Search Results

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

Page 50/66 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

  • Persistance Queue Implementation

    - by Winter
    I was reading an article on Batch Processing in java over at JDJ http://java.sys-con.com/node/415321 . The article mentioned using a persistence queue as a Batch Updater instead of immediately sending an individual insert or update to the database. The author doesn't give a concrete example of this concept so I googled Persistence Queue but that didn't come up with much. Does anyone know of a good example of this?

    Read the article

  • multi-threading in MFC

    - by kiddo
    Hello all,in my application there is a small part of function,in which it will read files to get some information,the number of filecount would be utleast 50,So I thought of implementing threading.Say if the user is giving 50 files,I wanted to separate it as 5 *10, 5 thread should be created,so that each thread can handle 10 files which can speed up the process.And also from the below code you can see that some variables are common.I read some articles about threading and I am aware that only one thread should access a variable/contorl at a me(CCriticalStiuation can be used for that).For me as a beginner,I am finding hard to imlplement what I have learned about threading.Somebody please give me some idea with code shown below..thanks in advance file read function:// void CMyClass::GetWorkFilesInfo(CStringArray& dataFilesArray,CString* dataFilesB, int* check,DWORD noOfFiles,LPWSTR path) { CString cFilePath; int cIndex =0; int exceptionInd = 0; wchar_t** filesForWork = new wchar_t*[noOfFiles]; int tempCheck; int localIndex =0; for(int index = 0;index < noOfFiles; index++) { tempCheck = *(check + index); if(tempCheck == NOCHECKBOX) { *(filesForWork+cIndex) = new TCHAR[MAX_PATH]; wcscpy(*(filesForWork+cIndex),*(dataFilesB +index)); cIndex++; } else//CHECKED or UNCHECKED { dataFilesArray.Add(*(dataFilesB+index)); *(check + localIndex) = *(check + index); localIndex++; } } WorkFiles(&cFilePath,dataFilesArray,filesForWork, path, cIndex); dataFilesArray.Add(cFilePath); *(check + localIndex) = CHECKED; }

    Read the article

  • Periodically iterating over a collection that's constantly changing

    - by rwmnau
    I have a collection of objects that's constantly changing, and I want to display some information about objects (my application is multi-threaded, and differently threads are constantly submitting requests to modify an object in the collection, so it's unpredictable), and I want to display some information about what's currently in the collection. If I lock the collection, I can iterate over it and get my information without any problems - however, this causes problems with the other threads, since they could have submitted multiple requests to modify the collection in the meantime, and will be stalled. I've thought of a couple ways around this, and I'm looking for any advice. Make a copy of the collection and iterate over it, allowing the original to continue updating in the background. The collection can get large, so this isn't ideal, but it's safe. Iterate over it using a For...Next loop, and catch an IndexOutOfBounds exception if an item is removed from the collection while we're iterating. This may occasionally cause duplicates to appear in my snapshot, so it's not ideal either. Any other ideas? I'm only concerned about a moment-in-time snapshot, so I'm not concerned about reflecting changes in my application - my main concern is that the collection be able to be updated with minimal latency, and that updates never be lost.

    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

  • [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

  • Swing: How do I run a job from AWT thread, but after a window was layed out?

    - by java.is.for.desktop
    My complete GUI runs inside the AWT thread, because I start the main window using SwingUtilities.invokeAndWait(...). Now I have a JDialog which has just to display a JLabel, which indicates that a certain job is in progress, and close that dialog after the job was finished. The problem is: the label is not displayed. That job seems to be started before JDialog was fully layed-out. When I just let the dialog open without waiting for a job and closing, the label is displayed. The last thing the dialog does in its ctor is setVisible(true). Things such as revalidate(), repaint(), ... don't help either. Even when I start a thread for the monitored job, and wait for it using someThread.join() it doesn't help, because the current thread (which is the AWT thread) is blocked by join, I guess. Replacing JDialog with JFrame doesn't help either. So, is the concept wrong in general? Or can I manage it to do certain job after it is ensured that a JDialog (or JFrame) is fully layed-out? Simplified algorithm of what I'm trying to achieve: Create a subclass of JDialog Ensure that it and its contents are fully layed-out Start a process and wait for it to finish (threaded or not, doesn't matter) Close the dialog I managed to write a reproducible test case: EDIT Problem from an answer is now addressed: This use case does display the label, but it fails to close after the "simulated process", because of dialog's modality. import java.awt.*; import javax.swing.*; public class _DialogTest2 { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { SwingUtilities.invokeAndWait(new Runnable() { final JLabel jLabel = new JLabel("Please wait..."); @Override public void run() { JFrame myFrame = new JFrame("Main frame"); myFrame.setDefaultCloseOperation(JFrame.EXIT_ON_CLOSE); myFrame.setSize(750, 500); myFrame.setLocationRelativeTo(null); myFrame.setVisible(true); JDialog d = new JDialog(myFrame, "I'm waiting"); d.setModalityType(Dialog.ModalityType.APPLICATION_MODAL); d.add(jLabel); d.setSize(300, 200); d.setLocationRelativeTo(null); d.setVisible(true); SwingUtilities.invokeLater(new Runnable() { @Override public void run() { try { Thread.sleep(3000); // simulate process jLabel.setText("Done"); } catch (InterruptedException ex) { } } }); d.setVisible(false); d.dispose(); myFrame.setVisible(false); myFrame.dispose(); } }); } }

    Read the article

  • .NET: Start a thread as suspended

    - by Ikaso
    In unmanaged code you can create a thread in suspended state. In .NET Framework I can't find this option. Is it because the Thread constructor puts the thread in a suspended state? Is there other reasons why this is not supported?

    Read the article

  • Form.Show() is not showing it's child controls

    - by Refracted Paladin
    I have a form, frmPleaseWait, that has a MarqueeProgressBar and a Label that I want to use when the UI is loading the data in a poorly structured app we have. The problem is that frmPleaseWait.Show() shows the form but not the controls in it. It is just a white rectangle. Now frmPleaseWait.ShowDialog() shows the child controls but doesn't let the UI load it's data. What am I missing? Below is a code snippet from where I am trying this. PleaseWait = new frmPleaseWait(); PleaseWait.Show(this); // Set all available HUD values in HUD Object HUD.LastName = GetCurrentRowVal("LastName").Trim(); HUD.FirstName = GetCurrentRowVal("FirstName").Trim(); HUD.PersonId = Convert.ToInt32(GetCurrentRowVal("PersonID").Trim()); HUD.SSn = GetCurrentRowVal("SSN").Trim(); HUD.MiddleName = GetCurrentRowVal("MiddleName").Trim(); HUD.MasterID = ConnectBLL.BLL.DriInterface.CheckForDriId(HUD.PersonId).ToString(); // This loads numerous UserControls with data shellForm.FormPaint(HUD.PersonId); PleaseWait.Close();

    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

  • How do I best write my own background-working and communicatible (sending progress updates and getti

    - by Ivan
    I have to develop a class which can run it's own hard-coded task in a background thread and communicate with container class sending him progress updates and taking messages from it. I believe I am going to extend BackgroundWorker class but it looks a bit weird to extend and I haven't managed to find a good example wit Google. Can you share a link to a good example of solving such a task? Please don't offer placing a BackgroundWorker visually on a form and reading the standard tutorial, it's not for my case. Maybe I'd better not extend but encapsulate a BackgroundWorker, but I hardly understand how to use it outide WinForms designer either :-(

    Read the article

  • throwing exception from APCProc crashes program

    - by lazy_banana
    I started to do some research on how terminate a multithreaded application properly and I found those 2 post(first, second) about how to use QueueUserAPC to signal other threads to terminate. I thought I should give it a try, and the application keeps crashing when I throw the exception from the APCProc. Code: #include <stdio.h> #include <windows.h> class ExitException { public: char *desc; DWORD exit_code; ExitException(char *desc,int exit_code): desc(desc), exit_code(exit_code) {} }; //I use this class to check if objects are deconstructed upon termination class Test { public: char *s; Test(char *s): s(s) { printf("%s ctor\n",s); } ~Test() { printf("%s dctor\n",s); } }; DWORD CALLBACK ThreadProc(void *useless) { try { Test t("thread_test"); SleepEx(INFINITE,true); return 0; } catch (ExitException &e) { printf("Thread exits\n%s %lu",e.desc,e.exit_code); return e.exit_code; } } void CALLBACK exit_apc_proc(ULONG_PTR param) { puts("In APCProc"); ExitException e("Application exit signal!",1); throw e; return; } int main() { HANDLE thread=CreateThread(NULL,0,ThreadProc,NULL,0,NULL); Sleep(1000); QueueUserAPC(exit_apc_proc,thread,0); WaitForSingleObject(thread,INFINITE); puts("main: bye"); return 0; } My question is why does this happen? I use mingw for compilation and my OS is 64bit. Can this be the reason?I read that you shouldn't call QueueApcProc from a 32bit app for a thread which runs in a 64bit process or vice versa, but this shouldn't be the case.

    Read the article

  • Multiple instances of the same Async task (Windows Phone)

    - by Bart Teunissen
    After googeling for ages, and reading some stuff about async task in books. I made a my first program with an async task in it. Only to find out, that i can only start one task. I want to run the task more then once. This is where i found out that that doesn't seem to work. to be a little bit clearer, here are some parts of my code: InitFunction(var); This is the Task itself public async Task InitFunction(string var) { _VarHandle = await _AdsClient.GetSymhandleByNameAsync(var); _Data = await _AdsClient.ReadAsync<T>(_VarHandle); _AdsClient.AddNotificationAsync<T>(_VarHandle, AdsTransmissionMode.OnChange, 1000, this); } This works like a charm when i execute the task only once.. But is there a possibility to run it multiple times. Something like this? InitFunction(var1); InitFunction(var2); InitFunction(var3); Because if i do this now (multiple tasks at once), the task it wants to start is still running, and it throws an exeption. if someone could help me with this, that would be awesome! ~ Bart

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • 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

  • C++: is it safe to read an integer variable that's being concurrently modified without locking?

    - by Hongli
    Suppose that I have an integer variable in a class, and this variable may be concurrently modified by other threads. Writes are protected by a mutex. Do I need to protect reads too? I've heard that there are some hardware architectures on which, if one thread modifies a variable, and another thread reads it, then the read result will be garbage; in this case I do need to protect reads. I've never seen such architectures though. This question assumes that a single transaction only consists of updating a single integer variable so I'm not worried about the states of any other variables that might also be involved in a transaction.

    Read the article

  • How to get a stable, snappy UI using threads?

    - by Thomas Ahle
    I recently watching this video on Google Chrome with great interest. It explains that Google Chrome uses one thread for IO, one for opening files and one for intermodule communication. I think I may be able to use something similar for my own - currently quite messy - application. I wondered if there were any good articles on best-practices or patterns for such threaded divisions of tasks?

    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

  • 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

  • Windows App. Thread Aborting Issue

    - by Patrick
    I'm working on an application that has to make specific decisions based on files that are placed into a folder being watched by a file watcher. Part of this decision making process involves renaming files before moving them off to another folder to be processed. Since I'm working with files of all different sizes I created an object that checks the file in a seperate thread to verify that it is "available" and when it is it fires an event. When I run the rename code from inside this available event it works. public void RenameFile_Test() { string psFilePath = @"C:\File1.xlsx"; tgt_File target = new FileObject(psFilePath); target.FileAvailable += new FileEventHandler(OnFileAvailable); target.FileUnAvailable += new FileEventHandler(OnFileUnavailable); } private void OnFileAvailable(object source, FileEventArgs e) { ((FileObject)source).RenameFile(@"C:\File2.xlsx"); } The problem I'm running into is that when the extensions are different from the source file and the rename to file I am making a call to a conversion factory that returns a factory object based on the type of conversion and then converts the file accordingly before doing the rename. When I run that particular piece of code in unit test it works, the factory object is returned, and the conversion happens correctly. But when I run it within the process I get up to the... moExcelApp = new Application(); part of converting an .xls or .xlsx to a .csv and i get a "Thread was being Aborted" error. Any thoughts? Update: There is a bit more information and a bit of map of how the application works currently. Client Application running FSW On File Created event Creates a FileObject passing in the path of the file. On construction the file is validated: if file exists is true then, Thread toAvailableCheck = new Thread(new ThreadStart(AvailableCheck)); toAvailableCheck.Start(); The AvailableCheck Method repeatedly tries to open a streamreader to the file until the reader is either created or the number of attempts times out. If the reader is opened, it fires the FileAvailable event, if not it fires the FileUnAvailable event, passing back itself in the event. The client application is wired to catch those events from inside the Oncreated event of the FSW. the OnFileAvailable method then calls the rename functionality which contains the excel interop call. If the file is being renamed (not converted, extensions stay the same) it does a move to change the name from the old file name to the new, and if its a conversion it runs a conversion factory object which returns the correct type of conversion based on the extensions of the source file and the destination file name. If it is a simple rename it works w/o a problem. If its a conversion (which is the XLS to CSV object that is returned as a part of the factory) the very first thing it does is create a new application object. That is where the application bombs. When i test the factory and conversion/rename process outside of the thread and in its own unit test the process works w/o a problem. Update: I tested the Excel Interop inside a thread by doing this: [TestMethod()] public void ExcelInteropTest() { Thread toExcelInteropThreadTest = new Thread(new ThreadStart(Instantiate_App)); toExcelInteropThreadTest.Start(); } private void Instantiate_App() { Application moExcelApp = new Application(); moExcelApp.Quit(); } And on the line where the application is instatntiated I got the 'A first chance exception of type 'System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' error. So I added; toExcelInteropThreadTest.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.MTA); after the thread instantiation and before the thread start call and still got the same error. I'm getting the notion that I'm going to have to reconsider the design.

    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

  • how to call windows paint event from child thread

    - by RAJ K
    If I am wrong then please correct me as I am new in this. I have one thread which display image captured from webcam on a windows created using CreateWindowEx() function. Now when i execute my program I can see that my paint code (in WindowProc()) in never reached (called InvalidateRect() from child thread to redraw), checked using breakpoint. Actually frame capture and display is being done in thread and I think because its in child thread and Window is in Main thread that is why its not able to call paint event. Can you help me on this

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >