Search Results

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

Page 49/66 | < Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >

  • java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: unable to create new native thread for multiple threads

    - by Kaustubh Ranjan Singh
    static class solver implements Runnable { static calculator(problem){ //Some code if(condition) {solver s = new solver(newproblem); new Thread(s).start();} } Public solver(int newproblem) { this.problem = newproblem ; } public void run() { // TODO Auto-generated method stub calculator(promblem); } } i am having a big array maze of 100x100 and i am trying to solve it and i am getting an error java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: unable to create new native thread(after running a code for some times). How can solve this , How can i use ExecutorService i think that will solve the problem or i want something like thisIf Number of generated threads4K then stop the first 100 threads

    Read the article

  • Delphi - Is there any equivalent to C# lock?

    - by CaldonCZE
    I'm writing a multi-threaded application in Delphi and need to use something to protect shared resources. In C# I'd use the "lock" keyword: private someMethod() { lock(mySharedObj) { //...do something with mySharedObj } } In Delphi I couldn't find anything similar, I found just TThread.Synchronize(someMethod) method, which prevents potential conflicts by calling someMethod in main VCL thread, but it isn't exactly what I want to do.... Edit: I'm using Delphi 6

    Read the article

  • Is this a valid, lazy, thread-safe Singleton implementation for C#?

    - by Matthew
    I implemented a Singleton pattern like this: public sealed class MyClass { ... public static MyClass Instance { get { return SingletonHolder.instance; } } ... static class SingletonHolder { public static MyClass instance = new MyClass (); } } From Googling around for C# Singleton implementations, it doesn't seem like this is a common way to do things in C#. I found one similar implementation, but the SingletonHolder class wasn't static, and included an explicit (empty) static constructor. Is this a valid, lazy, thread-safe way to implement the Singleton pattern? Or is there something I'm missing?

    Read the article

  • Isolating read and write in multithreaded

    - by the_lotus
    Hi In a multithreaded application. I have a bunch of function that loop through a collection to read the information. I also have a bunch of function that modifies that same collection. I’m looking for a way to isolate all the read and the write together. I don’t want a write to be done while a read is in progress. I was thinking of using SyncLock on the collection object but this will block multiple read trying to work in parallel.

    Read the article

  • Fast inter-process (inter-threaded) communications IPC on large multi-cpu system.

    - by IPC
    What would be the fastest portable bi-directional communication mechanism for inter-process communication where threads from one application need to communicate to multiple threads in another application on the same computer, and the communicating threads can be on different physical CPUs). I assume that it would involve a shared memory and a circular buffer and shared synchronization mechanisms. But shared mutexes are very expensive (and there are limited number of them too) to synchronize when threads are running on different physical CPUs.

    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

  • [Android] Thread Button sleep

    - by user557475
    Hello For my project,i´am trying to execute a Method every 10 seconds when i click a button "A" and it should stop when i click the button again (kind of on/off). this is what i reached :-/ : ButtonA.setOnClickListener(new OnClickListener() { @Override public void onClick(View v) { Handler handler = new Handler(); handler.postDelayed(new Runnable() { public void run() { showCurrentLocation(); Methodexecute(); } }, 10000); } } }); how can i repeat executing this method every 10 seconds until the button is clicked again. thanks

    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

  • Serialized task distribution: use thread or epoll?

    - by hpsmouse
    Now I'm in such a situation that there is a group of predefined tasks for multiple clients to do(any client can take any task). When a client connects to the server, server choose a task from the uncompleted tasks and send it to the client. It takes a while for the client to finish the task and send the result back to the server. Since a task should be sent to only one client, server should process requests in a serialized way. Now I have two plans to do it: create a thread for each client connection and all the threads take turns accessing the task pool, or use epoll listening on all the connection and process for each event of clients. Which one is better for the job? Or is there any other ideas? The server will be run on a multi-core machine.

    Read the article

  • Do I need to using locking against integers in c++ threads

    - by Shane MacLaughlin
    The title says it all really. If I am accessing a single integer type (e.g. long, int, bool, etc...) in multiple threads, do I need to use a synchronisation mechanism such as a mutex to lock them. My understanding is that as atomic types, I don't need to lock access to a single thread, but I see a lot of code out there that does use locking. Profiling such code shows that there is a significant performance hit for using locks, so I'd rather not. So if the item I'm accessing corresponds to a bus width integer (e.g. 4 bytes on a 32 bit processor) do I need to lock access to it when it is being used across multiple threads? Put another way, if thread A is writing to integer variable X at the same time as thread B is reading from the same variable, is it possible that thread B could end up a few bytes of the previous value mixed in with a few bytes of the value being written? Is this architecture dependent, e.g. ok for 4 byte integers on 32 bit systems but unsafe on 8 byte integers on 64 bit systems? Edit: Just saw this related post which helps a fair bit.

    Read the article

  • Is my way of doing threads in Android correct?

    - by Charlie
    Hi, I'm writing a live wallpaper, and I'm forking off two separate threads in my main wallpaper service. One updates, and the other draws. I was under the impression that once you call thread.start(), it took care of everything for you, but after some trial and error, it seems that if I want my update and draw threads to keep running, I have to manually keep calling their run() methods? In other words, instead of calling start() on both threads and forgetting, I have to manually set up a delayed handler event that calls thread.run() on both the update and draw threads every 16 milliseconds. Is this the correct way of having a long running thread? Also, to kill threads, I'm just setting them to be daemons, then nulling them out. Is this method ok? Most examples I see use some sort of join() / interrupt() in a while loop...I don't understand that one...

    Read the article

  • Simple prime number program - Weird issue with threads C#

    - by Para
    Hi! This is my code: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using System.Threading; namespace FirePrime { class Program { static bool[] ThreadsFinished; static bool[] nums; static bool AllThreadsFinished() { bool allThreadsFinished = false; foreach (var threadFinished in ThreadsFinished) { allThreadsFinished &= threadFinished; } return allThreadsFinished; } static bool isPrime(int n) { if (n < 2) { return false; } if (n == 2) { return true; } if (n % 2 == 0) { return false; } int d = 3; while (d * d <= n) { if (n % d == 0) { return false; } d += 2; } return true; } static void MarkPrimes(int startNumber,int stopNumber,int ThreadNr) { for (int j = startNumber; j < stopNumber; j++) nums[j] = isPrime(j); lock (typeof(Program)) { ThreadsFinished[ThreadNr] = true; } } static void Main(string[] args) { int nrNums = 100; int nrThreads = 10; //var threadStartNums = new List<int>(); ThreadsFinished = new bool[nrThreads]; nums = new bool[nrNums]; //var nums = new List<bool>(); nums[0] = false; nums[1] = false; for(int i=2;i<nrNums;i++) nums[i] = true; int interval = (int)(nrNums / nrThreads); //threadStartNums.Add(2); //int aux = firstStartNum; //int i = 2; //while (aux < interval) //{ // aux = interval*i; // i=i+1; // threadStartNums.Add(aux); //} int startNum = 0; for (int i = 0; i < nrThreads; i++) { var _thread = new System.Threading.Thread(() => MarkPrimes(startNum, Math.Min(startNum + interval, nrNums), i)); startNum = startNum + interval; //set the thread to run in the background _thread.IsBackground = true; //start our thread _thread.Start(); } while (!AllThreadsFinished()) { Thread.Sleep(1); } for (int i = 0; i < nrNums; i++) if(nums[i]) Console.WriteLine(i); } } } This should be a pretty simple program that is supposed to find and output the first nrNums prime numbers using nrThreads threads working in parallel. So, I just split nrNums into nrThreads equal chunks (well, the last one won't be equal; if nrThreads doesn't divide by nrNums, it will also contain the remainder, of course). I start nrThreads threads. They all test each number in their respective chunk and see if it is prime or not; they mark everything out in a bool array that keeps a tab on all the primes. The threads all turn a specific element in another boolean array ThreadsFinished to true when they finish. Now the weird part begins: The threads never all end. If I debug, I find that ThreadNr is not what I assign to it in the loop but another value. I guess this is normal since the threads execute afterwards and the counter (the variable i) is already increased by then but I cannot understand how to make the code be right. Can anyone help? Thank you in advance. P.S.: I know the algorithm is not very efficient; I am aiming at a solution using the sieve of Eratosthenes also with x given threads. But for now I can't even get this one to work and I haven't found any examples of any implementations of that algorithm anywhere in a language that I can understand.

    Read the article

  • Semaphores values

    - by Joel
    Hey, I have a question regarding using Semaphores HANDLE WINAPI CreateSemaphore(...); Is there anyway I can get the current value of the semaphore? Thanks, Joel

    Read the article

  • How to end a thread in perl

    - by user1672190
    I am new to perl and i have a question about perl thread. I am trying to create a new thread to check if the running function is timed out, and my way of doing it is as below. Logic is 1.create a new thread 2.run the main function and see if it is timed out, if ture, kill it Sample code: $exit_tread = false; # a flag to make sure timeout thread will run my $thr_timeout = threads->new( \&timeout ); execute main function here; $exit_thread = true # set the flag to true to force thread ends $thr_timeout->join(); #wait for the timeout thread ends Code of timeout function sub timeout { $timeout = false; my $start_time = time(); while (!$exit_thread) { sleep(1); last if (main function is executed); if (time() - $start_time >= configured time ) { logmsg "process is killed as request timed out"; _kill_remote_process(); $timeout = true; last; } } } now the code is running as i expected, but i am just not very clear if the code $exit_thread = true works because there is a "last" at the end of while loop. Can anybody give me a answer? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Using the windows api and C++, how could I load an exe from the hard drive and run it in its own thread?

    - by returneax
    For the sake of learning I'm trying to do what the OS does when launching a program ie. parsing a PE file and giving it a thread of execution. If I have two exe's one called foo.exe and the other bar.exe, how could I have foo.exe load the contents of bar.exe into memory then have it execute from there in its own thread? I know how to get it into memory using MapViewOfFile or by simple loading the contents on the hard drive into a buffer. I'm assuming simply copying the contents of bar.exe on disk into its own suspended thread and running it wouldn't work. I am semi-familiar with PE file internals. All help is very much appreciated, of course :)

    Read the article

  • Progressbar behaves strangely

    - by wanderameise
    I just created an application in C# that uses a thread which polls the UART for a receive event. If data is received an event is triggered in my main thread (GUI) and a progress bar is controlled via PerformStep() method (of course, I previously set the Max value accordingly). PerformStep is invoked using the following expression to handle cross threading this.Invoke((Action)delegate{progressBar2.PerformStep();}) When running this application the progressbar never hits its final value. It stops at 80%. When debugging and stopping at the line mentioned above, everything works fine using single steps. I have no idea what is going one! Start read thread on main thread: pThreadWrite = new Thread(new ThreadStart(ReadThread)); pThreadWrite.Start(); Read Thread: private void ReadThread() { while(1) { if (ReceiveEvent) { FlashProgressBar(); } } } Event that is triggered in main thread: private void FlashProgressBar() { this.Invoke((Action)delegate { progressBar2.PerformStep();}); } (It's a simplified representation of my code) It seems as if the internal progress is faster than the visual one.

    Read the article

  • DataGridView cells not editable when using an outside thread call

    - by joslinm
    Hi, I'm not able to edit my datagridview cells when a number of identical calls takes place on another thread. Here's the situation: Dataset table is created in the main window The program receives in files and processes them on a background thread in class TorrentBuilder : BackgroundWorker creating an array objects of another class Torrent My program receives those objects from the BW result and adds them into the dataset The above happens either on my main window thread or in another thread: I have a separate thread watching a folder for files to come in, and when they do come in, they proceed to call TorrentBuilder.RunWorkerAsynch() from that thread, receive the result, and call an outside class that adds the Torrent objects into the table. When the files are received by the latter thread, the datagridview isn't editable. All of the values come up properly into the datagridview, but when I click on a cell to edit it: I can write letters and everything, but when I click out of it, it immediately reverts back to its original value. If I restart the program, I can edit the same cells just fine. If the values are freshly added from the main window thread, I can edit the cells just fine. The outside thread is called from my main window thread, and sits there in the background. I don't believe it to be ReadOnly because I would have gotten an exception. Here's some code: From my main window class: private void dataGridView_DragDrop(object sender, DragEventArgs e) { ArrayList al = new ArrayList(); string[] files = (string[])e.Data.GetData(DataFormats.FileDrop); foreach (string file in files) { string extension = Path.GetExtension(file); if (Path.GetExtension(file).Equals(".zip") || Path.GetExtension(file).Equals(".rar")) { foreach (string unzipped in dh.UnzipFile(file)) al.Add(unzipped); } else if (Path.GetExtension(file).Equals(".torrent")) { al.Add(file); } } dataGridViewProgressBar.Visible = true; tb.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(tb_DragDropCompleted); tb.ProgressChanged += new ProgressChangedEventHandler(tb_DragDropProgress); tb.RunWorkerAsync() } void tb_DragDropCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e) { data.AddTorrents((Torrent[])e.Result); builder.Dispose(); dh.MoveProcessedFiles(data); dataGridViewProgressBar.Visible = false; } From my outside Thread while (autocheck) { if (torrentFiles != null) { builder.RunWorkerAsync(torrentFiles); while (builder.IsBusy) Thread.Sleep(500); } } void builder_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, System.ComponentModel.RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e) { data.AddTorrents((Torrent[])e.Result); builder.Dispose(); dh.MoveProcessedFiles(xml); data.Save(); //Save just does an `AcceptChanges()` and saves to a XML file }

    Read the article

  • Why isn't it possible to update an ObservableCollection from a different thread?

    - by MainMa
    In a multi-threaded WPF application, it is not possible to update an ObservableCollection from a thread other than WPF window thread. I know there are workarounds, so my question is not how to avoid the "This type of CollectionView does not support changes to its SourceCollection from a thread different from the Dispatcher thread" exception. My question is, why there is such an exception? Why wasn't it possible to allow collection updates from any thread? Personally, I don't see any reason to block UI update when ObservableCollection is changed from other threads. If two threads (including parallel ones) are accessing the same object, one listening for changes of object properties through events, the other one doing changes, it will always work, at least if locks are used properly. So, what are the reasons?

    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

  • Perl TCP Server handling multiple Client connections

    - by Matt
    I'll preface this by saying I have minimal experience with both Perl and Socket programming, so I appreciate any help I can get. I have a TCP Server which needs to handle multiple Client connections simultaneously and be able to receive data from any one of the Clients at any time and also be able to send data back to the Clients based on information it's received. For example, Client1 and Client2 connect to my Server. Client2 sends "Ready", the server interprets that and sends "Go" to Client1. The following is what I have written so far: my $sock = new IO::Socket::INET { LocalHost => $host, // defined earlier in code LocalPort => $port, // defined earlier in code Proto => 'tcp', Listen => SOMAXCONN, Reuse => 1, }; die "Could not create socket $!\n" unless $sock; while ( my ($new_sock,$c_addr) = $sock->accept() ) { my ($client_port, $c_ip) = sockaddr_in($c_addr); my $client_ipnum = inet_ntoa($c_ip); my $client_host = ""; my @threads; print "got a connection from $client_host", "[$client_ipnum]\n"; my $command; my $data; while ($data = <$new_sock>) { push @threads, async \&Execute, $data; } } sub Execute { my ($command) = @_; // if($command) = "test" { // send "go" to socket1 print "Executing command: $command\n"; system($command); } I know both of my while loops will be blocking and I need a way to implement my accept command as a thread, but I'm not sure the proper way of writing it.

    Read the article

  • Cleanest Way to Invoke Cross-Thread Events

    - by Nick
    I find that the .NET event model is such that I'll often be raising an event on one thread and listening for it on another thread. I was wondering what the cleanest way to marshal an event from a background thread onto my UI thread is. Based on the community suggestions, I've used this: // earlier in the code mCoolObject.CoolEvent+= new CoolObjectEventHandler(mCoolObject_CoolEvent); // then private void mCoolObject_CoolEvent(object sender, CoolObjectEventArgs args) { if (InvokeRequired) { CoolObjectEventHandler cb = new CoolObjectEventHandler( mCoolObject_CoolEvent); Invoke(cb, new object[] { sender, args }); return; } // do the dirty work of my method here }

    Read the article

  • Do really need a count lock on Multi threads with one CPU core?

    - by MrROY
    If i have some code looks like this(Please ignore the syntax, i want to understand it without a specified language): count = 0 def countDown(): count += 1 if __name__ == '__main__': thread1(countDown) thread2(countDown) thread3(countDown) Here i have a CPU with only one core, do i really need a lock to the variable count in case of it could be over-written by other threads. I don't know, but if the language cares a lot, please explain it under Java?C and Python, So many thanks.

    Read the article

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