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 55/66 | < Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >

  • C# Multi threading- Move objects between threads

    - by Grant
    Hi, i am working with a winforms control that is both a GUI element and also does some internal processing that has not been exposed to the developer. When this component is instantiated it may take between 5 and 15 seconds to become ready so what i want to do is put it on another thread and when its done bring it back to the gui thread and place it on my form. The problem is that this will (and has) cause a cross thread exception. Normally when i work with worker threads its just with simple data objects i can push back when processing is complete and then use with controls already on the main thread but ive never needed to move an entire control in this fashion. Does anyone know if this is possible and if so how? If not how does one deal with a problem like this where there is the potential to lock the main gui?

    Read the article

  • Is there a straightforward way to have a ThreadStatic instance member?

    - by Dan Tao
    With the ThreadStatic attribute I can have a static member of a class with one instance of the object per thread. This is really handy for achieving thread safety using types of objects that don't guarantee thread-safe instance methods (e.g., System.Random). It only works for static members, though. Is there some corresponding attribute that provides the same functionality, but for instance members? In other words, that allows me to have one instance of the object, per thread, per instance of the containing class?

    Read the article

  • lock statement not working when there is a loop inside it?

    - by Ngu Soon Hui
    See this code: public class multiply { public Thread myThread; public int Counter { get; private set; } public string name { get; private set; } public void RunConsolePrint() { lock(this) { RunLockCode("lock"); } } private void RunLockCode(string lockCode) { Console.WriteLine("Now thread "+lockCode+" " + name + " has started"); for (int i = 1; i <= Counter; i++) { Console.WriteLine(lockCode+" "+name + ": count has reached " + i + ": total count is " + Counter); } Console.WriteLine("Thread " + lockCode + " " + name + " has finished"); } public multiply(string pname, int pCounter) { name = pname; Counter = pCounter; myThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(RunConsolePrint)); } } And this is the test run code: static void Main(string[] args) { int counter = 50; multiply m2 = new multiply("Second", counter); multiply m1 = new multiply("First", counter); m1.myThread.Start(); m2.myThread.Start(); Console.ReadLine(); } I would expect that m2 must execute from start to finish before m1 starts executing, or vice versa, because of the lock statement. But the result I found was the call to lock first and lock second was intermingled together, i.e., something like this Now thread lock First has started Now thread lock Second has started lock First: Count has reached 1: total count is 50 lock First: Count has reached 2: total count is 50 lock Second: Count has reached 1: total count is 50 What did I do wrong?

    Read the article

  • Java: multi-threaded maps: how do the implementations compare?

    - by user346629
    I'm looking for a good hash map implementation. Specifically, one that's good for creating a large number of maps, most of them small. So memory is an issue. It should be thread-safe (though losing the odd put might be an OK compromise in return for better performance), and fast for both get and put. And I'd also like the moon on a stick, please, with a side-order of justice. The options I know are: HashMap. Disastrously un-thread safe. ConcurrentHashMap. My first choice, but this has a hefty memory footprint - about 2k per instance. Collections.sychronizedMap(HashMap). That's working OK for me, but I'm sure there must be faster alternatives. Trove or Colt - I think neither of these are thread-safe, but perhaps the code could be adapted to be thread safe. Any others? Any advice on what beats what when? Any really good new hash map algorithms that Java could use an implementation of? Thanks in advance for your input!

    Read the article

  • Help regarding multi-threading in MFC,please help me firends!

    - 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

  • "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

  • Registering an event from different thread

    - by ET
    Hi, I have a question regarding events in c#. Lets say I have an object obj1 of a class that exposes an event, and this object is running on thread t1. Now on different thread t2, there is another object called obj2 that is registered for the event of obj1. Is it promised that obj2 will get the event when it will be raised? thanks.

    Read the article

  • Thread-Safe lazy instantiating using MEF

    - by Xaqron
    // Member Variable private static readonly object _syncLock = new object(); // Now inside a static method foreach (var lazyObject in plugins) { if ((string)lazyObject.Metadata["key"] = "something") { lock (_syncLock) { // It seems the `IsValueCreated` is not up-to-date if (!lazyObject.IsValueCreated) lazyObject.value.DoSomething(); } return lazyObject.value; } } Here I need synchronized access per loop. There are many threads iterating this loop and based on the key they are looking for, a lazy instance is created and returned. lazyObject should not be created more that one time. Although Lazy class is for doing so and despite of the used lock, under high threading I have more than one instance created (I track this with a Interlocked.Increment on a volatile static int and log it somewhere). The problem is I don't have access to definition of Lazy and MEF defines how the Lazy class create objects. I should notice the CompositionContainer has a thread-safe option in constructor which is already used. My questions: 1) Why the lock doesn't work ? 2) Should I use an array of locks instead of one lock for performance improvement ?

    Read the article

  • Please tell me what is wrong with my threading!!!

    - by kiddo
    I have a function where I will compress a bunch of files into a single compressed file..it is taking a long time(to compress),so I tried implementing threading in my application..Say if I have 20 files for compression,I separated that as 5*4=20,inorder to do that I have separate variables(which are used for compression) for all 4 threads in order to avoid locks and I will wait until the 4 thread finishes..Now..the threads are working but i see no improvement in their performance..normally it will take 1 min for 20 files(for example) after implementing threading ...there is only 5 or 3 sec difference., sometimes the same. here i will show the code for 1 thread(so it is for other3 threads) //main thread myClassObject->thread1 = AfxBeginThread((AFX_THREADPROC)MyThreadFunction1,myClassObject); .... HANDLE threadHandles[4]; threadHandles[0] = myClassObject->thread1->m_hThread; .... WaitForSingleObject(myClassObject->thread1->m_hThread,INFINITE); UINT MyThreadFunction(LPARAM lparam) { CMerger* myClassObject = (CMerger*)lparam; CString outputPath = myClassObject->compressedFilePath.GetAt(0);//contains the o/p path wchar_t* compressInputData[] = {myClassObject->thread1outPath, COMPRESS,(wchar_t*)(LPCTSTR)(outputPath)}; HINSTANCE loadmyDll; loadmydll = LoadLibrary(myClassObject->thread1outPath); fp_Decompress callCompressAction = NULL; int getCompressResult=0; myClassObject->MyCompressFunction(compressInputData,loadClient7zdll,callCompressAction,myClassObject->thread1outPath, getCompressResult,minIndex,myClassObject->firstThread,myClassObject); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • New form on a different thread

    - by Dan
    So I have a thread in my application, which purpose is to listen to messages from the server and act according to what it recieves. I ran into a problem when I wanted to fire off a message from the server, that when the client app recieves it, the client app would open up a new form. However this new form just freezes instantly. I think what's happening is that the new form is loaded up on the same thread as the thread listening to the server, which of course is busy listening on the stream, in turn blocking the thread. Normally, for my other functions in the clients listening thread, I'd use invokes to update the UI of the main form, so I guess what I'm asking for is if here's a way to invoke a new form on the main form.

    Read the article

  • Is it thread safe to read a form controls value (but not change it) without using Invoke/BeginInvoke from another thread

    - by goku_da_master
    I know you can read a gui control from a worker thread without using Invoke/BeginInvoke because my app is doing it now. The cross thread exception error is not being thrown and my System.Timers.Timer thread is able to read gui control values just fine (unlike this guy: can a worker thread read a control in the GUI?) Question 1: Given the cardinal rule of threads, should I be using Invoke/BeginInvoke to read form control values? And does this make it more thread-safe? The background to this question stems from a problem my app is having. It seems to randomly corrupt form controls another thread is referencing. (see question 2) Question 2: I have a second thread that needs to update form control values so I Invoke/BeginInvoke to update those values. Well this same thread needs a reference to those controls so it can update them. It holds a list of these controls (say DataGridViewRow objects). Sometimes (not always), the DataGridViewRow reference gets "corrupt". What I mean by corrupt, is the reference is still valid, but some of the DataGridViewRow properties are null (ex: row.Cells). Is this caused by question 1 or can you give me any tips on why this might be happening? Here's some code (the last line has the problem): public partial class MyForm : Form { void Timer_Elapsed(object sender) { // we're on a new thread (this function gets called every few seconds) UpdateUiHelper updateUiHelper = new UpdateUiHelper(this); foreach (DataGridViewRow row in dataGridView1.Rows) { object[] values = GetValuesFromDb(); updateUiHelper.UpdateRowValues(row, values[0]); } // .. do other work here updateUiHelper.UpdateUi(); } } public class UpdateUiHelper { private readonly Form _form; private Dictionary<DataGridViewRow, object> _rows; private delegate void RowDelegate(DataGridViewRow row); private readonly object _lockObject = new object(); public UpdateUiHelper(Form form) { _form = form; _rows = new Dictionary<DataGridViewRow, object>(); } public void UpdateRowValues(DataGridViewRow row, object value) { if (_rows.ContainsKey(row)) _rows[row] = value; else { lock (_lockObject) { _rows.Add(row, value); } } } public void UpdateUi() { foreach (DataGridViewRow row in _rows.Keys) { SetRowValueThreadSafe(row); } } private void SetRowValueThreadSafe(DataGridViewRow row) { if (_form.InvokeRequired) { _form.Invoke(new RowDelegate(SetRowValueThreadSafe), new object[] { row }); return; } // now we're on the UI thread object newValue = _rows[row]; row.Cells[0].Value = newValue; // randomly errors here with NullReferenceException, but row is never null! }

    Read the article

  • UITableViewController executes delate functions before network request finishes

    - by user1543132
    I'm having trouble trying to populate a UITableView with the results of a network request. It seems that my code is alright as it works perfectly when my network is speedy, however, when it's not, the function - (UITableViewCell *)tableView:(UITableView *)tableView cellForRowAtIndexPath:(NSIndexPath *)indexPath- still executes, which results in a bad access error. I presume that this is because the array that the aforesaid function attempts to utilize has not been populated. This brings me to my question: Is there anyway that I can have the UITableView delegate methods delayed to avoid this? - (UITableViewCell *)tableView:(UITableView *)tableView cellForRowAtIndexPath:(NSIndexPath *)indexPath { static NSString *CellIdentifier = @"AlbumsCell"; //UITableViewCell *basicCell = [tableView dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier:CellIdentifier forIndexPath:indexPath]; AlbumsCell *cell = (AlbumsCell *)[tableView dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier:CellIdentifier]; if (!cell) { **// Here is where the Thread 1: EXC_BAD_ACCESS (code=2 address=0x8)** cell = [[[AlbumsCell alloc] initWithStyle:UITableViewCellStyleDefault reuseIdentifier:CellIdentifier] autorelease]; } Album *album = [_albums objectAtIndex:[indexPath row]]; [cell setAlbum:album]; return cell; }

    Read the article

  • Sleeping a thread blocking stdin

    - by Sid
    Hey, I'm running a function which evaluates commands passed in using stdin and another function which runs a bunch of jobs. I need to make the latter function sleep at regular intervals but that seems to be blocking the stdin. Any advice on how to resolve this would be appreciated. The source code for the functions is def runJobs(comps, jobQueue, numRunning, limit, lock): while len(jobQueue) >= 0: print(len(jobQueue)); if len(jobQueue) > 0: comp, tasks = find_computer(comps, 0); #do something time.sleep(5); def manageStdin(): print "Global Stdin Begins Now" for line in fileinput.input(): try: print(eval(line)); except Exception, e: print e; --Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to identify deadlock conditions in a third-party application?

    - by Imhotep is Invisible
    I am using a third-party application to handle batch CD audio extraction via multiple FireWire attached devices, but the application frequently (though non-deterministically) hangs during the extraction. I suspect that the multithreaded application is deadlocking over some shared resource. The developer, however, suspects the problem lies elsewhere but is not addressing the problem at this time. I would like to be able to do some legwork on my end to a) prove the condition exists and b) ideally point him in the right direction. The problems: while I used to be a programmer, it's been awhile and I need to shake off the dust (last work I did was back in '99 and it was under Solaris, while the application runs under XP). Rather than there being a dearth of information online, there's almost too much to digest. Are there any suggested guides or tutorials that might help me get back up to speed sufficient enough to help identify and/or diagnose the deadlock, or are there tools or approaches that I should study up on to aid me in my task? Many thanks for all suggestions!

    Read the article

  • BackgroundWorker acting bizarrely...

    - by vdh_ant
    Hi guys I'm working on some code that calls a service. This service call could fail and if it does I want the system to try again until it works or too much time has passed. I am wondering where I am going wrong as the following code doesn't seem to be working correctly... It randomly only does one to four loops... protected virtual void ProcessAsync(object data, int count) { var worker = new BackgroundWorker(); worker.DoWork += (sender, e) => { throw new InvalidOperationException("oh shiznit!"); }; worker.RunWorkerCompleted += (sender, e) => { //If an error occurs we need to tell the data about it if (e.Error != null) { count++; System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(count * 5000); if (count <= 10) { if (count % 5 == 0) this.Logger.Fatal("LOAD ERROR - The system can't load any data", e.Error); else this.Logger.Error("LOAD ERROR - The system can't load any data", e.Error); this.ProcessAsync(data, count); } } }; worker.RunWorkerAsync(); } Cheers Anthony

    Read the article

  • BlackBerry threading model

    - by Rory Fitzpatrick
    I've read a lot of comments mention in passing that the BlackBerry threading model deviates from the Java standard and can cause issues, but no amount of googling has enlightened me on what this means exactly. I've been developing a fairly large business application for the BlackBerry and, although I don't really have any previous experience with Java multi-threaded applications, haven't come across any issue that we've been able to blame on threading, other than what we caused ourselves. Can someone describe exactly how the BlackBerry threading model is different, and how I as a developer should take that into account? Obviously any links on the topic would also be great.

    Read the article

  • Look up values in a BDB for several files in parallel

    - by biznez
    What is the most efficient way to look up values in a BDB for several files in parallel? If I had a Perl script which did this for one file at a time, would forking/running the process in background with the ampersand in Linux work? How might Hadoop be used to solve this problem? Would threading be another solution?

    Read the article

  • What is better and why to use List as thread safe: BlockingCollection or ReaderWriterLockSlim or lock?

    - by theateist
    I have System.Collections.Generic.List _myList and many threads can read from it or add items to it simultaneously. From what I've read I should using 'BlockingCollection' so this will work. I also read about ReaderWriterLockSlim' and 'lock', but I don't figure out how to use them instead ofBlockingCollection`, so my question is can I do the same with: ReaderWriterLockSlim lock instead of using 'BlockingCollection'. If YES, can you please provide simple example and what pros and cons of using BlockingCollection, ReaderWriterLockSlim, lock?

    Read the article

  • How can I get back into my main processing thread?

    - by daveomcd
    I have an app that I'm accessing a remote website with NSURLConnection to run some code and then save out some XML files. I am then accessing those XML Files and parsing through them for information. The process works fine except that my User Interface isn't getting updated properly. I want to keep the user updated through my UILabel. I'm trying to update the text by using setBottomBarToUpdating:. It works the first time when I set it to "Processing Please Wait..."; however, in the connectionDidFinishLoading: it doesn't update. I'm thinking my NSURLConnection is running on a separate thread and my attempt with the dispatch_get_main_queue to update on the main thread isn't working. How can I alter my code to resolve this? Thanks! [If I need to include more information/code just let me know!] myFile.m NSLog(@"Refreshing..."); dispatch_sync( dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{ [self getResponse:@"http://mylocation/path/to/file.aspx"]; }); [self setBottomBarToUpdating:@"Processing Please Wait..."]; queue = dispatch_queue_create("updateQueue", DISPATCH_QUEUE_CONCURRENT); connectionDidFinishLoading: if ([response rangeOfString:@"Complete"].location == NSNotFound]) { // failed } else { //success dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(),^ { [self setBottomBarToUpdating:@"Updating Contacts..."]; }); [self updateFromXMLFile:@"http://thislocation.com/path/to/file.xml"]; dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(),^ { [self setBottomBarToUpdating:@"Updating Emails..."]; }); [self updateFromXMLFile:@"http://thislocation.com/path/to/file2.xml"]; }

    Read the article

  • Threading and iterating through changing collections

    - by adamjellyit
    In C# (console app) I want to hold a collection of objects. All objects are of same type. I want to iterate through the collection calling a method on each object. And then repeat the process continuously. However during iteration objects can be added or removed from the list. (The objects themselves will not be destroyed .. just removed from the list). Not sure what would happen with a foreach loop .. or other similar method. This has to have been done 1000 times before .. can you recommend a solid approach?

    Read the article

  • ConcurrenctBag(Of MyType) Vs List(Of MyType)

    - by Ben
    What is the advantage of using a ConcurrentBag(Of MyType) against just using a List(Of MyType)? The MSDN page on the CB (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd381779(v=VS.100).aspx) states that ConcurrentBag(Of T) is a thread-safe bag implementation, optimized for scenarios where the same thread will be both producing and consuming data stored in the bag So what is the advantage? I can understand the advantage of the other collection types in the Concurrency namespace, but this one puzzled me. Thanks.

    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 | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >