Search Results

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

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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

  • 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

  • memcpy() safety on adjacent memory regions

    - by JaredC
    I recently asked a question on using volatile and was directed to read some very informative articles from Intel and others discussing memory barriers and their uses. After reading these articles I have become quite paranoid though. I have a 64-bit machine. Is it safe to memcpy into adjacent, non-overlapping regions of memory from multiple threads? For example, say I have a buffer: char buff[10]; Is it always safe for one thread to memcpy into the first 5 bytes while a second thread copies into the last 5 bytes? My gut reaction (and some simple tests) indicate that this is completely safe, but I have been unable to find documentation anywhere that can completely convince me.

    Read the article

  • What would happen to GC if I run process with priority = RealTime?

    - by Bobb
    I have a C# app which runs with priority RealTime. It was all fine until I made few hectic changes in past 2 days. Now it runs out of memory in few hours. I am trying to find whether it is a memory leak I created of this is because I consume lot more objects than before and GC simply cant collect them because it runs with same priority. My question is - what could happen to GC when it tries to collect objects in application with RealTime priority (there is also at least one thread running with Highest thread priority)? (P.S. by realtime priority I mean Process.GetCurrentProcess().PriorityClass = ProcessPriorityClass.RealTime) Sorry forgot to tell. GC is in Server mode

    Read the article

  • Cocoa: NSOpenPanel Threads

    - by Craig
    I am monitoring my application using Activity Monitor and whenever NSOpenPanel is called the application appears as having 9 threads and stays like that until the application is closed. Is there a way to release those threads?, Or am I simply misunderstanding what the threads number means?, surely it isn't a good thing to have them open for no reason. Any help would be appreciated

    Read the article

  • Win32 reset event like synchronization class with boost C++

    - by fgungor
    I need some mechanism reminiscent of Win32 reset events that I can check via functions having the same semantics with WaitForSingleObject() and WaitForMultipleObjects() (Only need the ..SingleObject() version for the moment) . But I am targeting multiple platforms so all I have is boost::threads (AFAIK) . I came up with the following class and wanted to ask about the potential problems and whether it is up to the task or not. Thanks in advance. class reset_event { bool flag, auto_reset; boost::condition_variable cond_var; boost::mutex mx_flag; public: reset_event(bool _auto_reset = false) : flag(false), auto_reset(_auto_reset) { } void wait() { boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); if (flag) return; cond_var.wait(LOCK); if (auto_reset) flag = false; } bool wait(const boost::posix_time::time_duration& dur) { boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); bool ret = cond_var.timed_wait(LOCK, dur) || flag; if (auto_reset && ret) flag = false; return ret; } void set() { boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); flag = true; cond_var.notify_all(); } void reset() { boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); flag = false; } }; Example usage; reset_event terminate_thread; void fn_thread() { while(!terminate_thread.wait(boost::posix_time::milliseconds(10))) { std::cout << "working..." << std::endl; boost::this_thread::sleep(boost::posix_time::milliseconds(1000)); } std::cout << "thread terminated" << std::endl; } int main() { boost::thread worker(fn_thread); boost::this_thread::sleep(boost::posix_time::seconds(1)); terminate_thread.set(); worker.join(); return 0; } EDIT I have fixed the code according to Michael Burr's suggestions. My "very simple" tests indicate no problems. class reset_event { bool flag, auto_reset; boost::condition_variable cond_var; boost::mutex mx_flag; public: explicit reset_event(bool _auto_reset = false) : flag(false), auto_reset(_auto_reset) { } void wait() { boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); if (flag) { if (auto_reset) flag = false; return; } do { cond_var.wait(LOCK); } while(!flag); if (auto_reset) flag = false; } bool wait(const boost::posix_time::time_duration& dur) { boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); if (flag) { if (auto_reset) flag = false; return true; } bool ret = cond_var.timed_wait(LOCK, dur); if (ret && flag) { if (auto_reset) flag = false; return true; } return false; } void set() { boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); flag = true; cond_var.notify_all(); } void reset() { boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> LOCK(mx_flag); flag = false; } };

    Read the article

  • How to keep a .NET console app running?

    - by intoorbit
    Consider a Console application that starts up some services in a separate thread. All it needs to do is wait for the user to press Ctrl+C to shut it down. Which of the following is the better way to do this? static ManualResetEvent _quitEvent = new ManualResetEvent(false); static void Main() { Console.CancelKeyPress += delegate { _quitEvent.Set(); }; // kick off asynchronous stuff _quitEvent.WaitOne(); // cleanup/shutdown and quit } Or this, using Thread.Sleep(1): static bool _quitFlag = false; static void Main() { Console.CancelKeyPress += delegate { _quitFlag = true; }; // kick off asynchronous stuff while (!_quitFlag) { Thread.Sleep(1); } // cleanup/shutdown and quit }

    Read the article

  • What are common uses of condition variables in C++?

    - by jasonline
    I'm trying to learn about condition variables. I would like to know what are the common situations where condition variables are used. One example is in a blocking queue, where two threads access the queue - the producer thread pushes an item into the queue, while the consumer thread pops an item from the queue. If the queue is empty, the consumer thread is waiting until a signal is sent by the producer thread. What are other design situations where you need a condition variable to be used?

    Read the article

  • Will this make the object thread-safe?

    - by sharptooth
    I have a native Visual C++ COM object and I need to make it completely thread-safe to be able to legally mark it as "free-threaded" in th system registry. Specifically I need to make sure that no more than one thread ever accesses any member variable of the object simultaneously. The catch is I'm almost sure that no sane consumer of my COM object will ever try to simultaneously use the object from more than one thread. So I want the solution as simple as possible as long as it meets the requirement above. Here's what I came up with. I add a mutex or critical section as a member variable of the object. Every COM-exposed method will acquire the mutex/section at the beginning and release before returning control. I understand that this solution doesn't provide fine-grained access and this might slow execution down, but since I suppose simultaneous access will not really occur I don't care of this. Will this solution suffice? Is there a simpler solution?

    Read the article

  • ThreadExceptionEventHandler and invoking delegates

    - by QmunkE
    If I assign a ThreadExceptionEventHandler to Application.ThreadException, why when I invoke a delegate method using a control on the main application thread are any exceptions thrown by that delegate not triggering the event handler? i.e. static void Main() { ... Application.ThreadException += new System.Threading.ThreadExceptionEventHandler(Application_ThreadException); Application.Run(new Form1()); } static void Application_ThreadException(object sender, System.Threading.ThreadExceptionEventArgs e) { Console.Error.Write("A thread exception occurred!"); } ... private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { Thread syncThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(this.ThrowException)); syncThread.Start(); } private void ThrowException() { button1.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate { // Not handled by ThreadExceptionEventHandler? throw new Exception(); })); } The context on this is that I have a background thread started from a form which is throwing an unhandled exception which terminates the application. I know this thread is going to be unreliable since it is network connectivity reliant and so subject to being terminated at any point, but I'm just interested as to why this scenario doesn't play out as I expect?

    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

  • What is wrong with my @synchronized block?

    - by hyn
    I have 2 threads in my application, a game update thread and render/IO/main thread. My update thread updates the game state, and the render thread renders the scene based on the updated values of the game state models and a few other variables stored inside an object (gameEngine). The render thread gets executed while the game thread is still updating, which is a problem, so it appeared to me the solution is to use @synchronized like this: @synchronized(gameEngine) { [gameEngine update]; nextUpdate = now + GAME_UPDATE_INTERVAL; gameEngine.lastGameUpdateInterval = now - lastUpdate; gameEngine.lastGameUpdateTime = now; lastUpdate = now; } But the render thread still accesses the gameEngine object between -update and the last 3 lines of the block. Why is this?

    Read the article

  • What to use to wait on a indeterminate number of tasks?

    - by Scott Chamberlain
    I am still fairly new to parallel computing so I am not too sure which tool to use for the job. I have a System.Threading.Tasks.Task that needs to wait for n number number of tasks to finish before starting. The tricky part is some of its dependencies may start after this task starts (You are guaranteed to never hit 0 dependent tasks until they are all done). Here is kind of what is happening Parent thread creates somewhere between 1 and (NUMBER_OF_CPU_CORES - 1) tasks. Parent thread creates task to be run when all of the worker tasks are finished. Parent thread creates a monitoring thread Monitoring thread may kill a worker task or spawn a new task depending on load. I can figure out everything up to step 4. How do I get the task from step 2 to wait to run until any new worker threads created in step 4 finish?

    Read the article

  • Not Able to call The method Asynchronously in the Unit Test.

    - by user43838
    Hi everyone, I am trying to call a method that passes an object called parameters. public void LoadingDataLockFunctionalityTest() { DataCache_Accessor target = DataCacheTest.getNewDataCacheInstance(); target.itemsLoading.Add("WebFx.Caching.TestDataRetrieverFactorytestsync", true); DataParameters parameters = new DataParameters("WebFx.Core", "WebFx.Caching.TestDataRetrieverFactory", "testsync"); parameters.CachingStrategy = CachingStrategy.TimerDontWait; parameters.CacheDuration = 0; string data = (string)target.performGetForTimerDontWaitStrategy(parameters); TestSyncDataRetriever.SimulateLoadingForFiveSeconds = true; Thread t1 = new Thread(delegate() { string s = (string)target.performGetForTimerDontWaitStrategy(parameters); Console.WriteLine(s ?? String.Empty); }); t1.Start(); t1.Join(); Thread.Sleep(1000); ReaderWriterLockSlim rw = DataCache_Accessor.GetLoadingLock(parameters); Assert.IsTrue(rw.IsWriteLockHeld); Assert.IsNotNull(data); } My test is failing all the time and i am not able step through the method.. Can someone please put me in the right direction Thanks

    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 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

  • Why onCreate() calling multiple times when i use Thread()?

    - by RajaReddy PolamReddy
    In my app i faced a problem with threads. i am using native code in my app. i try to load library and then calling native functions from the android code. 1. By using Threads() : PjsuaThread pjsuaThread = new PjsuaThread(); pjsuaThread.start(); thread code class PjsuaThread extends Thread { public void run() { if (pjsua_app.initApp() != 0) { // native function calling return; } else { } pjsua_app.startPjsua(ApjsuaActivity.CFG_FNAME); // native function calling finished = true; } When i use code like this, onCreate() function calling multiple times and able to load library and calling some functions properly, after some seconds onCreate calling again because of that it's crashing. 2. Using AsyncTask(): And also i used AsyncTask< for this requirement, it's crashing the application( crashing in lib code ). not able to open any functions class SipTask extends AsyncTask<Void, String, Void> { protected Void doInBackground(Void... args) { if (pjsua_app.initApp() != 0) { return null; } else { } pjsua_app.startPjsua(ApjsuaActivity.CFG_FNAME); finished = true; return null; } @Override protected void onPostExecute(Void result) { super.onPostExecute(result); Log.i(TAG, "On POst "); } } What is annoying is that in most cases it is not the missing library, it's tried to able to load the lib crashing in between. any one know the reason ?

    Read the article

  • Implementing deadlock condition

    - by Bhaskar
    I am trying to implementing deadlock condition but somehow I am not able to get it working. Both the threads Thread1 and Thread2 are entering in the run function but only one of them enters in Sub/Sum depending on who entered run first. Example : if Thread2 entered run first the it will call sub() and Thread1 never calls sum(). I have also added sleep time so that Thread2 sleeps before calling sum() and Thread1 gets enough time to enter Sum() but Thread1 never enters. public class ExploringThreads { public static void main(String[] args) { // TODO Auto-generated method stub threadexample a1 = new threadexample(); Thread t1 = new Thread(a1, "Thread1"); Thread t2 = new Thread(a1,"Thread2"); t1.start(); t2.start(); } } class threadexample implements Runnable{ public int a = 10; public void run(){ if(Thread.currentThread().getName().equals("Thread1")) sum(); else if(Thread.currentThread().getName().equals("Thread2")) sub(); } public synchronized void sum() { try { Thread.sleep(2000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { // TODO Auto-generated catch block e.printStackTrace(); } System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName()+"In Sum"); sub(); } public synchronized void sub() { try { Thread.sleep(2000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { // TODO Auto-generated catch block e.printStackTrace(); } System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName()+"In Sub"); sum(); } }

    Read the article

  • How to check if a thread is busy in C#?

    - by Sam
    I have a Windows Forms UI running on a thread, Thread1. I have another thread, Thread2, that gets tons of data via external events that needs to update the Windows UI. (It actually updates multiple UI threads.) I have a third thread, Thread3, that I use as a buffer thread between Thread1 and Thread2 so that Thread2 can continue to update other threads (via the same method). My buffer thread, Thread3, looks like this: public class ThreadBuffer { public ThreadBuffer(frmUI form, CustomArgs e) { form.Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate { form.UpdateUI(e); }); } } What I would like to do is for my ThreadBuffer to check whether my form is currently busy doing previous updates. If it is, I'd like for it to wait until it frees up and then invoke the UpdateUI(e). I was thinking about either: a) //PseudoCode while(form==busy) { // Do nothing; } form.Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate { form.UpdateUI(e); }); How would I check the form==busy? Also, I am not sure that this is a good approach. b) Create an event in form1 that will notify the ThreadBuffer that it is ready to process. // psuedocode List<CustomArgs> elist = new List<CustomArgs>(); public ThreadBuffer(frmUI form, CustomArgs e) { from.OnFreedUp += from_OnFreedUp(); elist.Add(e); } private form_OnFreedUp() { if (elist.count == 0) return; form.Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate { form.UpdateUI(elist[0]); }); elist.Remove(elist[0]); } In this case, how would I write an event that will notify that the form is free? and c) an other ideas?

    Read the article

  • executorservice to read data from database in chuncks and run process on them

    - by TazMan
    I'm trying to write a process that would read data from a database and upload it onto a cloud datastore. How can I decide the partition strategy of the data? I want to query the table in chunks and process each chunk in 10 threads. Each thread basically will send the data to an individual node on a 10 node cluster on the cloud.. Where in the below multi threading code will the dataquery to extract and send 10 concurrent requests for uploading data to cloud would be? public class Caller { public static void main(String[] args) { ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(10); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { Runnable worker = new DomainCDCProcessor(i); executor.execute(worker); } executor.shutdown(); while (!executor.isTerminated()) { } System.out.println("Finished all threads"); } }

    Read the article

  • How to terminate a managed thread blocked in unmanaged code?

    - by James Curran
    I have a managed thread which is waiting, blocked, in an unmanaged code (specifically, it on a call to NamedPipeServerStream.WaitForConnection() which ultimitely calls into unmanaged code, and does not offer a timeout). I want to shut the thread down neatly. Thread.Abort() has no effect until the code returns to the managed realm, which it won't do until a client makes a connection, which we can't wait for). I need a way "shock" it out of the unmanaged code; or a way to just kill the thread even while it's in unmanaged land.

    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

  • Best way to reuse a Runnable

    - by Gandalf
    I have a class that implements Runnable and am currently using an Executor as my thread pool to run tasks (indexing documents into Lucene). executor.execute(new LuceneDocIndexer(doc, writer)); My issue is that my Runnable class creates many Lucene Field objects and I would rather reuse them then create new ones every call. What's the best way to reuse these objects (Field objects are not thread safe so I cannot simple make them static) - should I create my own ThreadFactory? I notice that after a while the program starts to degrade drastically and the only thing I can think of is it's GC overhead. I am currently trying to profile the project to be sure this is even an issue - but for now lets just assume it is.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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