Search Results

Search found 1302 results on 53 pages for 'async'.

Page 5/53 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Strongly typed API for ASP.NET MVC 2 async actions

  - by Alexey Zakharov

  Hi guys, Have anybody tried to create strongly typed API for ASP.NET MVC 2 async actions? Best regards, Alexey Zakharov

  Read the article

• Silverlight, dealing with Async calls

  - by Billy

  Hi there, I have some code as below: foreach (var position in mAllPositions) { DoAsyncCall(position); } //I want to execute code here after each Async call has finished So how can I do the above? I could do something like: while (count < mAllPositions.Count) { //Run my code here } and increment count after each Async call is made ... but this doesn't seem like a good way of doing it Any advice? Is there some design pattern for the above problem as i'm sure it's a common scenario?

  Read the article

• Drag and Drop in Silverlight with F# and Asynchronous Workflows

  - by knotig

  Hello everyone! I'm trying to implement drag and drop in Silverlight using F# and asynchronous workflows. I'm simply trying to drag around a rectangle on the canvas, using two loops for the the two states (waiting and dragging), an idea I got from Tomas Petricek's book "Real-world Functional Programming", but I ran into a problem: Unlike WPF or WinForms, Silverlight's MouseEventArgs do not carry information about the button state, so I can't return from the drag-loop by checking if the left mouse button is no longer pressed. I only managed to solve this by introducing a mutable flag. Would anyone have a solution for this, that does not involve mutable state? Here's the relevant code part (please excuse the sloppy dragging code, which snaps the rectangle to the mouse pointer): type MainPage() as this = inherit UserControl() do Application.LoadComponent(this, new System.Uri("/SilverlightApplication1;component/Page.xaml", System.UriKind.Relative)) let layoutRoot : Canvas = downcast this.FindName("LayoutRoot") let rectangle1 : Rectangle = downcast this.FindName("Rectangle1") let mutable isDragged = false do rectangle1.MouseLeftButtonUp.Add(fun _ -> isDragged <- false) let rec drag() = async { let! args = layoutRoot.MouseMove |> Async.AwaitEvent if (isDragged) then Canvas.SetLeft(rectangle1, args.GetPosition(layoutRoot).X) Canvas.SetTop(rectangle1, args.GetPosition(layoutRoot).Y) return! drag() else return() } let wait() = async { while true do let! args = Async.AwaitEvent rectangle1.MouseLeftButtonDown isDragged <- true do! drag() } Async.StartImmediate(wait()) () Thank you very much for your time!

  Read the article

• generic async loading method for page web scripts?

  - by boomhauer

  The google analytics code went to an async load model some time back. I've noticed that a lot of the other scripts I use on many sites are causing slow load times - specifically the addthis script and the facebook like button. I'm noticing that the slow load times of these scripts is causing the google bot to calc my page loadtimes as being much slower than previously. I'd like to know if there is a standard/generic way of causing these scripts to load async as well, or perhaps a pointer to someone who has done the work for this already. Seems this would be a popular thing to do, but not much luck searching around.

  Read the article

• Ruby and Rails Async

  - by Edijs Petersons

  I need to perform long-running operation in ruby/rails asynchronously. Googling around one of the options I find is Sidekiq. class WeeklyReportWorker include Sidekiq::Worker def perform(user, product, year = Time.now.year, week = Date.today.cweek) report = WeeklyReport.build(user, product, year, week) report.save end end # call WeeklyReportWorker.perform_async('user', 'product') Everything works great! But there is a problem. If I keep calling this async method every few seconds, but the actual time heavy operation performs is one minute things won't work. Let me put it in example. 5.times { WeeklyReportWorker.perform_async('user', 'product') } Now my heavy operation will be performed 5 times. Optimally it should have performed only once or twice depending on whether execution of first operaton started before 5th async call was made. Do you have tips how to solve it?

  Read the article

• Perfect Forwarding to async lambda

  - by Alexander Kondratskiy

  I have a function template, where I want to do perfect forwarding into a lambda that I run on another thread. Here is a minimal test case which you can directly compile: #include <thread> #include <future> #include <utility> #include <iostream> #include <vector> /** * Function template that does perfect forwarding to a lambda inside an * async call (or at least tries to). I want both instantiations of the * function to work (one for lvalue references T&, and rvalue reference T&&). * However, I cannot get the code to compile when calling it with an lvalue. * See main() below. */ template <typename T> std::string accessValueAsync(T&& obj) { std::future<std::string> fut = std::async(std::launch::async, [](T&& vec) mutable { return vec[0]; }, std::forward<T>(obj)); return fut.get(); } int main(int argc, char const *argv[]) { std::vector<std::string> lvalue{"Testing"}; // calling with what I assume is an lvalue reference does NOT compile std::cout << accessValueAsync(lvalue) << std::endl; // calling with rvalue reference compiles std::cout << accessValueAsync(std::move(lvalue)) << std::endl; // I want both to compile. return 0; } For the non-compiling case, here is the last line of the error message which is intelligible: main.cpp|13 col 29| note: no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘std::vector<std::basic_string<char> >’ to ‘std::vector<std::basic_string<char> >&’ I have a feeling it may have something to do with how T&& is deduced, but I can't pinpoint the exact point of failure and fix it. Any suggestions? Thank you! EDIT: I am using gcc 4.7.0 just in case this could be a compiler issue (probably not)

  Read the article

• Implementing a robust async stream reader

  - by Jon

  I recently provided an answer to this question: C# - Realtime console output redirection. As often happens, explaining stuff (here "stuff" was how I tackled a similar problem) leads you to greater understanding and/or, as is the case here, "oops" moments. I realized that my solution, as implemented, has a bug. The bug has little practical importance, but it has an extremely large importance to me as a developer: I can't rest easy knowing that my code has the potential to blow up. Squashing the bug is the purpose of this question. I apologize for the long intro, so let's get dirty. I wanted to build a class that allows me to receive input from a Stream in an event-based manner. The stream, in my scenario, is guaranteed to be a FileStream and there is also an associated StreamReader already present to leverage. The public interface of the class is this: public class MyStreamManager { public event EventHandler<ConsoleOutputReadEventArgs> StandardOutputRead; public void StartSendingEvents(); public void StopSendingEvents(); } Obviously this specific scenario has to do with a console's standard output, but that is a detail and does not play an important role. StartSendingEvents and StopSendingEvents do what they advertise; for the purposes of this discussion, we can assume that events are always being sent without loss of generality. The class uses these two fields internally: protected readonly StringBuilder inputAccumulator = new StringBuilder(); protected readonly byte[] buffer = new byte[256]; The functionality of the class is implemented in the methods below. To get the ball rolling: public void StartSendingEvents(); { this.stopAutomation = false; this.BeginReadAsync(); } To read data out of the Stream without blocking, and also without requiring a carriage return char, BeginRead is called: protected void BeginReadAsync() { if (!this.stopAutomation) { this.StandardOutput.BaseStream.BeginRead( this.buffer, 0, this.buffer.Length, this.ReadHappened, null); } } The challenging part: BeginRead requires using a buffer. This means that when reading from the stream, it is possible that the bytes available to read ("incoming chunk") are larger than the buffer. Since we are only handing off data from the stream to a consumer, and that consumer may well have inside knowledge about the size and/or format of these chunks, I want to call event subscribers exactly once for each chunk. Otherwise the abstraction breaks down and the subscribers have to buffer the incoming data and reconstruct the chunks themselves using said knowledge. This is much less convenient to the calling code, and detracts from the usefulness of my class. To this end, if the buffer is full after EndRead, we don't send its contents to subscribers immediately but instead append them to a StringBuilder. The contents of the StringBuilder are only sent back whenever there is no more to read from the stream (thus preserving the chunks). private void ReadHappened(IAsyncResult asyncResult) { var bytesRead = this.StandardOutput.BaseStream.EndRead(asyncResult); if (bytesRead == 0) { this.OnAutomationStopped(); return; } var input = this.StandardOutput.CurrentEncoding.GetString( this.buffer, 0, bytesRead); this.inputAccumulator.Append(input); if (bytesRead < this.buffer.Length) { this.OnInputRead(); // only send back if we 're sure we got it all } this.BeginReadAsync(); // continue "looping" with BeginRead } After any read which is not enough to fill the buffer, all accumulated data is sent to the subscribers: private void OnInputRead() { var handler = this.StandardOutputRead; if (handler == null) { return; } handler(this, new ConsoleOutputReadEventArgs(this.inputAccumulator.ToString())); this.inputAccumulator.Clear(); } (I know that as long as there are no subscribers the data gets accumulated forever. This is a deliberate decision). The good This scheme works almost perfectly: Async functionality without spawning any threads Very convenient to the calling code (just subscribe to an event) Maintains the "chunkiness" of the data; this allows the calling code to use inside knowledge of the data without doing any extra work Is almost agnostic to the buffer size (it will work correctly with any size buffer irrespective of the data being read) The bad That last almost is a very big one. Consider what happens when there is an incoming chunk with length exactly equal to the size of the buffer. The chunk will be read and buffered, but the event will not be triggered. This will be followed up by a BeginRead that expects to find more data belonging to the current chunk in order to send it back all in one piece, but... there will be no more data in the stream. In fact, as long as data is put into the stream in chunks with length exactly equal to the buffer size, the data will be buffered and the event will never be triggered. This scenario may be highly unlikely to occur in practice, especially since we can pick any number for the buffer size, but the problem is there. Solution? Unfortunately, after checking the available methods on FileStream and StreamReader, I can't find anything which lets me peek into the stream while also allowing async methods to be used on it. One "solution" would be to have a thread wait on a ManualResetEvent after the "buffer filled" condition is detected. If the event is not signaled (by the async callback) in a small amount of time, then more data from the stream will not be forthcoming and the data accumulated so far should be sent to subscribers. However, this introduces the need for another thread, requires thread synchronization, and is plain inelegant. Specifying a timeout for BeginRead would also suffice (call back into my code every now and then so I can check if there's data to be sent back; most of the time there will not be anything to do, so I expect the performance hit to be negligible). But it looks like timeouts are not supported in FileStream. Since I imagine that async calls with timeouts are an option in bare Win32, another approach might be to PInvoke the hell out of the problem. But this is also undesirable as it will introduce complexity and simply be a pain to code. Is there an elegant way to get around the problem? Thanks for being patient enough to read all of this.

  Read the article

• Implementing a robust async stream reader for a console

  - by Jon

  I recently provided an answer to this question: C# - Realtime console output redirection. As often happens, explaining stuff (here "stuff" was how I tackled a similar problem) leads you to greater understanding and/or, as is the case here, "oops" moments. I realized that my solution, as implemented, has a bug. The bug has little practical importance, but it has an extremely large importance to me as a developer: I can't rest easy knowing that my code has the potential to blow up. Squashing the bug is the purpose of this question. I apologize for the long intro, so let's get dirty. I wanted to build a class that allows me to receive input from a Stream in an event-based manner. The stream, in my scenario, is guaranteed to be a FileStream and there is also an associated StreamReader already present to leverage. The public interface of the class is this: public class MyStreamManager { public event EventHandler<ConsoleOutputReadEventArgs> StandardOutputRead; public void StartSendingEvents(); public void StopSendingEvents(); } Obviously this specific scenario has to do with a console's standard output. StartSendingEvents and StopSendingEvents do what they advertise; for the purposes of this discussion, we can assume that events are always being sent without loss of generality. The class uses these two fields internally: protected readonly StringBuilder inputAccumulator = new StringBuilder(); protected readonly byte[] buffer = new byte[256]; The functionality of the class is implemented in the methods below. To get the ball rolling: public void StartSendingEvents(); { this.stopAutomation = false; this.BeginReadAsync(); } To read data out of the Stream without blocking, and also without requiring a carriage return char, BeginRead is called: protected void BeginReadAsync() { if (!this.stopAutomation) { this.StandardOutput.BaseStream.BeginRead( this.buffer, 0, this.buffer.Length, this.ReadHappened, null); } } The challenging part: BeginRead requires using a buffer. This means that when reading from the stream, it is possible that the bytes available to read ("incoming chunk") are larger than the buffer. Since we are only handing off data from the stream to a consumer, and that consumer may well have inside knowledge about the size and/or format of these chunks, I want to call event subscribers exactly once for each chunk. Otherwise the abstraction breaks down and the subscribers have to buffer the incoming data and reconstruct the chunks themselves using said knowledge. This is much less convenient to the calling code, and detracts from the usefulness of my class. Edit: There are comments below correctly stating that since the data is coming from a stream, there is absolutely nothing that the receiver can infer about the structure of the data unless it is fully prepared to parse it. What I am trying to do here is leverage the "flush the output" "structure" that the owner of the console imparts while writing on it. I am prepared to assume (better: allow my caller to have the option to assume) that the OS will pass me the data written between two flushes of the stream in exactly one piece. To this end, if the buffer is full after EndRead, we don't send its contents to subscribers immediately but instead append them to a StringBuilder. The contents of the StringBuilder are only sent back whenever there is no more to read from the stream (thus preserving the chunks). private void ReadHappened(IAsyncResult asyncResult) { var bytesRead = this.StandardOutput.BaseStream.EndRead(asyncResult); if (bytesRead == 0) { this.OnAutomationStopped(); return; } var input = this.StandardOutput.CurrentEncoding.GetString( this.buffer, 0, bytesRead); this.inputAccumulator.Append(input); if (bytesRead < this.buffer.Length) { this.OnInputRead(); // only send back if we 're sure we got it all } this.BeginReadAsync(); // continue "looping" with BeginRead } After any read which is not enough to fill the buffer, all accumulated data is sent to the subscribers: private void OnInputRead() { var handler = this.StandardOutputRead; if (handler == null) { return; } handler(this, new ConsoleOutputReadEventArgs(this.inputAccumulator.ToString())); this.inputAccumulator.Clear(); } (I know that as long as there are no subscribers the data gets accumulated forever. This is a deliberate decision). The good This scheme works almost perfectly: Async functionality without spawning any threads Very convenient to the calling code (just subscribe to an event) Maintains the "chunkiness" of the data; this allows the calling code to use inside knowledge of the data without doing any extra work Is almost agnostic to the buffer size (it will work correctly with any size buffer irrespective of the data being read) The bad That last almost is a very big one. Consider what happens when there is an incoming chunk with length exactly equal to the size of the buffer. The chunk will be read and buffered, but the event will not be triggered. This will be followed up by a BeginRead that expects to find more data belonging to the current chunk in order to send it back all in one piece, but... there will be no more data in the stream. In fact, as long as data is put into the stream in chunks with length exactly equal to the buffer size, the data will be buffered and the event will never be triggered. This scenario may be highly unlikely to occur in practice, especially since we can pick any number for the buffer size, but the problem is there. Solution? Unfortunately, after checking the available methods on FileStream and StreamReader, I can't find anything which lets me peek into the stream while also allowing async methods to be used on it. One "solution" would be to have a thread wait on a ManualResetEvent after the "buffer filled" condition is detected. If the event is not signaled (by the async callback) in a small amount of time, then more data from the stream will not be forthcoming and the data accumulated so far should be sent to subscribers. However, this introduces the need for another thread, requires thread synchronization, and is plain inelegant. Specifying a timeout for BeginRead would also suffice (call back into my code every now and then so I can check if there's data to be sent back; most of the time there will not be anything to do, so I expect the performance hit to be negligible). But it looks like timeouts are not supported in FileStream. Since I imagine that async calls with timeouts are an option in bare Win32, another approach might be to PInvoke the hell out of the problem. But this is also undesirable as it will introduce complexity and simply be a pain to code. Is there an elegant way to get around the problem? Thanks for being patient enough to read all of this.

  Read the article

• How can I use Windows Workflow for validation of a Silverlight application?

  - by Josh C.

  I want to use Windows Workflow to provide a validation service. The validation that will be provided may have multiple tiers with chaining and redirecting to other stages of validation. The application that will generate the data for validation is a Silverlight app. I imagine the validation will take longer than the blink of an eye, so I don't want to tie the user up. Instead, I would like the user to submit the current data for validation. If the validation happens quickly, the service will perform an asynchronous callback to the app. The viewmodel that made the call would receive the validation output and post into the view. If the validation takes a long time, the user can move forward in the Silverlight app, disregarding the potential output of the validation. The viewmodel that made the call would be gone. I expect there would be another viewmodel that would contain the current validation output in its model. The validation value would change causing the user to get a notification in smaller notifcation area. I can see how the current view's viewmodel would call the validation through the viewmodel that is containing the validation output, but I am concerned that the service call will timeout. Also, I think the user may have already changed the values from the original validation, invalidating the feedback. I am sure asynchronous validation is a problem solved many times over, I am looking to glean from your experience in solving this kind of problem. Is this the right approach to the problem, or is there a better way to approach this?

  Read the article

• Asynchronous update design/interaction patterns

  - by Andy Waite

  These days many apps support asynchronous updates. For example, if you're looking at a list of widgets and you delete one of them then rather than wait for the roundtrip to the server, the app can hide the one you deleted, giving immediate feedback. The actual deletion on the server will happen in the background. This can be seen in web apps, desktop apps, iOS apps, etc. But what about when the background operation fails. How should you feed back to the user? Should you restore the UI to the pre-deletion state? What about when multiple background operations fail together? Does this behaviour/pattern have a name? Perhaps something based on the Command pattern?

  Read the article

• What scenarios are implementations of Object Management Group (OMG) Data Distribution Service best suited for?

  - by mindcrime

  I've always been a big fan of asynchronous messaging and pub/sub implementations, but coming from a Java background, I'm most familiar with using JMS based messaging systems, such as JBoss MQ, HornetQ, ActiveMQ, OpenMQ, etc. I've also loosely followed the discussion of AMQP. But I recently became aware of the Data Distribution Service Specification from the Object Management Group, and found there are a couple of open-source implementations: OpenSplice OpenDDS It sounds like this stuff is focused on the kind of high-volume scenarios one tends to associate with financial trading exchanges and what-not. My current interest is more along the lines of notifications related to activity stream processing (think Twitter / Facebook) and am wondering if the DDS servers are worth looking into further. Could anyone who has practical experience with this technology, and/or a deep understanding of it, comment on how useful it is, and what scenarios it is best suited for? How does it stack up against more "traditional" JMS servers, and/or AMQP (or even STOMP or OpenWire, etc?) Edit: FWIW, I found some information at this StackOverflow thread. Not a complete answer, but anybody else finding this question might also find that thread useful, hence the added link.

  Read the article

• What determines which Javascript functions are blocking vs non-blocking?

  - by Sean

  I have been doing web-based Javascript (vanilla JS, jQuery, Backbone, etc.) for a few years now, and recently I've been doing some work with Node.js. It took me a while to get the hang of "non-blocking" programming, but I've now gotten used to using callbacks for IO operations and whatnot. I understand that Javascript is single-threaded by nature. I understand the concept of the Node "event queue". What I DON'T understand is what determines whether an individual javascript operation is "blocking" vs. "non-blocking". How do I know which operations I can depend on to produce an output synchronously for me to use in later code, and which ones I'll need to pass callbacks to so I can process the output after the initial operation has completed? Is there a list of Javascript functions somewhere that are asynchronous/non-blocking, and a list of ones that are synchronous/blocking? What is preventing my Javascript app from being one giant race condition? I know that operations that take a long time, like IO operations in Node and AJAX operations on the web, require them to be asynchronous and therefore use callbacks - but who is determining what qualifies as "a long time"? Is there some sort of trigger within these operations that removes them from the normal "event queue"? If not, what makes them different from simple operations like assigning values to variables or looping through arrays, which it seems we can depend on to finish in a synchronous manner? Perhaps I'm not even thinking of this correctly - hoping someone can set me straight. Thanks!

  Read the article

• At what point is asynchronous reading of disk I/O more efficient than synchronous?

  - by blesh

  Assuming there is some bit of code that reads files for multiple consumers, and the files are of any arbitrary size: At what size does it become more efficient to read the file asynchronously? Or to put it another way, how small must a file be for it to be faster just to read it synchronously? I've noticed (and perhaps I'm incorrect) that when reading very small files, it takes longer to read them asynchronously than synchronously (in particular with .NET). I'm assuming this has to do with set up time for things like I/O Completion Ports, threads, etc. Is there any rule of thumb to help out here? Or is it dependent on the system and the environment?

  Read the article

• How to optimize calls to multiple APIs at once and return as one set?

  - by Martin

  I have a web app that searches across 2 APIs right now. I have my own Restful web service that I call, and it does all the work on the backend to asynchronously call the 2 APIs and concatenate them into one result set for my web app to use. I want to scale this out and add as many other APIs as I can (currently looking at about 10 more). But as I add APIs, the call to my service gets (potentially) slower and more complex. How do I handle one API not responding ... and other issues that arise? What would be the best way to approach this? Should I create a service call for each API, that way each one is independent and not coupled to all the other calls? Is there a way on the backend to handle the multiple API calls without all the extra complexity it adds? If I go the route of a service call per API, now my client code gets more complex (and I have a lot of clients)? And it's more work for the client, and since I have mobile apps, it will cost the client more data usage. If I go one service call, is there a way to set up some sort of connection so I can return data as I get it, in case one service call hangs?

  Read the article

• What are the benefits of Android way of "saving memory" - explicitly passing Context objects everywhere?

  - by Sarge Borsch

  Turned out, this question is not easy to formulate for me, but let's try. In Android, pretty much any UI object depends on a Context, and has defined lifetime. It also can destroy and recreate UI objects and even whole application process at any time, and so on. This makes coding asynchronous operations correctly not straightforward. (and sometimes very cumbersome) But I never have seen a real explanation, why it's done that way? There are other OSes, including mobile OSes (iOS, for example), that don't do such things. So, what are the wins of Android way (Activities & Contexts)? Does that allow Android applications to use much less RAM, or maybe there are other benefits?

  Read the article

• Futures/Monads vs Events

  - by c69

  So, the question is quite simple: in an application framework, when performance impact can be ignored (10-20 events per second at max), what is more maintainable and flexible to use as a preferred medium for communication between modules - Events or Futures/Promices/Monads ? Its often being said, that Events (pub/sub, mediator) allow loose-coupling and thus - more maintainable app... My experience deny this: once you have more that 20+ events - debugging becomes hard, and so is refactoring - because it is very hard to see: who, when and why uses what. Promices (i'm coding in javascript) are much uglier and dumber, than Events. But: you can clearly see connections between function calls, so application logic becomes more straight-forward. What i'm afraid. though, is that Promices will bring more hard-coupling with them... p.s: the answer does not have to be based on JS, experience from other functional languages is much welcome.

  Read the article

• How to Avoid a Busy Loop Inside a Function That Returns the Object That's Being Waited For

  - by Carl Smith

  I have a function which has the same interface as Python's input builtin, but it works in a client-server environment. When it's called, the function, which runs in the server, sends a message to the client, asking it to get some input from the user. The user enters some stuff, or dismisses the prompt, and the result is passed back to the server, which passes it to the function. The function then returns the result. The function must work like Python's input [that's the spec], so it must block until it has the result. This is all working, but it uses a busy loop, which, in practice, could easily be spinning for many minutes. Currently, the function tells the client to get the input, passing an id. The client returns the result with the id. The server puts the result in a dictionary, with the id as the key. The function basically waits for that key to exist. def input(): '''simplified example''' key = unique_key() tell_client_to_get_input(key) while key not in dictionary: pass return dictionary.pop(pin) Using a callback would be the normal way to go, but the input function must block until the result is available, so I can't see how that could work. The spec can't change, as Python will be using the new input function for stuff like help and pdb, which provide their own little REPLs. I have a lot of flexibility in terms of how everything works overall, but just can't budge on the function acting exactly like Python's. Is there any way to return the result as soon as it's available, without the busy loop?

  Read the article

• Asynchronously returning a hierarchal data using .NET TPL... what should my return object "look" like?

  - by makerofthings7

  I want to use the .NET TPL to asynchronously do a DIR /S and search each subdirectory on a hard drive, and want to search for a word in each file... what should my API look like? In this scenario I know that each sub directory will have 0..10000 files or 0...10000 directories. I know the tree is unbalanced and want to return data (in relation to its position in the hierarchy) as soon as it's available. I am interested in getting data as quickly as possible, but also want to update that result if "better" data is found (better means closer to the root of c:) I may also be interested in finding all matches in relation to its position in the hierarchy. (akin to a report) Question: How should I return data to my caller? My first guess is that I think I need a shared object that will maintain the current "status" of the traversal (started | notstarted | complete ) , and might base it on the System.Collections.Concurrent. Another idea that I'm considering is the consumer/producer pattern (which ConcurrentCollections can handle) however I'm not sure what the objects "look" like. Optional Logical Constraint: The API doesn't have to address this, but in my "real world" design, if a directory has files, then only one file will ever contain the word I'm looking for.  If someone were to literally do a DIR /S as described above then they would need to account for more than one matching file per subdirectory. More information : I'm using Azure Tables to store a hierarchy of data using these TPL extension methods. A "node" is a table. Not only does each node in the hierarchy have a relation to any number of nodes, but it's possible for each node to have a reciprocal link back to any other node. This may have issues with recursion but I'm addressing that with a shared object in my recursion loop. Note that each "node" also has the ability to store local data unique to that node. It is this information that I'm searching for. In other words, I'm searching for a specific fixed RowKey in a hierarchy of nodes. When I search for the fixed RowKey in the hierarchy I'm interested in getting the results FAST (first node found) but prefer data that is "closer" to the starting point of the hierarchy. Since many nodes may have the particular RowKey I'm interested in, sometimes I may want to get a report of ALL the nodes that contain this RowKey.

  Read the article

• Choosing a JavaScript Asynch-Loader

  - by Prisoner ZERO

  I’ve been looking at various asynchronous resource-loaders and I’m not sure which one to use yet. Where I work we have disparate group-efforts whose class-modules may use different versions of jQuery (etc). As such, nested dependencies may differ, as well. I have no control over this, so this means I need to dynamically load resources which may use alternate versions of the same library. As such, here are my requirements: Load JavaScript and CSS resource files asynchronously. Manage dependency-order and nested-dependencies across versions. Detect if a resource is already loaded. Must allow for cross-domain loading (CDN's) (optional) Allow us to unload a resource. I’ve been looking at: Curl RequireJS JavaScriptMVC LABjs I might be able to fake these requirements myself by loading versions into properly-namespaced variables & using an array to track what is already loaded...but (hopefully) someone has already invented this. So my questions are: Which ones do you use? And why? Are there others that my satisfy my requirements fully? Which do you find most eloquent and easiest to work with? And why?

  Read the article

• At what point asynchronous reading of disk I/O is more efficient than synchronous?

  - by blesh

  Assuming there is some bit of code that reads files for multiple consumers, and the files are of any arbitrary size: At what size does it become more efficient to read the file asynchronously? Or to put it another way, how small must a file be for it to be faster just to read it synchronously? I've noticed (and perhaps I'm incorrect) that when reading very small files, it takes longer to read them asynchronously than synchronously (in particular with .NET). I'm assuming this has to do with set up time for things like I/O Completion Ports, threads, etc. Is there any rule of thumb to help out here? Or is it dependent on the system and the environment?

  Read the article

• Handling async ASMX web service exceptions

  - by Andy

  Hi, I've developed silverlight client with makes async web services calls to a asmx web service. The problem is, I want to handle exceptions, so far as to be able to tell in the client application whether there was an exception in the webservice (and therefore will be logged local to the webservice) or whether there was a communication problem (i.e. the endpoint for the webservice was wrong). In testing both types of exceptions in my project I get the same generic exception: System.ServiceModel.CommunicationException: The remote server returned an error: NotFound. This exception is amazingly useless when an exception occured in the webservice as it clearly has been found. Is the presence of this generic error to do with security (not being allowed to see true errors)? It can't be the fact that I don't have debug strings as I'm running on a dev PC. Either way, my question is, what's the best way to handle async errors in a commercial silverlight application? Any links or ideas are most welcome! :) Thanks a lot! Andy.

  Read the article

• Suggestions for doing async I/O with Task Parallel Library

  - by anelson

  I have some high performance file transfer code which I wrote in C# using the Async Programming Model (APM) idiom (eg, BeginRead/EndRead). This code reads a file from a local disk and writes it to a socket. For best performance on modern hardware, it's important to keep more than one outstanding I/O operation in flight whenever possible. Thus, I post several BeginRead operations on the file, then when one completes, I call a BeginSend on the socket, and when that completes I do another BeginRead on the file. The details are a bit more complicated than that but at the high level that's the idea. I've got the APM-based code working, but it's very hard to follow and probably has subtle concurrency bugs. I'd love to use TPL for this instead. I figured Task.Factory.FromAsync would just about do it, but there's a catch. All of the I/O samples I've seen (most particularly the StreamExtensions class in the Parallel Extensions Extras) assume one read followed by one write. This won't perform the way I need. I can't use something simple like Parallel.ForEach or the Extras extension Task.Factory.Iterate because the async I/O tasks don't spend much time on a worker thread, so Parallel just starts up another task, resulting in potentially dozens or hundreds of pending I/O operations; way too much! You can work around that by Waiting on your tasks, but that causes creation of an event handle (a kernel object), and a blocking wait on a task wait handle, which ties up a worker thread. My APM-based implementation avoids both of those things. I've been playing around with different ways to keep multiple read/write operations in flight, and I've managed to do so using continuations that call a method that creates another task, but it feels awkward, and definitely doesn't feel like idiomatic TPL. Has anyone else grappled with an issue like this with the TPL? Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Databinding in WinForms performing async data import

  - by burnside

  I have a scenario where I have a collection of objects bound to a datagrid in winforms. If a user drags and drops an item on to the grid, I need to add a placeholder row into the grid and kick off a lengthy async import process. I need to communicate the status of the async import process back to the UI, updating the row in the grid and have the UI remain responsive to allow the user to edit the other rows. What's the best practice for doing this? My current solution is: binding a thread safe implementation of BindingList to the grid, filled with the objects that are displayed as rows in the grid. When a user drags and drops an item on to the grid, I create a new object containing the sparse info obtained from the dropped item and add that to the BindingList, disabling the editing of that row. I then fire off a separate thread to do the import, passing it the newly bound object I have just created to fill with data. The import process, periodically sets the status of the object and fires an event which is subscribed to by the UI telling it to refresh the grid to see the new properties on the object. Should I be passing the same object that is bound to the grid to the import process thread to operate on, or should I be creating a copy and merging back the changes to the object on the UI thread using BeginInvoke? Any problems or advice with this implementation? Thanks

  Read the article

• Implement a threading to prevent UI block on a bug in an async function

  - by Marcx

  I think I ran up againt a bug in an async function... Precisely the getDirectoryListingAsync() of the File class... This method is supposted to return an object containing the lists of files in a specified folder. I found that calling this method on a direcory with a lot of files (in my tests more than 20k files), after few seconds there is a block on the UI until the process is completed... I think that this method is separated in two main block: 1) get the list of files 2) create the array with the details of the files The point 1 seems to be async (for a few second the ui is responsive), then when the process pass from point 1 to point 2 the block of the UI occurs until the complete event is dispathed... Here's some (simple) code: private function checkFiles(dir:File):void { if (dir.exists) { dir.addEventListener( FileListEvent.DIRECTORY_LISTING, listaImmaginiLocale); dir.getDirectoryListingAsync(); // after this point, for the firsts seconds the UI respond well (point 1), // few seconds later (point 2) the UI is frozen } } private function listaImmaginiLocale( event:FileListEvent ):void { // from this point on the UI is responsive again... } Actually in my projects there are some function that perform an heavy cpu usage and to prevent the UI block I implemented a simple function that after some iteration will wait giving time to UI to be refreshed. private var maxIteration:int = 150000; private function sampleFunct(offset:int = 0) :void { if (offset < maxIteration) { // do something // call the recursive function using a timeout.. // if the offset in multiple by 1000 the function will wait 15 millisec, // otherwise it will be called immediately // 1000 is a random number for the pourpose of this example, but I usually change the // value based on how much heavy is the function itself... setTimeout(function():void{aaa(++offset);}, (offset%1000?15:0)); } } Using this method I got a good responsive UI without afflicting performance... I'd like to implement it into the getDirectoryListingAsync method but I don't know if it's possibile how can I do it where is the file to edit or extend.. Any suggestion???

  Read the article

• How to manage large amounts of delegates and usercallbacks in C# async http library

  - by Tyler

  I'm coding a .NET library in C# for communicating with XBMC via its JSON RPC interface using HTTP. I coded and released a preliminary version but everything is done synchronously. I then recoded the library to be asynchronous for my own purposes as I was/am building an XBMC remote for WP7. I now want to release the new async library but want to make sure it's nice and tidy before I do. Due to the async nature a user initiates a request, supplies a callback method that matches my delegate and then handles the response once it's been received. The problem I have is that within the library I track a RequestState object for the lifetime of the request, it contains the http request/response as well as the user callback etc. as member variables, this would be fine if only one type of object was coming back but depending on what the user calls they may be returned a list of songs or a list of movies etc. My implementation at the moment uses a single delegate ResponseDataRecieved which has a single parameter which is a simple Object - As this has only be used by me I know which methods return what and when I handle the response I cast said object to the type I know it really is - List, List etc. A third party shouldn't have to do this though - The delegate signature should contain the correct type of object. So then I need a delegate for every type of response data that can be returned to the third party - The specific problem is, how do I handle this gracefully internally - Do I have a bunch of different RequestState objects that each have a different member variable for the different delegates? That doesn't "feel" right. I just don't know how to do this gracefully and cleanly.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >