Search Results

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

Page 51/66 | < Previous Page | 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • SQL Server stored procedure in multi threaded environments

    - by Shamika
    Hi, I need to execute some Sql server stored procs in a thread safe manner. At the moment I'm using software locks (C# locks) to achieve this but wonder what kind of features provided by the Sql server itself to achieve thread safety. It seems to be there are some table and row locking features built in to Sql server. Also from a performance perspective what is best approach? Software locks? Or Sql Server built in locks? Thanks, Shamika

    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

  • WPF: issue updating UI from background thread

    - by Ted Shaffer
    My code launches a background thread. The background thread makes changes and wants the UI in the main thread to update. The code that launches the thread then waits looks something like: Thread fThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(PerformSync)); fThread.IsBackground = true; fThread.Start(); fThread.Join(); MessageBox.Show("Synchronization complete"); When the background wants to update the UI, it sets a StatusMessage and calls the code below: static StatusMessage _statusMessage; public delegate void AddStatusDelegate(); private void AddStatus() { AddStatusDelegate methodForUIThread = delegate { _statusMessageList.Add(_statusMessage); }; this.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(methodForUIThread, System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherPriority.Send); } _statusMessageList is an ObservableCollection that is the source for a ListBox. The AddStatus method is called but the code on the main thread never executes - that is, _statusMessage is not added to _statusMessageList while the thread is executing. However, once it is complete (fThread.Join() returns), all the stacked up calls on the main thread are executed. But, if I display a message box between the calls to fThread.Start() and fThread.Join(), then the status messages are updated properly. What do I need to change so that the code in the main thread executes (UI updates) while waiting for the thread to terminate? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • passing parameters to a thread

    - by assassin
    I want to pass a function that takes a parameter to the ThreadStart Constructor in C#. But, it seems that this is not possible, as I get a syntax error it I try to do something like this Thread t1 = new Thread(new Thread Start(func1(obj1)); where obj1 is an object of type List<string> (say). If I want a thread to execute this function that takes in an object as a parameter, and I plan to create 2 such threads simultaneously with different parameter values what is the best method to achieve this?

    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 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

  • Is this use of PreparedStatements in a Thread in JAVA correct?

    - by Gormcito
    I'm still an undergrad just working part time and so I'm always trying to be aware of better ways to do things. Recently I had to write a program for work where the main thread of the program would spawn "task" threads (for each db "task" record) which would perform some operations and then update the record to say that it has finished. Therefore I needed a database connection object and PreparedStatement objects in or available to the ThreadedTask objects. This is roughly what I ended up writing, is creating a PreparedStatement object per thread a waste? I thought static PreparedStatments could create race conditions... Thread A stmt.setInt(); Thread B stmt.setInt(); Thread A stmt.execute(); Thread B stmt.execute(); A´s version never gets execed.. Is this thread safe? Is creating and destroying PreparedStatement objects that are always the same not a huge waste? public class ThreadedTask implements runnable { private final PreparedStatement taskCompleteStmt; public ThreadedTask() { //... taskCompleteStmt = Main.db.prepareStatement(...); } public run() { //... taskCompleteStmt.executeUpdate(); } } public class Main { public static final db = DriverManager.getConnection(...); }

    Read the article

  • C# Spawn Multiple Threads for work then wait until all finished

    - by pharoc
    just want some advice on "best practice" regarding multi-threading tasks. as an example, we have a C# application that upon startup reads data from various "type" table in our database and stores the information in a collection which we pass around the application. this prevents us from hitting the database each time this information is required. at the moment the application is reading data from 10 tables synchronously. i would really like to have the application read from each table in a different thread all running in parallel. the application would wait for all the threads to complete before continuing with the startup of the application. i have looked into BackGroundWorker but just want some advice on accomplishing the above. Does the method sound logical in order to speed up the startup time of our application How can we best handle all the threads keeping in mind that each thread's work is independent of one another, we just need to wait for all the threads to complete before continuing. i look forward to some answers

    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

  • Multi-threading concept and lock in c#

    - by Neeraj
    I read about lock, though not understood nothing at all. My question is why do we use a un-used object and lock that and how this makes something thread-safe or how this helps in multi-threading ? Isn't there other way to make thread-safe code. public class test { private object Lock { get; set; } ... lock (this.Lock) { ... } ... } Sorry is my question is very stupid, but i don't understand, although i've used it many times.

    Read the article

  • How to end a thread in perl

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

    Read the article

  • wxpython - Running threads sequentially without blocking GUI

    - by ryantmer
    I've got a GUI script with all my wxPython code in it, and a separate testSequences module that has a bunch of tasks that I run based on input from the GUI. The tasks take a long time to complete (from 20 seconds to 3 minutes), so I want to thread them, otherwise the GUI locks up while they're running. I also need them to run one after another, since they all use the same hardware. (My rationale behind threading is simply to prevent the GUI from locking up.) I'd like to have a "Running" message (with varying number of periods after it, i.e. "Running", "Running.", "Running..", etc.) so the user knows that progress is occurring, even though it isn't visible. I'd like this script to run the test sequences in separate threads, but sequentially, so that the second thread won't be created and run until the first is complete. Since this is kind of the opposite of the purpose of threads, I can't really find any information on how to do this... Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance! gui.py import testSequences from threading import Thread #wxPython code for setting everything up here... for j in range(5): testThread = Thread(target=testSequences.test1) testThread.start() while testThread.isAlive(): #wait until the previous thread is complete time.sleep(0.5) i = (i+1) % 4 self.status.SetStatusText("Running"+'.'*i) testSequences.py import time def test1(): for i in range(10): print i time.sleep(1) (Obviously this isn't the actual test code, but the idea is the same.)

    Read the article

  • Crossthread exception and invokerequired solution doesn't change my control value

    - by Pilouk
    EDIT Solution : Here i'm setting my byref value in each object then i'm running a backgroundworker Private Sub TelechargeFichier() Dim DocManquant As Boolean = False Dim docName As String = "" Dim lg As String = "" Dim telechargementFini As Boolean = False lblMessage.Text = EasyDealChangeLanguage.Instance.GetStringFromResourceName("1478") prgBar.Maximum = m_listeFichiers.Count For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeFichiers.Count - 1 m_listeFichiers(i).Set_ByRefLabel(lblMessage) m_listeFichiers(i).Set_ByRefPrgbar(prgBar) m_listeThreads.Add(New Thread(AddressOf m_listeFichiers(i).DownloadMe)) Next m_bgWorker = New BackgroundWorker m_bgWorker.WorkerReportsProgress = True AddHandler m_bgWorker.DoWork, AddressOf DownloadFiles m_bgWorker.RunWorkerAsync() ''Completed 'lblMessage.Text = EasyDealChangeLanguage.Instance.GetStringFromResourceName("1383") 'Me.DialogResult = System.Windows.Forms.DialogResult.OK End Sub Here is my downloadFiles function : Note that each start will do the downloadMe function see below too Private Sub DownloadFiles(sender As Object, e As DoWorkEventArgs) For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeThreads.Count - 1 m_listeThreads(i).Start() Next For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeThreads.Count - 1 m_listeThreads(i).Join() Next End Sub I have multiple thread that each will download a ftp file. I would like that each file that have been completed will set a value to a progress bar and a label from my UI thread. For some reason invokerequired never change to false. Here is my little function that start all the thread Private Sub TelechargeFichier() Dim DocManquant As Boolean = False Dim docName As String = "" Dim lg As String = "" Dim telechargementFini As Boolean = False lblMessage.Text = EasyDealChangeLanguage.Instance.GetStringFromResourceName("1478") prgBar.Maximum = m_listeFichiers.Count For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeFichiers.Count - 1 m_listeFichiers(i).Set_ByRefLabel(lblMessage) m_listeFichiers(i).Set_ByRefPrgbar(prgBar) m_listeThreads.Add(New Thread(AddressOf m_listeFichiers(i).DownloadMe)) Next For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeThreads.Count - 1 m_listeThreads(i).Start() Next For i As Integer = 0 To m_listeThreads.Count - 1 m_listeThreads(i).Join() Next 'Completed lblMessage.Text = EasyDealChangeLanguage.Instance.GetStringFromResourceName("1383") Me.DialogResult = System.Windows.Forms.DialogResult.OK End Sub Here my property that hold the Byref control from the UI thread. This is in my object which content the addressof function that will download the file (DownloadMe) Public Sub Set_ByRefPrgbar(ByRef prgbar As ProgressBar) m_prgBar = prgbar End Sub Public Sub Set_ByRefLabel(ByRef lbl As EasyDeal.Controls.EasyDealLabel3D) m_lblMessage = lbl End Sub Here is the download function : Public Sub DownloadMe() Dim ftpReq As FtpWebRequest Dim ftpResp As FtpWebResponse = Nothing Dim streamInput As Stream Dim fileStreamOutput As FileStream Try ftpReq = CType(WebRequest.Create(EasyDeal.Controls.Common.FTP_CONNECTION & m_downloadFtpPath & m_filename), FtpWebRequest) ftpReq.Credentials = New NetworkCredential(FTP_USER, FTP_PASS) ftpReq.Method = WebRequestMethods.Ftp.DownloadFile ftpResp = ftpReq.GetResponse streamInput = ftpResp.GetResponseStream() fileStreamOutput = New FileStream(m_outputPath, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.ReadWrite) ReadWriteStream(streamInput, fileStreamOutput) Catch ex As Exception 'Au pire la fichier sera pas downloader Finally If ftpResp IsNot Nothing Then ftpResp.Close() End If Dim nomFichier As String = m_displaynameEN If EasyDealChangeLanguage.GetCurrentLanguageTypes = EasyDealChangeLanguage.EnumLanguageType.Francais Then nomFichier = m_displaynameFR End If If m_lblMessage IsNot Nothing Then EasyDealCommon.TH_SetControlText(m_lblMessage, String.Format(EasyDealChangeLanguage.Instance.GetStringFromResourceName("1479"), nomFichier)) End If If m_prgBar IsNot Nothing Then EasyDealCommon.TH_SetPrgValue(m_prgBar, 1) End If End Try End Sub Here is the crossthread invoke solution function : Public Sub TH_SetControlText(ByVal ctl As Control, ByVal text As String) If ctl.InvokeRequired Then ctl.BeginInvoke(New Action(Of Control, String)(AddressOf TH_SetControlText), ctl, text) Else ctl.Text = text End If End Sub Public Sub TH_SetPrgValue(ByVal prg As ProgressBar, ByVal value As Integer) If prg.InvokeRequired Then prg.BeginInvoke(New Action(Of ProgressBar, Integer)(AddressOf TH_SetPrgValue), prg, value) Else prg.Value += value End If End Sub The problem is the invokerequired never get to false it actually goes in to beginInvoke but never end in the Else section to set the value.

    Read the article

  • Does thread pool size keep growing for scheduledthreadpoolexecutor?

    - by Sourajit Basak
    Imagine a situation where tasks are being added to scheduledthreadpoolexecutor. Each of these tasks will keep on running at different periodic intervals. Although all such tasks will not be running at the same time because each is set at different intervals, there may be a situation where a high number of threads are competing for execution. Is there any restriction on total number of threads ? It seems there is a restriction on the total number of idle threads. And does this concept of idle thread imply that long running tasks (thread) may be destroyed and recreated when needed ?

    Read the article

  • Threadpool with pasistant worker instances

    - by Matt Smokey-waters Holmes
    So basically what im trying to do is queue up tasks in a thread pool to be executed as soon as a worker becomes free, i have found various examples of this but in all cases the examples have been setup to use a new Worker instance for each job, i want persistent workers. Im trying to make a ftp backup tool, i have it working but because of the limitations of a single connection it is slow. What i ideally want to do is have a single connection for scanning directories and building up a file list then four workers to download said files. Here is an example of my worker /** * FTP Worker */ public class Worker implements Runnable { protected FTPClient _ftp; // Connection details protected String _host = ""; protected String _user = ""; protected String _pass = ""; // worker status protected boolean _working = false; public Worker(String host, String user, String pass) { this._host = host; this._user = user; this._pass = pass; } // Check if the worker is in use public boolean inUse() { return this._working; } @Override public void run() { this._ftp = new FTPClient(); this._connect(); } // Download a file from the ftp server public boolean download(String base, String path, String file) { this._working = true; boolean outcome = true; //create directory if not exists File pathDir = new File(base + path); if (!pathDir.exists()) { pathDir.mkdirs(); } //download file try { OutputStream output = new FileOutputStream(base + path + file); this._ftp.retrieveFile(file, output); output.close(); } catch (Exception e) { outcome = false; } finally { this._working = false; return outcome; } } // Connect to the server protected boolean _connect() { try { this._ftp.connect(this._host); this._ftp.login(this._user, this._pass); } catch (Exception e) { return false; } return this._ftp.isConnected(); } // Disconnect from the server protected void _disconnect() { try { this._ftp.disconnect(); } catch (Exception e) { /* do nothing */ } } } and basically i want to be able to call Worker.download(...) for each task in a queue whenever a worker becomes available without having to create a new connection to the ftp server for each download Any help would be appreciated as iv'e never used threads before and I'm going round in circles at the moment

    Read the article

  • Download multiple files in background in Android

    - by Addev
    Basically I'm trying to make a little app for watching offline content. So there's a moment where the user selects to download the contents (and the app should download about 300 small files and images). I'd like to show the user how does the process go if he enters the proper activity. Showing a list of all the files, telling what has been already downloaded, in progress or waiting for download. My problem is that I really don't know what approach to take for achieve this. Since the download should last until finished I imagine the solution is an Service, but whats best? an IntentService, a Bound Service or an Standard Service calling a startService() for each download? And how can I keep my objects updated for displaying them later? should I use a database or objects in memory? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Can I have multiple instance of the mandlebrot example in one program?

    - by yan bellavance
    Basically what I did is I took the Mandlebrot example and have 3 instances of it in my program. So the program would look like a mainwindow that has 3 mandlebrot widgets in it, one besides the other. Is it possible that GDB doesnt support debugging multiple intances of a classe that derives from qthread or is it thread-unsafe to do so? I don't have any problems at run-time but when I put breakpoints in a function called by the QThread run() function I get a segmentation fault. I can clearly see that the function doesn't complete before returning to the breakpoint ie I the program stops at the breakpoint, I step into the lines of codes one by one but after a couple of instructions another thread startS using the function(even though they are different instances).

    Read the article

  • boost scoped_lock mutex crashes

    - by JahSumbar
    hello, I have protected a std::queue's access functions, push, pop, size, with boost::mutexes and boost::mutex::scoped_lock in these functions from time to time it crashes in a scoped lock the call stack is this: 0 0x0040f005 boost::detail::win32::interlocked_bit_test_and_set include/boost/thread/win32/thread_primitives.hpp 361 1 0x0040e879 boost::detail::basic_timed_mutex::timed_lock include/boost/thread/win32/basic_timed_mutex.hpp 68 2 0x0040e9d3 boost::detail::basic_timed_mutex::lock include/boost/thread/win32/basic_timed_mutex.hpp 64 3 0x0040b96b boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex>::lock include/boost/thread/locks.hpp 349 4 0x0040b998 unique_lock include/boost/thread/locks.hpp 227 5 0x00403837 MyClass::inboxSize - this is my inboxSize function that uses this code: MyClass::inboxSize () { boost::mutex::scoped_lock scoped_lock(m_inboxMutex); return m_inbox.size(); } and the mutex is declared like this: boost::mutex m_inboxMutex; it crashes at the last pasted line in this function: inline bool interlocked_bit_test_and_set(long* x,long bit) { long const value=1<<bit; long old=*x; and x has this value: 0xababac17 Thanks for the help

    Read the article

  • "pseudo-atomic" operations in C++

    - by dan
    So I'm aware that nothing is atomic in C++. But I'm trying to figure out if there are any "pseudo-atomic" assumptions I can make. The reason is that I want to avoid using mutexes in some simple situations where I only need very weak guarantees. 1) Suppose I have globally defined volatile bool b, which initially I set true. Then I launch a thread which executes a loop while(b) doSomething(); Meanwhile, in another thread, I execute b=true. Can I assume that the first thread will continue to execute? In other words, if b starts out as true, and the first thread checks the value of b at the same time as the second thread assigns b=true, can I assume that the first thread will read the value of b as true? Or is it possible that at some intermediate point of the assignment b=true, the value of b might be read as false? 2) Now suppose that b is initially false. Then the first thread executes bool b1=b; bool b2=b; if(b1 && !b2) bad(); while the second thread executes b=true. Can I assume that bad() never gets called? 3) What about an int or other builtin types: suppose I have volatile int i, which is initially (say) 7, and then I assign i=7. Can I assume that, at any time during this operation, from any thread, the value of i will be equal to 7? 4) I have volatile int i=7, and then I execute i++ from some thread, and all other threads only read the value of i. Can I assume that i never has any value, in any thread, except for either 7 or 8? 5) I have volatile int i, from one thread I execute i=7, and from another I execute i=8. Afterwards, is i guaranteed to be either 7 or 8 (or whatever two values I have chosen to assign)?

    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

< Previous Page | 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58  | Next Page >