
    I have a Java application that I CAN'T EDIT that starts a Thread wich has this run method: public void run(){ while(true){ System.out.println("Something"); } } And at a certain moment I wanna stop it, but if I use thread.interrupt(); it won't work. If I use thread.stop(); it works, but this method is deprecated and its use is discouraged because soon it will be removed from JVM. Does anyone knows how to do it? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • logging one thread in Java using log4j

    - by Javier
    I have an web application written in Java, and I have a thread-pool. The application is huge, and I cannot make major changes, for example, I cannot change log4j. I am executing a batch process in the thread pool, and I want to log everything that goes is executed to execute that process. There will always be just one thread active in the thread pool. Any ideas of how can I do that?

    Read the article

  • C++ Simple thread with parameter (no .net)

    - by Marc Vollmer
    I've searched the internet for a while now and found different solutions but then all don't really work or are to complicated for my use. I used C++ until 2 years ago so it might be a bit rusty :D I'm currently writing a program that posts data to an URL. It only posts the data nothing else. For posting the data I use curl, but it blocks the main thread and while the first post is still running there will be a second post that should start. In the end there are about 5-6 post operations running at the same time. Now I want to push the posting with curl into another thread. One thread per post. The thread should get a string parameter with the content what to push. I'm currently stuck on this. Tried the WINAPI for windows but that crashes on reading the parameter. (the second thread is still running in my example while the main thread ended (waiting on system("pause")). It would be nice to have a multi plattform solution, because it will run under windows and linux! Heres my current code: #define CURL_STATICLIB #include <curl/curl.h> #include <curl/easy.h> #include <cstdlib> #include <iostream> #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <string> #if defined(WIN32) #include <windows.h> #else //#include <pthread.h> #endif using namespace std; void post(string post) { // Function to post it to url CURL *curl; // curl object CURLcode res; // CURLcode object curl = curl_easy_init(); // init curl if(curl) { // is curl init curl_easy_setopt(curl, CURLOPT_URL, "http://10.8.27.101/api.aspx"); // set url string data = "api=" + post; // concat post data strings curl_easy_setopt(curl, CURLOPT_POSTFIELDS, data.c_str()); // post data res = curl_easy_perform(curl); // execute curl_easy_cleanup(curl); // cleanup } else { cerr << "Failed to create curl handle!\n"; } } #if defined(WIN32) DWORD WINAPI thread(LPVOID data) { // WINAPI Thread string pData = *((string*)data); // convert LPVOID to string [THIS FAILES] post(pData); // post it with curl } #else // Linux version #endif void startThread(string data) { // FUnction to start the thread string pData = data; // some Test #if defined(WIN32) CreateThread(NULL, 0, (LPTHREAD_START_ROUTINE)thread, &pData, 0, NULL); // Start a Windows thread with winapi #else // Linux version #endif } int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { // The post data to send string postData = "test1234567890"; startThread(postData); // Start the thread system("PAUSE"); // Dont close the console window return EXIT_SUCCESS; } Has anyone a suggestion? Thanks for the help!

    Read the article

  • MonoTouch Load image in background

    - by user1058951
    I am having a problem trying to load an image and display it using System.Threading.Task My Code is as follows Task DownloadTask { get; set; } public string Instrument { get; set; } public PriceChartViewController(string Instrument) { this.Instrument = Instrument; DownloadTask = Task.Factory.StartNew(() => { }); } private void LoadChart(ChartType chartType) { NSData data = new NSData(); DownloadTask = DownloadTask.ContinueWith(prevTask => { try { UIApplication.SharedApplication.NetworkActivityIndicatorVisible = true; NSUrl nsUrl = new NSUrl(chartType.Uri(Instrument)); data = NSData.FromUrl(nsUrl); } finally { UIApplication.SharedApplication.NetworkActivityIndicatorVisible = false; } }); DownloadTask = DownloadTask.ContinueWith(t => { UIImage image = new UIImage(data); chartImageView = new UIImageView(image); chartImageView.ContentScaleFactor = 2f; View.AddSubview(chartImageView); this.Title = chartType.Title; }, CancellationToken.None, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion, TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext()); } The second Continue with does not seem to be being called? Initially my code looked like the following without the background processing and it worked perfectly. private void oldLoadChart(ChartType chartType) { UIApplication.SharedApplication.NetworkActivityIndicatorVisible = true; NSUrl nsUrl = new NSUrl(chartType.Uri(Instrument)); NSData data = NSData.FromUrl(nsUrl); UIImage image = new UIImage(data); chartImageView = new UIImageView(image); chartImageView.ContentScaleFactor = 2f; View.AddSubview(chartImageView); this.Title = chartType.Title; UIApplication.SharedApplication.NetworkActivityIndicatorVisible = false; } Does anyone know what I am doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Thread class closing from other Class (Activity) with protected void onStop() Android

    - by user1761337
    I have a Problem with Closing the Thread. I will Closing the Thread with onStop,onPause and onDestroy. This is my Source in the Activity Class: @Override protected void onStop(){ super.onStop(); finish(); } @Override protected void onPause() { super.onPause(); finish(); } @Override public void onDestroy() { this.mWakeLock.release(); super.onDestroy(); } And the Thread Class: public class GameThread extends Thread { private SurfaceHolder mSurfaceHolder; private Handler mHandler; private Context mContext; private Paint mLinePaint; private Paint blackPaint; //for consistent rendering private long sleepTime; //amount of time to sleep for (in milliseconds) private long delay=1000/30; //state of game (Running or Paused). int state = 1; public final static int RUNNING = 1; public final static int PAUSED = 2; public final static int STOPED = 3; GameSurface gEngine; public GameThread(SurfaceHolder surfaceHolder, Context context, Handler handler,GameSurface gEngineS){ //data about the screen mSurfaceHolder = surfaceHolder; mHandler = handler; mContext = context; gEngine=gEngineS; } //This is the most important part of the code. It is invoked when the call to start() is //made from the SurfaceView class. It loops continuously until the game is finished or //the application is suspended. private long beforeTime; @Override public void run() { //UPDATE while (state==RUNNING) { Log.d("State","Thread is runnig"); //time before update beforeTime = System.nanoTime(); //This is where we update the game engine gEngine.Update(); //DRAW Canvas c = null; try { //lock canvas so nothing else can use it c = mSurfaceHolder.lockCanvas(null); synchronized (mSurfaceHolder) { //clear the screen with the black painter. //reset the canvas c.drawColor(Color.BLACK); //This is where we draw the game engine. gEngine.doDraw(c); } } finally { // do this in a finally so that if an exception is thrown // during the above, we don't leave the Surface in an // inconsistent state if (c != null) { mSurfaceHolder.unlockCanvasAndPost(c); } } this.sleepTime = delay-((System.nanoTime()-beforeTime)/1000000L); try { //actual sleep code if(sleepTime>0){ this.sleep(sleepTime); } } catch (InterruptedException ex) { Logger.getLogger(GameThread.class.getName()).log(Level.SEVERE, null, ex); } while (state==PAUSED){ Log.d("State","Thread is pausing"); try { this.sleep(1000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { // TODO Auto-generated catch block e.printStackTrace(); } } } }} How i can close the Thread from Activity Class??

    Read the article

  • Reducing lag when downloading large amount of data from webpage

    - by Mahir
    I am getting data via RSS feeds and displaying each article in a table view cell. Each cell has an image view, set to a default image. If the page has an image, the image is to be replaced with the image from the article. As of now, each cell downloads the source code from the web page, causing the app to lag when I push the view controller and when I try scrolling. Here is what I have in the cellForRowAtIndexPath: method. NSString * storyLink = [[stories objectAtIndex: storyIndex] objectForKey: @"link"]; storyLink = [storyLink stringByTrimmingCharactersInSet:[NSCharacterSet whitespaceAndNewlineCharacterSet]]; NSString *sourceCode = [NSString stringWithContentsOfURL:[NSURL URLWithString:storyLink] encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding error:&error]; NSString *startPt = @"instant-gallery"; NSString *startPt2 = @"<img src=\""; if ([sourceCode rangeOfString:startPt].length != 0) { //webpage has images // find the first "<img src=...>" tag starting from "instant-gallery" NSString *trimmedSource = [sourceCode substringFromIndex:NSMaxRange([sourceCode rangeOfString:startPt])]; trimmedSource = [trimmedSource substringFromIndex:NSMaxRange([trimmedSource rangeOfString:startPt2])]; trimmedSource = [trimmedSource substringToIndex:[trimmedSource rangeOfString:@"\""].location]; NSURL *url = [NSURL URLWithString:trimmedSource]; NSData *data = [NSData dataWithContentsOfURL:url]; UIImage *image = [UIImage imageWithData:data]; cell.picture.image = image; Someone suggested using NSOperationQueue. Would this way be a good solution? EDIT: - (UITableViewCell *)tableView:(UITableView *)tableView cellForRowAtIndexPath:(NSIndexPath *)indexPath { static NSString *MyIdentifier = @"FeedCell"; LMU_LAL_FeedCell *cell = [tableView dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier:MyIdentifier]; if (cell == nil) { NSArray *nib = [[NSBundle mainBundle] loadNibNamed:@"LMU_LAL_FeedCell" owner:self options:nil]; cell = (LMU_LAL_FeedCell*) [nib objectAtIndex:0]; } int storyIndex = [indexPath indexAtPosition: [indexPath length] - 1]; NSString *untrimmedTitle = [[stories objectAtIndex: storyIndex] objectForKey: @"title"]; cell.title.text = [untrimmedTitle stringByTrimmingCharactersInSet:[NSCharacterSet whitespaceCharacterSet]]; CGSize maximumLabelSize = CGSizeMake(205,9999); CGSize expectedLabelSize = [cell.title.text sizeWithFont:cell.title.font constrainedToSize:maximumLabelSize]; //adjust the label to the the new height. CGRect newFrame = cell.title.frame; newFrame.size.height = expectedLabelSize.height; cell.title.frame = newFrame; //position frame of date label CGRect dateNewFrame = cell.date.frame; dateNewFrame.origin.y = cell.title.frame.origin.y + cell.title.frame.size.height + 1; cell.date.frame = dateNewFrame; cell.date.text = [self formatDateAtIndex:storyIndex]; dispatch_queue_t someQueue = dispatch_queue_create("cell background queue", NULL); dispatch_async(someQueue, ^(void){ NSError *error = nil; NSString * storyLink = [[stories objectAtIndex: storyIndex] objectForKey: @"link"]; storyLink = [storyLink stringByTrimmingCharactersInSet:[NSCharacterSet whitespaceAndNewlineCharacterSet]]; NSString *sourceCode = [NSString stringWithContentsOfURL:[NSURL URLWithString:storyLink] encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding error:&error]; NSString *startPt = @"instant-gallery"; NSString *startPt2 = @"<img src=\""; if ([sourceCode rangeOfString:startPt].length != 0) { //webpage has images // find the first "<img src=...>" tag starting from "instant-gallery" NSString *trimmedSource = [sourceCode substringFromIndex:NSMaxRange([sourceCode rangeOfString:startPt])]; trimmedSource = [trimmedSource substringFromIndex:NSMaxRange([trimmedSource rangeOfString:startPt2])]; trimmedSource = [trimmedSource substringToIndex:[trimmedSource rangeOfString:@"\""].location]; NSURL *url = [NSURL URLWithString:trimmedSource]; NSData *data = [NSData dataWithContentsOfURL:url]; UIImage *image = [UIImage imageWithData:data]; dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^(void){ cell.picture.image = image; }); }) //error: expected expression } return cell; //error: expected identifier } //error extraneous closing brace

    Read the article

  • Crossthread exception and invokerequired solution doesn't change my control value

    - by Pilouk
    EDIT Solution : Here i'm setting my byref value in each object then i'm running a backgroundworker Private Sub TelechargeFichier() Dim DocManquant As Boolean = False Dim docName As String = "" Dim lg As String = "" Dim telechargementFini As Boolean = False lblMessage.Text = EasyDealChangeLanguage.Instance.GetStringFromResourceName("1478") prgBar.Maximum = m_listeFichiers.Count For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeFichiers.Count - 1 m_listeFichiers(i).Set_ByRefLabel(lblMessage) m_listeFichiers(i).Set_ByRefPrgbar(prgBar) m_listeThreads.Add(New Thread(AddressOf m_listeFichiers(i).DownloadMe)) Next m_bgWorker = New BackgroundWorker m_bgWorker.WorkerReportsProgress = True AddHandler m_bgWorker.DoWork, AddressOf DownloadFiles m_bgWorker.RunWorkerAsync() ''Completed 'lblMessage.Text = EasyDealChangeLanguage.Instance.GetStringFromResourceName("1383") 'Me.DialogResult = System.Windows.Forms.DialogResult.OK End Sub Here is my downloadFiles function : Note that each start will do the downloadMe function see below too Private Sub DownloadFiles(sender As Object, e As DoWorkEventArgs) For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeThreads.Count - 1 m_listeThreads(i).Start() Next For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeThreads.Count - 1 m_listeThreads(i).Join() Next End Sub I have multiple thread that each will download a ftp file. I would like that each file that have been completed will set a value to a progress bar and a label from my UI thread. For some reason invokerequired never change to false. Here is my little function that start all the thread Private Sub TelechargeFichier() Dim DocManquant As Boolean = False Dim docName As String = "" Dim lg As String = "" Dim telechargementFini As Boolean = False lblMessage.Text = EasyDealChangeLanguage.Instance.GetStringFromResourceName("1478") prgBar.Maximum = m_listeFichiers.Count For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeFichiers.Count - 1 m_listeFichiers(i).Set_ByRefLabel(lblMessage) m_listeFichiers(i).Set_ByRefPrgbar(prgBar) m_listeThreads.Add(New Thread(AddressOf m_listeFichiers(i).DownloadMe)) Next For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeThreads.Count - 1 m_listeThreads(i).Start() Next For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeThreads.Count - 1 m_listeThreads(i).Join() Next 'Completed lblMessage.Text = EasyDealChangeLanguage.Instance.GetStringFromResourceName("1383") Me.DialogResult = System.Windows.Forms.DialogResult.OK End Sub Here my property that hold the Byref control from the UI thread. This is in my object which content the addressof function that will download the file (DownloadMe) Public Sub Set_ByRefPrgbar(ByRef prgbar As ProgressBar) m_prgBar = prgbar End Sub Public Sub Set_ByRefLabel(ByRef lbl As EasyDeal.Controls.EasyDealLabel3D) m_lblMessage = lbl End Sub Here is the download function : Public Sub DownloadMe() Dim ftpReq As FtpWebRequest Dim ftpResp As FtpWebResponse = Nothing Dim streamInput As Stream Dim fileStreamOutput As FileStream Try ftpReq = CType(WebRequest.Create(EasyDeal.Controls.Common.FTP_CONNECTION & m_downloadFtpPath & m_filename), FtpWebRequest) ftpReq.Credentials = New NetworkCredential(FTP_USER, FTP_PASS) ftpReq.Method = WebRequestMethods.Ftp.DownloadFile ftpResp = ftpReq.GetResponse streamInput = ftpResp.GetResponseStream() fileStreamOutput = New FileStream(m_outputPath, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.ReadWrite) ReadWriteStream(streamInput, fileStreamOutput) Catch ex As Exception 'Au pire la fichier sera pas downloader Finally If ftpResp IsNot Nothing Then ftpResp.Close() End If Dim nomFichier As String = m_displaynameEN If EasyDealChangeLanguage.GetCurrentLanguageTypes = EasyDealChangeLanguage.EnumLanguageType.Francais Then nomFichier = m_displaynameFR End If If m_lblMessage IsNot Nothing Then EasyDealCommon.TH_SetControlText(m_lblMessage, String.Format(EasyDealChangeLanguage.Instance.GetStringFromResourceName("1479"), nomFichier)) End If If m_prgBar IsNot Nothing Then EasyDealCommon.TH_SetPrgValue(m_prgBar, 1) End If End Try End Sub Here is the crossthread invoke solution function : Public Sub TH_SetControlText(ByVal ctl As Control, ByVal text As String) If ctl.InvokeRequired Then ctl.BeginInvoke(New Action(Of Control, String)(AddressOf TH_SetControlText), ctl, text) Else ctl.Text = text End If End Sub Public Sub TH_SetPrgValue(ByVal prg As ProgressBar, ByVal value As Integer) If prg.InvokeRequired Then prg.BeginInvoke(New Action(Of ProgressBar, Integer)(AddressOf TH_SetPrgValue), prg, value) Else prg.Value += value End If End Sub The problem is the invokerequired never get to false it actually goes in to beginInvoke but never end in the Else section to set the value.

    Read the article

  • Turn based synchronization between threads

    - by Amarus
    I'm trying to find a way to synchronize multiple threads having the following conditions: * There are two types of threads: 1. A single "cyclic" thread executing an infinite loop to do cyclic calculations 2. Multiple short-lived threads not started by the main thread * The cyclic thread has a sleep duration between each cycle/loop iteration * The other threads are allowed execute during the inter-cycle sleep of the cyclic thread: - Any other thread that attempts to execute during an active cycle should be blocked - The cyclic thread will wait until all other threads that are already executing to be finished Here's a basic example of what I was thinking of doing: // Somewhere in the code: ManualResetEvent manualResetEvent = new ManualResetEvent(true); // Allow Externally call CountdownEvent countdownEvent = new CountdownEvent(1); // Can't AddCount a CountdownEvent with CurrentCount = 0 void ExternallyCalled() { manualResetEvent.WaitOne(); // Wait until CyclicCalculations is having its beauty sleep countdownEvent.AddCount(); // Notify CyclicCalculations that it should wait for this method call to finish before starting the next cycle Thread.Sleep(1000); // TODO: Replace with actual method logic countdownEvent.Signal(); // Notify CyclicCalculations that this call is finished } void CyclicCalculations() { while (!stopCyclicCalculations) { manualResetEvent.Reset(); // Block all incoming calls to ExternallyCalled from this point forward countdownEvent.Signal(); // Dirty workaround for the issue with AddCount and CurrentCount = 0 countdownEvent.Wait(); // Wait until all of the already executing calls to ExternallyCalled are finished countdownEvent.Reset(); // Reset the CountdownEvent for next cycle. Thread.Sleep(2000); // TODO: Replace with actual method logic manualResetEvent.Set(); // Unblock all threads executing ExternallyCalled Thread.Sleep(1000); // Inter-cycles delay } } Obviously, this doesn't work. There's no guarantee that there won't be any threads executing ExternallyCalled that are in between manualResetEvent.WaitOne(); and countdownEvent.AddCount(); at the time the main thread gets released by the CountdownEvent. I can't figure out a simple way of doing what I'm after, and almost everything that I've found after a lengthy search is related to producer/consumer synchronization which I can't apply here.

    Read the article

  • Where to begin with multi-threaded programming with c++?

    - by zoke
    I'm trying to implement my own IRC client as a personal proejct and I realized I needed a way to read and write from the socket at the same time. I realized I could have a reading thread which reads from the socket in the background and puts data in a queue and I could have another thread which writes data from a queue to the socket. However I have no idea on how to start with multithreaded programing or how to do it with c++. Where do I go from here?

    Read the article

  • WM6x IMAPIAdviseSink::OnNotify threading issues

    - by violet313
    specifically WM6x, winCE5x Now my current understanding from trawling the msdn etal is that the IMAPIAdviseSink::OnNotify callback can be made from any old thread; from (ce)mapi or perhaps even from a third-party service provider. Under WM6x, i cannot seem to coax an in-thread response by invoking HrThisThreadAdviseSink, since while this function is declared in mapiutil.h, a definition appears not to exist (in cemapi.lib or wherever??) ~But i notice that all the OnNotify callbacks i receive derive from windows messages that i am receiving on my thread (=looks to me like an in-thread implementation in any case under cemapi)... So, can anyone confirm that this is infact always the case -or am i just getting lucky right now? ah, i should add that my advise source is IMAPISession::Advise erm i should also say that i might have cross-posted this on the msdn forum -but they're mostly numptys over there,,

    Read the article

  • How do I know if a boost thread is done ?

    - by jules
    I am using boost::thread to process messages in a queue. When a first message comes I start a message processing thread. When a second message comes I check if the message processing thread is done. if it is done I start a new one if it is not done I don nothing. How do I know if the thread is done ? I tried with joinable() but it is not working, as when the thread is done, it is still joinable. I also tried to interrupt the process at once, and add an interruption point at the end of my thread, but it did not work. Thanks

    Read the article

  • C++ thread to separate process

    - by silverbandit91
    Is there any way I can have a thread branch off into its own independent process? I know there's the CreateProcess function but as far as I can tell, you can only run external applications with it. Is what I'm asking for at all possible?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55  | Next Page >