Search Results

Search found 5026 results on 202 pages for 'blocked threads'.

Page 49/202 | < Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >

• Sync Vs. Async Sockets Performance in .NET

  - by Michael Covelli

  Everything that I read about sockets in .NET says that the asynchronous pattern gives better performance (especially with the new SocketAsyncEventArgs which saves on the allocation). I think this makes sense if we're talking about a server with many client connections where its not possible to allocate one thread per connection. Then I can see the advantage of using the ThreadPool threads and getting async callbacks on them. But in my app, I'm the client and I just need to listen to one server sending market tick data over one tcp connection. Right now, I create a single thread, set the priority to Highest, and call Socket.Receive() with it. My thread blocks on this call and wakes up once new data arrives. If I were to switch this to an async pattern so that I get a callback when there's new data, I see two issues The threadpool threads will have default priority so it seems they will be strictly worse than my own thread which has Highest priority. I'll still have to send everything through a single thread at some point. Say that I get N callbacks at almost the same time on N different threadpool threads notifying me that there's new data. The N byte arrays that they deliver can't be processed on the threadpool threads because there's no guarantee that they represent N unique market data messages because TCP is stream based. I'll have to lock and put the bytes into an array anyway and signal some other thread that can process what's in the array. So I'm not sure what having N threadpool threads is buying me. Am I thinking about this wrong? Is there a reason to use the Async patter in my specific case of one client connected to one server?

  Read the article

• Tomcat stops responding to JK requests

  - by Bruno Reis

  Hello. I have a nasty issue with load-balanced Tomcat servers that are hanging up. Any help would be greatly appreciated. The system I'm running Tomcat 6.0.26 on HotSpot Server 14.3-b01 (Java 1.6.0_17-b04) on three servers sitting behind another server that acts as load balancer. The load balancer runs Apache (2.2.8-1) + MOD_JK (1.2.25). All of the servers are running Ubuntu 8.04. The Tomcat's have 2 connectors configured: an AJP one, and a HTTP one. The AJP is to be used with the load balancer, while the HTTP is used by the dev team to directly connect to a chosen server (if we have a reason to do so). I have Lambda Probe 1.7b installed on the Tomcat servers to help me diagnose and fix the problem soon to be described. The problem Here's the problem: after about 1 day the application servers are up, JK Status Manager starts reporting status ERR for, say, Tomcat2. It will simply get stuck on this state, and the only fix I've found so far is to ssh the box and restart Tomcat. I must also mention that JK Status Manager takes a lot longer to refresh when there's a Tomcat server in this state. Finally, the "Busy" count of the stuck Tomcat on JK Status Manager is always high, and won't go down per se -- I must restart the Tomcat server, wait, then reset the worker on JK. Analysis Since I have 2 connectors on each Tomcat (AJP and HTTP), I still can connect to the application through the HTTP one. The application works just fine like this, very, very fast. That is perfectly normal, since I'm the only one using this server (as JK stopped delegating requests to this Tomcat). To try to better understand the problem, I've taken a thread dump from a Tomcat which is not responding anymore, and from another one that has been restarted recently (say, 1 hour before). The instance that is responding normally to JK shows most of the TP-ProcessorXXX threads in "Runnable" state, with the following stack trace: java.net.SocketInputStream.socketRead0 ( native code ) java.net.SocketInputStream.read ( SocketInputStream.java:129 ) java.io.BufferedInputStream.fill ( BufferedInputStream.java:218 ) java.io.BufferedInputStream.read1 ( BufferedInputStream.java:258 ) java.io.BufferedInputStream.read ( BufferedInputStream.java:317 ) org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket.read ( ChannelSocket.java:621 ) org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket.receive ( ChannelSocket.java:559 ) org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket.processConnection ( ChannelSocket.java:686 ) org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket$SocketConnection.runIt ( ChannelSocket.java:891 ) org.apache.tomcat.util.threads.ThreadPool$ControlRunnable.run ( ThreadPool.java:690 ) java.lang.Thread.run ( Thread.java:619 ) The instance that is stuck show most (all?) of the TP-ProcessorXXX threads in "Waiting" state. These have the following stack trace: java.lang.Object.wait ( native code ) java.lang.Object.wait ( Object.java:485 ) org.apache.tomcat.util.threads.ThreadPool$ControlRunnable.run ( ThreadPool.java:662 ) java.lang.Thread.run ( Thread.java:619 ) I don't know of the internals of Tomcat, but I would infer that the "Waiting" threads are simply threads sitting on a thread pool. So, if they are threads waiting inside of a thread pool, why wouldn't Tomcat put them to work on processing requests from JK? Solution? So, as I've stated before, the only fix I've found is to stop the Tomcat instance, stop the JK worker, wait the latter's busy count slowly go down, start Tomcat again, and enable the JK worker once again. What is causing this problem? How should I further investigate it? What can I do to solve it? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Using NHibernate's HQL to make a query with multiple inner joins

  - by Abu Dhabi

  The problem here consists of translating a statement written in LINQ to SQL syntax into the equivalent for NHibernate. The LINQ to SQL code looks like so: var whatevervar = from threads in context.THREADs join threadposts in context.THREADPOSTs on threads.thread_id equals threadposts.thread_id join posts1 in context.POSTs on threadposts.post_id equals posts1.post_id join users in context.USERs on posts1.user_id equals users.user_id orderby posts1.post_time where threads.thread_id == int.Parse(id) select new { threads.thread_topic, posts1.post_time, users.user_display_name, users.user_signature, users.user_avatar, posts1.post_body, posts1.post_topic }; It's essentially trying to grab a list of posts within a given forum thread. The best I've been able to come up with (with the help of the helpful users of this site) for NHibernate is: var whatevervar = session.CreateQuery("select t.Thread_topic, p.Post_time, " + "u.User_display_name, u.User_signature, " + "u.User_avatar, p.Post_body, p.Post_topic " + "from THREADPOST tp " + "inner join tp.Thread_ as t " + "inner join tp.Post_ as p " + "inner join p.User_ as u " + "where tp.Thread_ = :what") .SetParameter<THREAD>("what", threadid) .SetResultTransformer(Transformers.AliasToBean(typeof(MyDTO))) .List<MyDTO>(); But that doesn't parse well, complaining that the aliases for the joined tables are null references. MyDTO is a custom type for the output: public class MyDTO { public string thread_topic { get; set; } public DateTime post_time { get; set; } public string user_display_name { get; set; } public string user_signature { get; set; } public string user_avatar { get; set; } public string post_topic { get; set; } public string post_body { get; set; } } I'm out of ideas, and while doing this by direct SQL query is possible, I'd like to do it properly, without defeating the purpose of using an ORM. Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Using a custom IList obtained through NHibernate

  - by Abu Dhabi

  Hi.I'm trying to write a web page in .NET, using C# and NHibernate 2.1. The pertinent code looks like this: var whatevervar = session.CreateSQLQuery("select thread_topic, post_time, user_display_name, user_signature, user_avatar, post_topic, post_body from THREAD, [USER], POST, THREADPOST where THREADPOST.thread_id=" + id + " and THREADPOST.thread_id=THREAD.thread_id and [USER].user_id=POST.user_id and POST.post_id=THREADPOST.post_id ORDER BY post_time;").List(); (I have tried to use joins in HQL, but then fell back on this query, due to HQL's unreadability.) The problem is that I'm getting a result that is incompatible with a repeater. When I try this: posts.DataSource = whatevervar.; posts.DataBind(); ...I get this: DataBinding: 'System.Object[]' does not contain a property with the name 'user_avatar'. In an earlier project, I used LINQ to SQL for this same purpose, and it looked like so: var whatevervar = from threads in context.THREADs join threadposts in context.THREADPOSTs on threads.thread_id equals threadposts.thread_id join posts1 in context.POSTs on threadposts.post_id equals posts1.post_id join users in context.USERs on posts1.user_id equals users.user_id orderby posts1.post_time where threads.thread_id == int.Parse(id) select new { threads.thread_topic, posts1.post_time, users.user_display_name, users.user_signature, users.user_avatar, posts1.post_body, posts1.post_topic }; That worked, and now I want to do the same with NHibernate. Unfortunately, I don't know how to make the repeater recognize the fields of the result of the query. Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• How to use IObservable/IObserver with ConcurrentQueue or ConcurrentStack

  - by James Black

  I realized that when I am trying to process items in a concurrent queue using multiple threads while multiple threads can be putting items into it, the ideal solution would be to use the Reactive Extensions with the Concurrent data structures. My original question is at: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2997797/while-using-concurrentqueue-trying-to-dequeue-while-looping-through-in-parallel/ So I am curious if there is any way to have a LINQ (or PLINQ) query that will continuously be dequeueing as items are put into it. I am trying to get this to work in a way where I can have n number of producers pushing into the queue and a limited number of threads to process, so I don't overload the database. If I could use Rx framework then I expect that I could just start it, and if 100 items are placed in within 100ms, then the 20 threads that are part of the PLINQ query would just process through the queue. There are three technologies I am trying to work together: Rx Framework (Reactive LINQ) PLING System.Collections.Concurrent structures

  Read the article

• Thread scheduling C

  - by MRP

  include <pthread.h> include <stdio.h> include <stdlib.h> #define NUM_THREADS 4 #define TCOUNT 5 #define COUNT_LIMIT 13 int done = 0; int count = 0; int thread_ids[4] = {0,1,2,3}; int thread_runtime[4] = {0,5,4,1}; pthread_mutex_t count_mutex; pthread_cond_t count_threshold_cv; void *inc_count(void *t) { int i; long my_id = (long)t; long run_time = thread_runtime[my_id]; if (my_id==2 && done ==0) { for(i=0; i< 5 ; i++) { if( i==4 ){done =1;} pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); count++; if (count == COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_signal(&count_threshold_cv); printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d Threshold reached.\n", my_id, count); } printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d, unlocking mutex\n", my_id, count); pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); } } if (my_id==3 && done==1) { for(i=0; i< 4 ; i++) { if(i == 3 ){ done = 2;} pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); count++; if (count == COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_signal(&count_threshold_cv); printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d Threshold reached.\n", my_id, count); } printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d, unlocking mutex\n", my_id, count); pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); } } if (my_id==4&& done == 2) { for(i=0; i< 8 ; i++) { pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); count++; if (count == COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_signal(&count_threshold_cv); printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d Threshold reached.\n",my_id, count); } printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d, unlocking mutex\n", my_id, count); pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); } } pthread_exit(NULL); } void *watch_count(void *t) { long my_id = (long)t; printf("Starting watch_count(): thread %ld\n", my_id); pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); if (count<COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_wait(&count_threshold_cv, &count_mutex); printf("watch_count(): thread %ld Condition signal received.\n", my_id); count += 125; printf("watch_count(): thread %ld count now = %d.\n", my_id, count); } pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); pthread_exit(NULL); } int main (int argc, char *argv[]) { int i, rc; long t1=1, t2=2, t3=3, t4=4; pthread_t threads[4]; pthread_attr_t attr; pthread_mutex_init(&count_mutex, NULL); pthread_cond_init (&count_threshold_cv, NULL); pthread_attr_init(&attr); pthread_attr_setdetachstate(&attr,PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE); pthread_create(&threads[0], &attr, watch_count, (void *)t1); pthread_create(&threads[1], &attr, inc_count, (void *)t2); pthread_create(&threads[2], &attr, inc_count, (void *)t3); pthread_create(&threads[3], &attr, inc_count, (void *)t4); for (i=0; i<NUM_THREADS; i++) { pthread_join(threads[i], NULL); } printf ("Main(): Waited on %d threads. Done.\n", NUM_THREADS); pthread_attr_destroy(&attr); pthread_mutex_destroy(&count_mutex); pthread_cond_destroy(&count_threshold_cv); pthread_exit(NULL); } so this code creates 4 threads. thread 1 keeps track of the count value while the other 3 increment the count value. the run time is the number of times the thread will increment the count value. I have a done value that allows the first thread to increment the count value first until its run time is up.. so its like a First Come First Serve. my question is, is there a better way of implementing this? I have read about SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_RR.. I guess I dont know how to implement them into this code or if it can be.

  Read the article

• Java Swing Threading with Updatable JProgressBar

  - by Anthony Sparks

  First off I've been working with Java's Concurency package quite a bit lately but I have found an issue that I am stuck on. I want to have and Application and the Application can have a SplashScreen with a status bar and the loading of other data. So I decided to use SwingUtilities.invokeAndWait( call the splash component here ). The SplashScreen then appears with a JProgressBar and runs a group of threads. But I can't seem to get a good handle on things. I've looked over SwingWorker and tried using it for this purpose but the thread just returns. Here is a bit of sudo-code. and the points I'm trying to achieve. Have an Application that has a SplashScreen that pauses while loading info Be able to run multiple threads under the SplashScreen Have the progress bar of the SplashScreen Update-able yet not exit until all threads are done. Launching splash screen try { SwingUtilities.invokeAndWait( SplashScreen ); } catch (InterruptedException e) { } catch (InvocationTargetException e) { } Splash screen construction SplashScreen extends JFrame implements Runnable{ public void run() { //run threads //while updating status bar } } I have tried many things including SwingWorkers, Threads using CountDownLatch's, and others. The CountDownLatch's actually worked in the manner I wanted to do the processing but I was unable to update the GUI. When using the SwingWorkers either the invokeAndWait was basically nullified (which is their purpose) or it wouldn't update the GUI still even when using a PropertyChangedListener. If someone else has a couple ideas it would be great to hear them. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Why delete-orphan needs "cascade all" to run in JPA/Hibernate ?

  - by Jerome C.

  Hello, I try to map a one-to-many relation with cascade "remove" (jpa) and "delete-orphan", because I don't want children to be saved or persist when the parent is saved or persist (security reasons due to client to server (GWT, Gilead)) But this configuration doesn't work. When I try with cascade "all", it runs. Why the delete-orphan option needs a cascade "all" to run ? here is the code (without id or other fields for simplicity, the class Thread defines a simple many-to-one property without cascade): when using the removeThread function in a transactional function, it does not run but if I edit cascade.Remove into cascade.All, it runs. @Entity public class Forum { private List<ForumThread> threads; /** * @return the topics */ @OneToMany(mappedBy = "parent", cascade = CascadeType.REMOVE, fetch = FetchType.LAZY) @Cascade(org.hibernate.annotations.CascadeType.DELETE_ORPHAN) public List<ForumThread> getThreads() { return threads; } /** * @param topics the topics to set */ public void setThreads(List<ForumThread> threads) { this.threads = threads; } public void addThread(ForumThread thread) { getThreads().add(thread); thread.setParent(this); } public void removeThread(ForumThread thread) { getThreads().remove(thread); } } thanks.

  Read the article

• how to implement a "soft barrier" in multithreaded c++

  - by Jason

  I have some multithreaded c++ code with the following structure: do_thread_specific_work(); update_shared_variables(); //checkpoint A do_thread_specific_work_not_modifying_shared_variables(); //checkpoint B do_thread_specific_work_requiring_all_threads_have_updated_shared_variables(); What follows checkpoint B is work that could have started if all threads have reached only checkpoint A, hence my notion of a "soft barrier". Typically multithreading libraries only provide "hard barriers" in which all threads must reach some point before any can continue. Obviously a hard barrier could be used at checkpoint B. Using a soft barrier can lead to better execution time, especially since the work between checkpoints A and B may not be load-balanced between the threads (i.e. 1 slow thread who has reached checkpoint A but not B could be causing all the others to wait at the barrier just before checkpoint B). I've tried using atomics to synchronize things and I know with 100% certainty that is it NOT guaranteed to work. For example using openmp syntax, before the parallel section start with: shared_thread_counter = num_threads; //known at compile time #pragma omp flush Then at checkpoint A: #pragma omp atomic shared_thread_counter--; Then at checkpoint B (using polling): #pragma omp flush while (shared_thread_counter > 0) { usleep(1); //can be removed, but better to limit memory bandwidth #pragma omp flush } I've designed some experiments in which I use an atomic to indicate that some operation before it is finished. The experiment would work with 2 threads most of the time but consistently fail when I have lots of threads (like 20 or 30). I suspect this is because of the caching structure of modern CPUs. Even if one thread updates some other value before doing the atomic decrement, it is not guaranteed to be read by another thread in that order. Consider the case when the other value is a cache miss and the atomic decrement is a cache hit. So back to my question, how to CORRECTLY implement this "soft barrier"? Is there any built-in feature that guarantees such functionality? I'd prefer openmp but I'm familiar with most of the other common multithreading libraries. As a workaround right now, I'm using a hard barrier at checkpoint B and I've restructured my code to make the work between checkpoint A and B automatically load-balancing between the threads (which has been rather difficult at times). Thanks for any advice/insight :)

  Read the article

• mod_wsgi daemon mode vs threaded fastcgi

  - by t0ster

  Can someone explain the difference between apache mod_wsgi in daemon mode and django fastcgi in threaded mode. They both use threads for concurrency I think. Supposing that I'm using nginx as front end to apache mod_wsgi. UPDATE: I'm comparing django built in fastcgi(./manage.py method=threaded maxchildren=15) and mod_wsgi in 'daemon' mode(WSGIDaemonProcess example threads=15). They both use threads and acquire GIL, am I right?

  Read the article

• An Actor "queue" ?

  - by synic

  In Java, to write a library that makes requests to a server, I usually implement some sort of dispatcher (not unlike the one found here in the Twitter4J library: http://github.com/yusuke/twitter4j/blob/master/twitter4j-core/src/main/java/twitter4j/internal/async/DispatcherImpl.java) to limit the number of connections, to perform asynchronous tasks, etc. The idea is that N number of threads are created. A "Task" is queued and all threads are notified, and one of the threads, when it's ready, will pop an item from the queue, do the work, and then return to a waiting state. If all the threads are busy working on a Task, then the Task is just queued, and the next available thread will take it. This keeps the max number of connections to N, and allows at most N Tasks to be operating at the same time. I'm wondering what kind of system I can create with Actors that will accomplish the same thing? Is there a way to have N number of Actors, and when a new message is ready, pass it off to an Actor to handle it - and if all Actors are busy, just queue the message?

  Read the article

• How to parallelize this groovy code?

  - by lucas

  I'm trying to write a reusable component in Groovy to easily shoot off emails from some of our Java applications. I would like to pass it a List, where Email is just a POJO(POGO?) with some email info. I'd like it to be multithreaded, at least running all the email logic in a second thread, or make one thread per email. I am really foggy on multithreading in Java so that probably doesn't help! I've attempted a few different ways, but here is what I have right now: void sendEmails(List<Email> emails) { def threads = [] def sendEm = emails.each{ email -> def th = new Thread({ Random rand = new Random() def wait = (long)(rand.nextDouble() * 1000) println "in closure" this.sleep wait sendEmail(email) }) println "putting thread in list" threads << th } threads.each { it.run() } threads.each { it.join() } } I was hoping the sleep would randomly slow some threads down so the console output wouldn't be sequential. Instead, I see this: putting thread in list putting thread in list putting thread in list putting thread in list putting thread in list putting thread in list putting thread in list putting thread in list putting thread in list putting thread in list in closure sending email1 in closure sending email2 in closure sending email3 in closure sending email4 in closure sending email5 in closure sending email6 in closure sending email7 in closure sending email8 in closure sending email9 in closure sending email10 sendEmail basically does what you'd expect, including the println statement, and the client that calls this follows, void doSomething() { Mailman emailer = MailmanFactory.getExchangeEmailer() def to = ["one","two"] def from = "noreply" def li = [] def email (1..10).each { email = new Email(to,null,from,"email"+it,"hello") li << email } emailer.sendEmails li }

  Read the article

• Caveats to be aware of when using threading in Python?

  - by knorv

  I'm quite new to threading in Python and have a couple of beginner questions. When starting more than say fifty threads using the Python threading module I start getting MemoryError. The threads themselves are very slim and not very memory hungry, so it seems like it is the overhead of the threading that causes the memory issues. Is there something I can do to increase the memory capacity or otherwise make Python allow for a larger number of threads? What is the maximum number of threads you've been able to run in your Python code using the threading module? Did you do any tricks to achieve that number? Are there any other caveats to be aware of when using the threading module?

  Read the article

• Why is my code stopping and not returning an exception?

  - by BeckyLou

  I have some code that starts a couple of threads to let them execute, then uses a while loop to check for the current time passing a set timeout period, or for the correct number of results to have been processed (by checking an int on the class object) (with a Thread.Sleep() to wait between loops) Once the while loop is set to exit, it calls Abort() on the threads and should return data to the function that calls the method. When debugging and stepping through the code, I find there can be exceptions in the code running on the separate threads, and in some cases I handle these appropriately, and at other times I don't want to do anything specific. What I have been seeing is that my code goes into the while loop and the thread sleeps, then nothing is returned from my function, either data or an exception. Code execution just stops completely. Any ideas what could be happening? Code sample: System.Threading.Thread sendThread = new System.Threading.Thread(new System.Threading.ThreadStart(Send)); sendThread.Start(); System.Threading.Thread receiveThread = new System.Threading.Thread(new System.Threading.ThreadStart(Receive)); receiveThread.Start(); // timeout Int32 maxSecondsToProcess = this.searchTotalCount * timeout; DateTime timeoutTime = DateTime.Now.AddSeconds(maxSecondsToProcess); Log("Submit() Timeout time: " + timeoutTime.ToString("yyyyMMdd HHmmss")); // while we're still waiting to receive results & haven't hit the timeout, // keep the threads going while (resultInfos.Count < this.searchTotalCount && DateTime.Now < timeoutTime) { Log("Submit() Waiting..."); System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(10 * 1000); // 1 minute } Log("Submit() Aborting threads"); // <== this log doesn't show up sendThread.Abort(); receiveThread.Abort(); return new List<ResultInfo>(this.resultInfos.Values);

  Read the article

• How to buffer stdout in memory and write it from a dedicated thread

  - by NickB

  I have a C application with many worker threads. It is essential that these do not block so where the worker threads need to write to a file on disk, I have them write to a circular buffer in memory, and then have a dedicated thread for writing that buffer to disk. The worker threads do not block any more. The dedicated thread can safely block while writing to disk without affecting the worker threads (it does not hold a lock while writing to disk). My memory buffer is tuned to be sufficiently large that the writer thread can keep up. This all works great. My question is, how do I implement something similar for stdout? I could macro printf() to write into a memory buffer, but I don't have control over all the code that might write to stdout (some of it is in third-party libraries). Thoughts? NickB

  Read the article

• Recommendations for IPC between parent and child processes in .NET?

  - by Jeremy

  My .NET program needs to run an algorithm that makes heavy use of 3rd party libraries (32-bit), most of which are unmanaged code. I want to drive the CPU as hard as I can, so the code runs several threads in parallel to divide up the work. I find that running all these threads simultaneously results in temporary memory spikes, causing the process' virtual memory size to approach the 2 GB limit. This memory is released back pretty quickly, but occasionally if enough threads enter the wrong sections of code at once, the process crosses the "red line" and either the unmanaged code or the .NET code encounters an out of memory error. I can throttle back the number of threads but then my CPU usage is not as high as I would like. I am thinking of creating worker processes rather than worker threads to help avoid the out of memory errors, since doing so would give each thread of execution its own 2 GB of virtual address space (my box has lots of RAM). I am wondering what are the best/easiest methods to communicate the input and output between the processes in .NET? The file system is an obvious choice. I am used to shared memory, named pipes, and such from my UNIX background. Is there a Windows or .NET specific mechanism I should use?

  Read the article

• Killing a script launched in a Process via os.system()

  - by L.J.

  I have a python script which launches several processes. Each process basically just calls a shell script: from multiprocessing import Process import os import logging def thread_method(n = 4): global logger command = "~/Scripts/run.sh " + str(n) + " >> /var/log/mylog.log" if (debug): logger.debug(command) os.system(command) I launch several of these threads, which are meant to run in the background. I want to have a timeout on these threads, such that if it exceeds the timeout, they are killed: t = [] for x in range(10): try: t.append(Process(target=thread_method, args=(x,) ) ) t[-1].start() except Exception as e: logger.error("Error: unable to start thread") logger.error("Error message: " + str(e)) logger.info("Waiting up to 60 seconds to allow threads to finish") t[0].join(60) for n in range(len(t)): if t[n].is_alive(): logger.info(str(n) + " is still alive after 60 seconds, forcibly terminating") t[n].terminate() The problem is that calling terminate() on the process threads isn't killing the launched run.sh script - it continues running in the background until I either force kill it from the command line, or it finishes internally. Is there a way to have terminate also kill the subshell created by os.system()?

  Read the article

• When we should use NSThreads in a cocoa Touch ?

  - by srikanth rongali

  I am writing a small game by using cocos2d. It is a shooting game. Player on one side and enemy on other side. To run the both actions of player shooting and enemy shooting do we should use threads ? Or can we do without using them. At present I am not using threads. But I can manage to do both actions of player and enemy at same time. Should I use threads compulsory good performance ? Or am I doing wrong without using threads ? Please help me from this confusion. Thank you.

  Read the article

• OpenThread() through diiferent thread numbers ?

  - by user354641

  Hi there . I'm confusing about opening different threads with OpenThread Function and examining them with NtQueryInformationThread native function . I have no problem with NtQueryInformationThread & I can examine them finely. the problem is I don't know how to loop through different number of threads using OpenThread (with SetDebugPrivilege Consideration) . suppose we have different threads from number 5100 to 5200 & we want to examine them sequentially : for example 5100, 5101, 5102, 5103, 5104, 5105 ... 5200 ... . I don't know how to use OpenThread Function in delphi in right way ... . I'm using this syntax & I found it wrong : OpenThread(THREAD_ALL_ACCESS,false,(DWORD)5100) . if anyone could guide me how to use OpenThread though different number of threads it would be great . thanks alot .

  Read the article

• Noise with multi-threaded raytracer

  - by herber88

  This is my first multi-threaded implementation, so it's probably a beginners mistake. The threads handle the rendering of every second row of pixels (so all rendering is handled within each thread). The problem persists if the threads render the upper and lower parts of the screen respectively. Both threads read from the same variables, can this cause any problems? From what I've understood only writing can cause concurrency problems... Can calling the same functions cause any concurrency problems? And again, from what I've understood this shouldn't be a problem... The only time both threads write to the same variable is when saving the calculated pixel color. This is stored in an array, but they never write to the same indices in that array. Can this cause a problem? Multi-threaded rendered image (Spam prevention stops me from posting images directly..) Ps. I use the exactly same implementation in both cases, the ONLY difference is a single vs. two threads created for the rendering.

  Read the article

• Semaphore - What is the use of initial count?

  - by Sandbox

  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.threading.semaphoreslim.aspx To create a semaphore, I need to provide an initial count and maximum count. MSDN states that an initial count is - The initial number of requests for the semaphore that can be granted concurrently. While it states that maximum count is The maximum number of requests for the semaphore that can be granted concurrently. I can understand that the maximum count is the maximum number of threads that can access a resource concurrently. But, what is the use of initial count? If I create a semaphore with an initial count of 0 and a maximum count of 2, none of my threadpool threads are able to access the resource. If I set the initial count as 1 and maximum count as 2 then only thread pool thread can access the resource. It is only when I set both initial count and maximum count as 2, 2 threads are able to access the resource concurrently. So, I am really confused about the significance of initial count? SemaphoreSlim semaphoreSlim = new SemaphoreSlim(0, 2); //all threadpool threads wait SemaphoreSlim semaphoreSlim = new SemaphoreSlim(1, 2);//only one thread has access to the resource at a time SemaphoreSlim semaphoreSlim = new SemaphoreSlim(2, 2);//two threadpool threads can access the resource concurrently

  Read the article

• Threading and cores

  - by Matt

  If I have X cores on my machine and I start X threads. Let's assume for the sake of argument that each thread is completely separated in terms of the memory, hdd, etc it uses. Is the OS going to know to send each thread to a core or do more time slicing on one core for multiple threads. What the question boils down to, is if I have X cores and my program must do independent calculations, should I start X threads, will they each get piped to a core, or is the presumption that because I have X cores I can start X threads completely wrong? I'm thinking it is. This is with C# --

  Read the article

• Using NHibernate's HQL to make a query with multiple inner joins

  - by Abu Dhabi

  The problem here consists of translating a statement written in LINQ to SQL syntax into the equivalent for NHibernate. The LINQ to SQL code looks like so: var whatevervar = from threads in context.THREADs join threadposts in context.THREADPOSTs on threads.thread_id equals threadposts.thread_id join posts1 in context.POSTs on threadposts.post_id equals posts1.post_id join users in context.USERs on posts1.user_id equals users.user_id orderby posts1.post_time where threads.thread_id == int.Parse(id) select new { threads.thread_topic, posts1.post_time, users.user_display_name, users.user_signature, users.user_avatar, posts1.post_body, posts1.post_topic }; It's essentially trying to grab a list of posts within a given forum thread. The best I've been able to come up with (with the help of the helpful users of this site) for NHibernate is: var whatevervar = session.CreateQuery("select t.Thread_topic, p.Post_time, " + "u.User_display_name, u.User_signature, " + "u.User_avatar, p.Post_body, p.Post_topic " + "from THREADPOST tp " + "inner join tp.Thread_ as t " + "inner join tp.Post_ as p " + "inner join p.User_ as u " + "where tp.Thread_ = :what") .SetParameter<THREAD>("what", threadid) .SetResultTransformer(Transformers.AliasToBean(typeof(MyDTO))) .List<MyDTO>(); But that doesn't parse well, complaining that the aliases for the joined tables are null references. MyDTO is a custom type for the output: public class MyDTO { public string thread_topic { get; set; } public DateTime post_time { get; set; } public string user_display_name { get; set; } public string user_signature { get; set; } public string user_avatar { get; set; } public string post_topic { get; set; } public string post_body { get; set; } } I'm out of ideas, and while doing this by direct SQL query is possible, I'd like to do it properly, without defeating the purpose of using an ORM. Thanks in advance! EDIT: The database looks like this: http://i41.tinypic.com/5agciu.jpg (Can't post images yet.)

  Read the article

• Locking individual elements in a static collection?

  - by user638474

  I have a static collection of objects that will be frequently updated from multiple threads. Is it possible to lock individual objects in a collection instead of locking the entire collection so that only threads trying to access the same object in the collection would get blocked instead of every thread? If there is a better way to update objects in a collection from multiple threads, I'm all ears.

  Read the article

• How to synchronize access to many objects

  - by vividos

  I have a thread pool with some threads (e.g. as many as number of cores) that work on many objects, say thousands of objects. Normally I would give each object a mutex to protect access to its internals, lock it when I'm doing work, then release it. When two threads would try to access the same object, one of the threads has to wait. Now I want to save some resources and be scalable, as there may be thousands of objects, and still only a hand full of threads. I'm thinking about a class design where the thread has some sort of mutex or lock object, and assigns the lock to the object when the object should be accessed. This would save resources, as I only have as much lock objects as I have threads. Now comes the programming part, where I want to transfer this design into code, but don't know quite where to start. I'm programming in C++ and want to use Boost classes where possible, but self written classes that handle these special requirements are ok. How would I implement this? My first idea was to have a boost::mutex object per thread, and each object has a boost::shared_ptr that initially is unset (or NULL). Now when I want to access the object, I lock it by creating a scoped_lock object and assign it to the shared_ptr. When the shared_ptr is already set, I wait on the present lock. This idea sounds like a heap full of race conditions, so I sort of abandoned it. Is there another way to accomplish this design? A completely different way?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >