Search Results

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

Page 57/66 | < Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >

  • Forcing an app to run single core only?

    - by Kevin
    I have this strange issue with some third party DLL's. The third party provider references some open source DLL's that have a memory exception whenever I try to use a certain method. This issue does not appear when the app is run on a single core machine, but obviously we cannot assume a user will have that. Is there a way to force an app, or even better yet a referenced DLL to run on a single core? Any other way to possibly fix this? Getting the third party to rebuild the OS dll's is apparently out of the question (its a bit of a sore spot with me currently :) ) so I have to handle it myself or just forget about providing this functionality.

    Read the article

  • How can solve "Cross-thread operation not valid"?

    - by Phsika
    i try to start multi Thread but i can not it returns to me error: Cross-thread operation not valid: 'listBox1' thread was created to control outside access from another thread was. MyCodes: public DataTable dTable; public DataTable dtRowsCount; Thread t1; ThreadStart ts1; void ExcelToSql() { // SelectDataFromExcel(); ts1 = new ThreadStart(SelectDataFromExcel); t1 = new Thread(ts1); t1.Start(); } void SelectDataFromExcel() { string connectionString = @"Provider=Microsoft.ACE.OLEDB.12.0;Data Source=C:\Source\Addresses.xlsx;Extended Properties=""Excel 12.0;HDR=YES;"""; OleDbConnection excelConnection = new OleDbConnection(connectionString); string[] Sheets = new string[] { "Sayfa1"}; excelConnection.Open(); // This code will open excel file. OleDbCommand dbCommand; OleDbDataAdapter dataAdapter; // progressBar1.Minimum = 1; foreach (var sheet in Sheets) { dbCommand = new OleDbCommand("select * From[" + sheet + "$]", excelConnection); //progressBar1.Maximum = CountRowsExcel(sheet).Rows.Count; // progressBar2.Value = i + 1; System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000); **listBox1.Items.Add("Tablo ismi: "+sheet.ToUpper()+"Satir Adeti: "+CountRowsExcel(sheet).Rows.Count.ToString()+" ");** dataAdapter = new OleDbDataAdapter(dbCommand); dTable = new DataTable(); dataAdapter.Fill(dTable); dTable.TableName = sheet.ToUpper(); dTable.Dispose(); dataAdapter.Dispose(); dbCommand.Dispose(); ArrangedDataList(dTable); FillSqlTable(dTable, dTable.TableName); } excelConnection.Close(); excelConnection.Dispose(); }

    Read the article

  • Suggestions for lightweight, thread-safe scheduler

    - by nirvanai
    I am trying to write a round-robin scheduler for lightweight threads (fibers). It must scale to handle as many concurrently-scheduled fibers as possible. I also need to be able to schedule fibers from threads other than the one the run loop is on, and preferably unschedule them from arbitrary threads as well (though I could live with only being able to unschedule them from the run loop). My current idea is to have a circular doubly-linked list, where each fiber is a node and the scheduler holds a reference to the current node. This is what I have so far: using Interlocked = System.Threading.Interlocked; public class Thread { internal Future current_fiber; public void RunLoop () { while (true) { var fiber = current_fiber; if (fiber == null) { // block the thread until a fiber is scheduled continue; } if (fiber.Fulfilled) fiber.Unschedule (); else fiber.Resume (); //if (current_fiber == fiber) current_fiber = fiber.next; Interlocked.CompareExchange<Future> (ref current_fiber, fiber.next, fiber); } } } public abstract class Future { public bool Fulfilled { get; protected set; } internal Future previous, next; // this must be thread-safe // it inserts this node before thread.current_fiber // (getting the exact position doesn't matter, as long as the // chosen nodes haven't been unscheduled) public void Schedule (Thread thread) { next = this; // maintain circularity, even if this is the only node previous = this; try_again: var current = Interlocked.CompareExchange<Future> (ref thread.current_fiber, this, null); if (current == null) return; var target = current.previous; while (target == null) { // current was unscheduled; negotiate for new current_fiber var potential = current.next; var actual = Interlocked.CompareExchange<Future> (ref thread.current_fiber, potential, current); current = (actual == current? potential : actual); if (current == null) goto try_again; target = current.previous; } // I would lock "current" and "target" at this point. // How can I do this w/o risk of deadlock? next = current; previous = target; target.next = this; current.previous = this; } // this would ideally be thread-safe public void Unschedule () { var prev = previous; if (prev == null) { // already unscheduled return; } previous = null; if (next == this) { next = null; return; } // Again, I would lock "prev" and "next" here // How can I do this w/o risk of deadlock? prev.next = next; next.previous = prev; } public abstract void Resume (); } As you can see, my sticking point is that I cannot ensure the order of locking, so I can't lock more than one node without risking deadlock. Or can I? I don't want to have a global lock on the Thread object, since the amount of lock contention would be extreme. Plus, I don't especially care about insertion position, so if I lock each node separately then Schedule() could use something like Monitor.TryEnter and just keep walking the list until it finds an unlocked node. Overall, I'm not invested in any particular implementation, as long as it meets the requirements I've mentioned. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! P.S- For the curious, this is for an open source project I'm starting at http://github.com/nirvanai/Cirrus

    Read the article

  • Referenced assembly won't load in new thread on IIS 7

    - by DanielC
    I have a process in which a user uploads a file to a web site where the file is then processed and uploaded into the database. The process of validating the file could take several minutes so as soon as the file is uploaded I create a new thread and I do my processing on this second thread. This works great on my local machine but doesn't work at all on my IIS 7 test server. After some investigating I found the problem is that the process is trying to load a reference to Castle and it can't find the DLL. I have a copy of Castle DLLs in my bin and it works elsewhere in my app. I ran Fuslog and discovered that it is trying to load castle from the wrong location. It is trying to load from c:/windows/system32/inetsrv/. It appears that under IIS 7 the second thread is executing in a different context or something. So the question is what can I do to get it to find Castle in the application BIN folder?

    Read the article

  • Are there concurrency problems when using -performSelector:withObject:afterDelay: ?

    - by mystify
    For example, I often use this: [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:someDelay]; Now, lets say I call this 10 times to perform at the exact same delay, like: [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; - (void)doSomethingAfterDelay:(id)someObject { /* access an array, read stuff, write stuff, do different things that would suffer in multithreaded environments .... all operations are nonatomic! */ } I have observed pretty strange behavior when doing things like this. For my understanding, this method schedules a timer to fire on the current thread, so in this case the main thread. But since it doesn't create new threads, it actually should not be possible to run into concurrency problems, right?

    Read the article

  • Are there concurrency problems when using -performSelector:withObject:afterDelay: ?

    - by mystify
    For example, I often use this: [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:someDelay]; Now, lets say I call this 10 times to perform at the exact same delay, like: [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; - (void)doSomethingAfterDelay:(id)someObject { /* access an array, read stuff, write stuff, do different things that would suffer in multithreaded environments .... all operations are nonatomic! */ } I have observed pretty strange behavior when doing things like this. For my understanding, this method schedules a timer to fire on the current thread, so in this case the main thread. But since it doesn't create new threads, it actually should not be possible to run into concurrency problems, right?

    Read the article

  • Thread Jobs in Java

    - by Bragaadeesh
    Hi, I want to spawn 200 threads simultaneously in Java. What I'm doing right now is running into a loop and creating 200 threads and starting them. After these 200 gets completed, I want to spawn another 200 set of threads and so on. The gist here is that the first 200 threads I spawned need to be FINISHED before spawning the next set. I tried the code below, but its not working for(int i=0;i<200;i++){ Thread myThread = new Thread(runnableInstance); myThread.start(); } for(int i=0;i<200;i++){ Thread myThread = new Thread(runnableInstance); myThread.start(); } Note: I have intentionally put the for loop Twice, but the desired effect I intend is not happening simply because the second for loop is executed before the first set of threads end their execution. Please advise

    Read the article

  • Easy Threading in WPF

    - by Sandeep Bansal
    Hi everyone, I've been reading a lot about threading in C#, WPF and Silverlight but can't get it to work. My main problem is I have the _load (_Initialized) action and it has a lot of object creation and along with that I have timers working doing different things, this causes the startup time of the program to be very slow and obviously causes the UI to hang and it isn't a good thing for deploying to a lot of users. My timers change values of labels and textfields but having them do that on another thread is an obvious no go. So can someone give me some examples on how to achieve what I need to do? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to synchronize access to many objects

    - by vividos
    I have a thread pool with some threads (e.g. as many as number of cores) that work on many objects, say thousands of objects. Normally I would give each object a mutex to protect access to its internals, lock it when I'm doing work, then release it. When two threads would try to access the same object, one of the threads has to wait. Now I want to save some resources and be scalable, as there may be thousands of objects, and still only a hand full of threads. I'm thinking about a class design where the thread has some sort of mutex or lock object, and assigns the lock to the object when the object should be accessed. This would save resources, as I only have as much lock objects as I have threads. Now comes the programming part, where I want to transfer this design into code, but don't know quite where to start. I'm programming in C++ and want to use Boost classes where possible, but self written classes that handle these special requirements are ok. How would I implement this? My first idea was to have a boost::mutex object per thread, and each object has a boost::shared_ptr that initially is unset (or NULL). Now when I want to access the object, I lock it by creating a scoped_lock object and assign it to the shared_ptr. When the shared_ptr is already set, I wait on the present lock. This idea sounds like a heap full of race conditions, so I sort of abandoned it. Is there another way to accomplish this design? A completely different way?

    Read the article

  • C# thread safety for class instances

    - by Steveng
    I am learning C# and I am confused with the thread safety of the copies of the class instances as below: eg: classA objA; classA objB = objA; objA.field1 = value2; //do I need lock around modification of field1? //let say we pass the objB to another thread objB.field1 = value1 //do I need a lock for objB because of the modification of field1? I am confused because coming from the background of C++, the class in C# is the reference type. If both objA and objB refer to the same memory underlying, then I would need a lock to protect the simultaneous writing to the field1. Could someone confirm with this or am I missing something? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • C# WPF Unable to control Textboxes

    - by Bo0m3r
    I'm a beginner in coding into C#. While I'm launching a process I can't controls my textboxes. I found some answers on this forum but the explaination is a bit to difficult for me to implement it for my problem. I created a small program that will run a batch file to make a backup. While the backup is running I can't modify my textboxes, disabling buttons etc... I already saw that this is normal but I don't know how to implement the solutions. My last attempt was with Dispatcher.invoke as you can see below. public partial class MainWindow : Window { public MainWindow() { InitializeComponent(); tb_Status.Text = "Ready"; } public void status() { Dispatcher.Invoke(DispatcherPriority.Send, new Action( () => { tb_Status.Text = "The backup is running!"; } ) ); } public void process() { try { Process p = new Process(); p.StartInfo.WindowStyle = ProcessWindowStyle.Minimized; p.StartInfo.CreateNoWindow = true; p.StartInfo.UseShellExecute = false; p.StartInfo.RedirectStandardOutput = true; p.StartInfo.FileName = "Robocopy.bat"; p.Start(); string output = p.StandardOutput.ReadToEnd(); p.WaitForExit(); tb_Output.Text = File.ReadAllText("Backup\\log.txt"); } catch (Exception ex) { tb_Status.Text = ex.Message.ToString(); } } private void Bt_Start_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { status(); Directory.CreateDirectory("Backup"); process(); tb_Status.Text = "The backup finished"; File.Delete("Backup\\log.txt"); } } } Any help is appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Is PThread a good choice for multi-platorm C/C++ multi-threading program?

    - by RogerV
    Been doing mostly Java and smattering of .NET for last five years and haven't written any significant C or C++ during that time. So have been away from that scene for a while. If I want to write a C or C++ program today that does some multi-threading and is source code portable across Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux/Unix - is PThread a good choice? The C or C++ code won't be doing any GUI, so won't need to worry with any of that. For the Windows platform, I don't want to bring a lot of Unix baggage, though, in terms of unix emulation runtime libraries. Would prefer a PThread API for Windows that is a thin-as-possible wrapper over existing Windows threading APIs. ADDENDUM EDIT: Am leaning toward going with boost:thread - I also want to be able to use C++ try/catch exception handling too. And even though my program will be rather minimal and not particularly OOPish, I like to encapsulate using class and namespace - as opposed to C disembodied functions.

    Read the article

  • "Multi-threading" w/ NSTimers in an iPhone app

    - by MrDatabase
    Say I have two NSTimers in my iPhone app: timer1 and timer2. timer1 calls function1 30 times per second and timer2 calls function2 30 times per second. Assume these two functions are reading and updating the same integer variables. Are there any "multi-threading" issues here? If not how does iPhone OS handle the execution of the two functions (in general)?

    Read the article

  • Threading and cores

    - by Matt
    If I have X cores on my machine and I start X threads. Let's assume for the sake of argument that each thread is completely separated in terms of the memory, hdd, etc it uses. Is the OS going to know to send each thread to a core or do more time slicing on one core for multiple threads. What the question boils down to, is if I have X cores and my program must do independent calculations, should I start X threads, will they each get piped to a core, or is the presumption that because I have X cores I can start X threads completely wrong? I'm thinking it is. This is with C# --

    Read the article

  • [gtk+] run function in another thread than gui

    - by sterh
    Hello, I have simple C/gtk+ application. I have function in this app which load image in gtkimageview widget: gboolean main_win_open( MainWin* mw, const char* file_path) { ... //loading and displaing image in gtkimageview ... } The loading image is work, but i need to run this function in another thread then main gui form; I have function: void* argument_thread(void *args) { Data *data = (Data*)args; gdk_threads_enter(); main_win_open (data->win,data->argv); gdk_threads_leave(); } Data it's structure for main_win_open function arguments: typedef struct _Data { MainWin *win; char* argv; } Data; Then in main function i create thread and run it: int main(int argc, char** argv) { GError* err; GThread* thread; Data data; MainWin *win; // init thread support if(!g_thread_supported()) g_thread_init(NULL); gdk_threads_init(); // init GTK+ gtk_init (&argc, &argv); win = (MainWin*)main_win_new(); gtk_widget_show(GTK_WIDGET(win)); data.win = win; data.argv = argv[1]; if (argc == 2) { thread = g_thread_create((GThreadFunc)argument_thread,&data,FALSE, &err); } gdk_threads_enter(); gtk_main(); gdk_threads_leave(); } But when i try to run app from command line and try to load big-size image, gui is blocking. What's wrong? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Application window sent behind other windows on closing different thread (C#)

    - by david.murrant
    I'm writing a Windows Forms Application in C#.NET On startup, the application displays a splash screen which is running in a separate thread. Whilst the splash screen is showing, the main application is initialising. Once the main application has finished initialising, the main form of the application is displayed, and the splash screen still shows over the top. Everything so far is as expected. Then, the Splash screen is closed, which causes that thread to exit. For some reason, at the point, the main application windows gets sent behind all other open Windows, notably the Windows Explorer window where you clicked the .exe file to run the application in the first place! What could be causing the windows to suddenly jump "behind" like this?

    Read the article

  • Multithreaded SDL error in C++

    - by wyatt
    I'm building a program in C++, using SDL, and am occasionally receiving this error: * glibc detected * ./assistant: double free or corruption (!prev) It's difficult to replicate, so I can't find exactly what's causing it, but I just added a second thread to the program, and neither thread run on its own seems to cause the error. The threads don't share any variables, though they both run the functions SDL_BlitSurface and SDL_Flip. Could running these concurrently throw up such an error, or am I barking up the wrong tree? If this is the cause, should I simply throw a mutex around all SDL calls? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How do I make this Java code operate properly? [Multi-threaded, race condition]

    - by Fixee
    I got this code from a student, and it does not work properly because of a race condition involving x++ and x--. He added synchronized to the run() method trying to get rid of this bug, but obviously this only excludes threads from entering run() on the same object (which was never a problem in the first place) but doesn't prevent independent objects from updating the same static variable x at the same time. public class DataRace implements Runnable { static volatile int x; public synchronized void run() { for (int i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { x++; x--; } } public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { Thread [] threads = new Thread[100]; for (int i = 0; i < threads.length; i++) threads[i] = new Thread(new DataRace()); for (int i = 0; i < threads.length; i++) threads[i].start(); for (int i = 0; i < threads.length; i++) threads[i].join(); System.out.println(x); // x not always 0! } } Since we cannot synchronize on x (because it is primitive), the best solution I can think of is to create a new static object like static String lock = ""; and enclose the x++ and x-- within a synchronized block, locking on lock. But this seems really awkward. Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • Java ThreadPool for multiple identical tasks

    - by tdimmig
    I have 1 thread who sole job is to grab DatagramPackets off of a socket and stick them in a buffer. Another thread works out of that buffer, processing the DatagramPackets. I'd like to have a pool of threads working out of that buffer. I had thought to use a fixed thread pool to do this. To do so, do I need to create the pool, then submit enough runnables for execution to fill it up? I had hoped for a way to say "this is the thread/runnable that I want you to execute, this is how many I want running, GO!". Is there such a method of doing this? Is something other than a fixed thread pool better suited?

    Read the article

  • Thread too slow. Better way to execute code (Android AndEngine)?

    - by rphello101
    I'm developing a game where the user creates sprites with every touch. I then have a thread run to check to see if those sprites collide with any others. The problem is, if I tap too quickly, I cause a null pointer exception error. I believe it's because I'm tapping faster than my thread is running. This is the thread I have: public class grow implements Runnable{ public grow(Sprite sprite){ } @Override public void run() { float radf, rads; //fill radius/stationary radius float fx=0, fy=0, sx, sy; while(down){ if(spriteC[spriteNum].active){ spriteC[spriteNum].sprite.setScale(spriteC[spriteNum].scale += 0.001); if(spriteC[spriteNum].sprite.collidesWith(ground)||spriteC[spriteNum].sprite.collidesWith(roof)|| spriteC[spriteNum].sprite.collidesWith(left)||spriteC[spriteNum].sprite.collidesWith(right)){ down = false; spriteC[spriteNum].active=false; yourScene.unregisterTouchArea(spriteC[spriteNum].sprite); } fx = spriteC[spriteNum].sprite.getX(); fy = spriteC[spriteNum].sprite.getY(); radf=spriteC[spriteNum].sprite.getHeightScaled()/2; Log.e("F"+Float.toString(fx),Float.toString(fy)); if(spriteNum>0) for(int x=0;x<spriteNum;x++){ rads=spriteC[x].sprite.getHeightScaled()/2; sx = spriteC[x].body.getWorldCenter().x * 32; sy = spriteC[x].body.getWorldCenter().y * 32; Log.e("S"+Float.toString(sx),Float.toString(sy)); Log.e(Float.toString((float) Math.sqrt(Math.pow((fx-sx),2)+Math.pow((fy-sy),2))),Float.toString((radf+rads))); if(Math.sqrt(Math.pow((fx-sx),2)+Math.pow((fy-sy),2))<(radf+rads)){ down = false; spriteC[spriteNum].active=false; yourScene.unregisterTouchArea(spriteC[spriteNum].sprite); Log.e("Collided",Boolean.toString(down)); } } } } spriteC[spriteNum].body = PhysicsFactory.createCircleBody(mPhysicsWorld, spriteC[spriteNum].sprite, BodyType.DynamicBody, FIXTURE_DEF); mPhysicsWorld.registerPhysicsConnector(new PhysicsConnector(spriteC[spriteNum].sprite, spriteC[spriteNum].body, true, true)); } } Better solution anyone? I know there is something to do with a handler, but I don't exactly know what that is or how to use one.

    Read the article

  • Java - multithreaded access to a local value store which is periodically cleared

    - by Telax
    I'm hoping for some advice or suggestions on how best to handle multi threaded access to a value store. My local value storage is designed to hold onto objects which are currently in use. If the object is not in use then it is removed from the store. A value is pumped into my store via thread1, its entry into the store is announced to listeners, and the value is stored. Values coming in on thread1 will either be totally new values or updates for existing values. A timer is used to periodically remove any value from the store which is not currently in use and so all that remains of this value is its ID held locally by an intermediary. Now, an active element on thread2 may wake up and try to access a set of values by passing a set of value IDs which it knows about. Some values will be stored already (great) and some may not (sadface). Those values which are not already stored will be retrieved from an external source. My main issue is that items which have not already been stored and are currently being queried for may arrive in on thread1 before the query is complete. I'd like to try and avoid locking access to the store whilst a query is being made as it may take some time.

    Read the article

  • Simulators for thread scheduling on multicore

    - by shijie xu
    I am seeking a simulator for thread scheduling at multi-core architecture, that is mapping threads to the cores at runtime. During runtime, simulator collects overall cache and IPC statistics. I checked below simulators, but seems there are not sufficient for me: Simplescalar: A simulator only for single core. SESC: multiprocessor simulator with detailed power, thermal, and performance models, QSim: provides instruction-level control of the emulated environment and detailed information about the executing instruction stream. It seems both SESC and QSim supports instructions scheduling instead of thread scheduling on the cores? Anyone can help provide some clues or share experience for this part?

    Read the article

  • C# Anyway to detect if an object is locked.

    - by scope-creep
    Hi, Is their anyway to determine if a object is locked in c#. I have the unenviable position, through design where i'm reading from a queue inside a class, and I need to dump the contents into a collection in the class. But that collection is also read/write from an interface outside the class. So obviously their may be a case when the collection is being written to, as the same time i want to write to it. I could program round it, say using delegate but it would be ugly. Bob.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >