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 53/66 | < Previous Page | 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • Does the Java Memory Model (JSR-133) imply that entering a monitor flushes the CPU data cache(s)?

    - by Durandal
    There is something that bugs me with the Java memory model (if i even understand everything correctly). If there are two threads A and B, there are no guarantees that B will ever see a value written by A, unless both A and B synchronize on the same monitor. For any system architecture that guarantees cache coherency between threads, there is no problem. But if the architecture does not support cache coherency in hardware, this essentially means that whenever a thread enters a monitor, all memory changes made before must be commited to main memory, and the cache must be invalidated. And it needs to be the entire data cache, not just a few lines, since the monitor has no information which variables in memory it guards. But that would surely impact performance of any application that needs to synchronize frequently (especially things like job queues with short running jobs). So can Java work reasonably well on architectures without hardware cache-coherency? If not, why doesn't the memory model make stronger guarantees about visibility? Wouldn't it be more efficient if the language would require information what is guarded by a monitor? As i see it the memory model gives us the worst of both worlds, the absolute need to synchronize, even if cache coherency is guaranteed in hardware, and on the other hand bad performance on incoherent architectures (full cache flushes). So shouldn't it be more strict (require information what is guarded by a monitor) or more lose and restrict potential platforms to cache-coherent architectures? As it is now, it doesn't make too much sense to me. Can somebody clear up why this specific memory model was choosen? EDIT: My use of strict and lose was a bad choice in retrospect. I used "strict" for the case where less guarantees are made and "lose" for the opposite. To avoid confusion, its probably better to speak in terms of stronger or weaker guarantees.

    Read the article

  • Multithreaded update of multiple ProgressBars

    - by ClaudeS
    I have developped an application that can process data (in my case image algorithms performed on videos). I have developed different ProcessingMethods. Sometimes several videos are processed in parallel. Each process runs in a seperate thread. I have a GUI with several ProgressBars, one for each thread that is processing data. What is a good way to update the ProgressBar? Today my GUI is creating all the processing threads and one progressBars for each thread. Then I pass those progressBars to the threads, which pass them to the ProcessingMethod. The ProcessingMethod will then update the progressbar (using Invoke(..)). I have different processingMethods. Within each of these methods I have copy-paste code to update the progressBar. Although I am a new to programming, I know copy-paste is not good. What is a good way to make it better?

    Read the article

  • Rails: Thread won't affect database unless joined to main Thread

    - by hatboysam
    I have a background operation I would like to occur every 20 seconds in Rails given that some condition is true. It kicked off when a certain controller route is hit, and it looks like this def startProcess argId = self.id t = Thread.new do while (Argument.isRunning(argId)) do Argument.update(argId) Argument.markVotes(argId) puts "Thread ran" sleep 20 end end end However, this code does absolutely nothing to my database unless I call "t.join" in which case my whole server is blocked for a long time (but it works). Why can't the read commit ActiveRecords without being joined to the main thread? The thread calls methods that look something like def sample model = Model.new() model.save() end but the models are not saved to the DB unless the thread is joined to the main thread. Why is this? I have been banging my head about this for hours.

    Read the article

  • What is the absolute fastest way to implement a concurrent queue with ONLY one consumer and one producer?

    - by JohnPristine
    java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentLinkedQueue comes to mind, but is it really optimum for this two-thread scenario? I am looking for the minimum latency possible on both sides (producer and consumer). If the queue is empty you can immediately return null AND if the queue is full you can immediately discard the entry you are offering. Does ConcurrentLinkedQueue use super fast and light locks (AtomicBoolean) ? Has anyone benchmarked ConcurrentLinkedQueue or knows about the ultimate fastest way of doing that? Additional Details: I imagine the queue should be a fair one, meaning the consumer should not make the consumer wait any longer than it needs (by front-running it) and vice-versa.

    Read the article

  • Debug.writeline locks

    - by Carra
    My program frequently stops with a deadlock. When I do a break-all and look at the threads I see that three threads are stuck in our logging function: public class Logging { public static void WriteClientLog(LogLevel logLevel, string message) { #if DEBUG System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine(String.Format("{0} {1}", DateTime.Now.ToString("HH:mm:ss"), message)); //LOCK #endif //...Log4net logging } } If I let the program continue the threads are still stuck on that line. I can't see where this can lock. The debug class, string class & datetime class seem to be thread safe. The error goes away when I remove the "#if DEBUG System... #endif" code but I'm curious why this behavior happens. Thread one: public void CleanCache() { Logging.WriteClientLog(LogLevel.Debug, "Start clean cache.");//Stuck } Thread two: private void AliveThread() { Logging.WriteClientLog(LogLevel.Debug, "Check connection");//Stuck }

    Read the article

  • Faking a Single Address Space

    - by dsimcha
    I have a large scientific computing task that parallelizes very well with SMP, but at too fine grained a level to be easily parallelized via explicit message passing. I'd like to parallelize it across address spaces and physical machines. Is it feasible to create a scheduler that would parallelize already multithreaded code across multiple physical computers under the following conditions: The code is already multithreaded and can scale pretty well on SMP configurations. The fact that not all of the threads are running in the same address space or on the same physical machine must be transparent to the program, even if this comes at a significant performance penalty in some use cases. You may assume that all of the physical machines involved are running operating systems and CPU architectures that are binary compatible. Things like locks and atomic operations may be slow (having network latency to deal with and all) but must "just work".

    Read the article

  • Will lock() statement block all threads in the proccess/appdomain?

    - by MikeJ
    Maybe the question sounds silly, but I don't understand 'something about threads and locking and I would like to get a confirmation (here's why I ask). So, if I have 10 servers and 10 request in the same time come to each server, that's 100 request across the farm. Without locking, thats 100 request to the database. If I do something like this: private static readonly object myLockHolder = new object(); if (Cache[key] == null) { lock(myLockHolder) { if (Cache[key] == null) { Cache[key] = LengthyDatabaseCall(); } } } How many database requests will I do? 10? 100? Or as much as I have threads?

    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

  • Does async and await incease performance of an ASP.Net application

    - by Kerezo
    I recently read a article about c#-5 and new $ nice asynchronous programming. I see it works greate in windows application. The question came to me before is if this feature can increase ASP.Net performance? consider this code: public T GetData() { var d = GetSomeData(); return d; } and public async T GetData2() { var d = await GetSomeData(); return d; } Has in an ASP.Net appication that two codes difference? thanks

    Read the article

  • Qt: How to use QTimer to print a message to a QTextBrowser every 10 seconds?

    - by Aaron McKellar
    Hello, I have working at this for hours and cannot figure it out nor can I find any help online that works. Basically the gist of what I am trying to accomplish is to have a Qt GUI with a button and a QTextBrowser. When I push the button I want it to diplay a message and then keep printing this message every 10 seconds. I figured I would use QTimer because it makes sense to have a timer to diplay the message every 10 seconds. When I originally implemented this into my buttonClicked() SLOT it caused the program to freeze. I looked online for a solution and found QApplication::processEvents(). So basically in my function I had something like this: while(1) { QTimer *timer; connect(...) //omitted parameters for this example timer.start(10000); ui->diplay->append("Message"); while(timer.isActive()) { QApplication::processEvents() } } I figured it would break out of the timer.isActive() while loop but it won't it simply stays in there. So I figured this is a threading issue. So I figured out how to use QThreads but I still can't get it to work. Basically when I create a thread with a timer on it and the thread tells the timer to start, the program closes and the console says "The program has unexpectedly finished". There has to be an easy way to do this but my track record with Qt has always been that th

    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

  • Java: "implements Runnable" vs. "extends Thread"

    - by goosefraba19
    From what time I've spent with threads in Java, I've found these two ways to write threads. public class ThreadA implements Runnable { public void run() { //Code } } //with a "new Thread(threadA).start()" call public class ThreadB extends Thread { public ThreadB() { super("ThreadB"); } public void run() { //Code } } //with a "threadB.start()" call Is there any significant difference in these two blocks of code?

    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

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

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

    Read the article

  • 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

  • How does lock(syncRoot) make sense on a static method?

    - by Rising Star
    The following code is excerpted from the (Windows Identity Foundation SDK) template that MS uses to create a new Security Token Service Web Site. public static CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration Current { get { HttpApplicationState httpAppState = HttpContext.Current.Application; CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration customConfiguration = httpAppState.Get( CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfigurationKey ) as CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration; if ( customConfiguration == null ) { lock ( syncRoot ) { customConfiguration = httpAppState.Get( CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfigurationKey ) as CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration; if ( customConfiguration == null ) { customConfiguration = new CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration(); httpAppState.Add( CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfigurationKey, customConfiguration ); } } } return customConfiguration; } } I'm relatively new to multi-threaded programming. I assume that the reason for the lock statement is to make this code thread-safe in the event that two web requests arrive at the web site at the same time. However, I would have thought that using lock (syncRoot) would not make sense because syncRoot refers to the current instance that this method is operating on... but this is a static method? How does this make sense?

    Read the article

  • Manually Increasing the Amount of CPU a Java Application Uses

    - by SkylineAddict
    I've just made a program with Eclipse that takes a really long time to execute. It's taking even longer because it's loading my CPU to 25% only (I'm assuming that is because I'm using a quad-core and the program is only using one core). Is there any way to make the program use all 4 cores to max it out? Java is supposed to be natively multi-threaded, so I don't understand why it would only use 25%.

    Read the article

  • Can I overwrite an Object that has been Locked() in C#?

    - by makerofthings7
    I have a few objects that I'd like to send to the server, but I want to make sure that this is the only thread that moving the data from Stage to Upload. Is the following code valid in a multithreaded environment? List<CounterInternal> UploadToServer = new List<CounterInternal>(); List<CounterInternal> StagingQueue = new List<CounterInternal>(); lock (this.UploadToServer) lock (this.StagingQueue) { if (UploadToServer.Count == 0) { UploadToServer = StagingQueue.DoDeepCopyExtensionMethod(); // is the following line valid given that I have a Lock() on it? StagingQueue = new List<CounterInternal>(); } } }

    Read the article

  • How do I read and write to a file using threads in java?

    - by WarmWaffles
    I'm writing an application where I need to read blocks in from a single file, each block is roughly 512 bytes. I am also needing to write blocks simultaneously. One of the ideas I had was BlockReader implements Runnable and BlockWriter implements Runnable and BlockManager manages both the reader and writer. The problem that I am seeing with most examples that I have found was locking problems and potential deadlock situations. Any ideas how to implement this?

    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 | 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60  | Next Page >