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 58/66 | < Previous Page | 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65  | Next Page >

  • Threading in C#

    - by j-t-s
    Hi All Just looking for something ultra simple. I need to spawn a method off to a new thread. I don't care when or how it ends. Can somebody please help me with this? Thank you

    Read the article

  • IS ResultSet thread safe

    - by javatraniee
    Is ResultSet Thread safe? My question arises because in this i have used a different statement for each query i have delsared a ResultSet as an local variable but it gives me a error of Operation not allowed after ResultSet is closed. But my statements are working as i'm using the statements in insert and delete query.I have commented the ResultSet part and have not got the error !! The source code of my program can be referd to , in my earlier Question .

    Read the article

  • Thread toggling

    - by sid
    Hi all, In Ubuntu, I am running 2 'C' applications, When I press key up/down the applications are alternatively getting the events. What might be the problem/solution? Ex: I have 'A application' and 'B application', I launch 'A application' and press the key up/down its working fine. If I simultaneously launch 'B application' and focus is on 'B application' then pressing key up/down will toggle between 'A application' & 'B application' so 2 times I have to press the key to move on 'B application'(focus is on 'B application'). 'A application' and 'B application' are threads. Thanks in advance-opensid

    Read the article

  • Error with `Thread.Sleep` during automatic testing on TeamCity 5

    - by yeyeyerman
    Hello, I'm having some problems executing the tests of the application I'm developing. All the tests execute normally with ReSharper and in NCover. However, the execution of one of these tests in TeamCity is generating an error. This test initializes two objects, the object under test and a simulator of a real object. Both objects will communicate throug a serial link in a representation of the real scenario. ObjectSimulator r_simulator = new ObjectSimulator(...); ObjectDriver r_driver = new ObjectDriver(...); Assert.IsTrue(r_driver.Connect() == ErrorCode.Success); The simulator just do the following in the constructor public class ObjectSimulator { ... public ObjectSimulator() { // serial port configuration m_port = new SerialPort(); m_port.DataReceived += DataReceivedEvent; } ... } The main object has two threads. The main thread of the application and a timer to refresh a watchdog timer in the real object. public ErrorCode Connect() { ... StartSynchroTimer(); Thread.Sleep(4); // to check if the timer is working properly ... } The problem seems to be comming from the Thread.Sleep() call, as when I remove it everything works. The ObjectSimulator somehow doesn't execute the DataReceived event callback. How can I resolve this issue?

    Read the article

  • Updating table from async task android

    - by CantChooseUsernames
    I'm following this tutorial: http://huuah.com/android-progress-bar-and-thread-updating/ to learn how to make progress bars. I'm trying to show the progress bar on top of my activity and have it update the activity's table view in the background. So I created an async task for the dialog that takes a callback: package com.lib.bookworm; import android.app.ProgressDialog; import android.content.Context; import android.os.AsyncTask; public class UIThreadProgress extends AsyncTask<Void, Void, Void> { private UIThreadCallback callback = null; private ProgressDialog dialog = null; private int maxValue = 100, incAmount = 1; private Context context = null; public UIThreadProgress(Context context, UIThreadCallback callback) { this.context = context; this.callback = callback; } @Override protected Void doInBackground(Void... args) { while(this.callback.condition()) { this.callback.run(); this.publishProgress(); } return null; } @Override protected void onProgressUpdate(Void... values) { super.onProgressUpdate(values); dialog.incrementProgressBy(incAmount); }; @Override protected void onPreExecute() { super.onPreExecute(); dialog = new ProgressDialog(context); dialog.setCancelable(true); dialog.setMessage("Loading..."); dialog.setProgress(0); dialog.setProgressStyle(ProgressDialog.STYLE_HORIZONTAL); dialog.setMax(maxValue); dialog.show(); } @Override protected void onPostExecute(Void result) { super.onPostExecute(result); if (this.dialog.isShowing()) { this.dialog.dismiss(); } this.callback.onThreadFinish(); } } And in my activity, I do: final String page = htmlPage.substring(start, end).trim(); //Create new instance of the AsyncTask.. new UIThreadProgress(this, new UIThreadCallback() { @Override public void run() { row_id = makeTableRow(row_id, layout, params, matcher); //ADD a row to the table layout. } @Override public void onThreadFinish() { System.out.println("FINISHED!!"); } @Override public boolean condition() { return matcher.find(); } }).execute(); So the above creates an async task to run to update a table layout activity while showing the progress bar that displays how much work has been done.. However, I get an error saying that only the thread that started the activity can update its views. I tried doing: MainActivity.this.runOnUiThread(new Runnable() { @Override public void run() { row_id = makeTableRow(row_id, layout, params, matcher); //ADD a row to the table layout. } } But this gives me synchronization errors.. Any ideas how I can display progress and at the same time update my table in the background? Currently my UI looks like:

    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

  • 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

  • Real World Examples of read-write in concurrent software

    - by Richard Fabian
    I'm looking for real world examples of needing read and write access to the same value in concurrent systems. In my opinion, many semaphores or locks are present because there's no known alternative (to the implementer,) but do you know of any patterns where mutexes seem to be a requirement? In a way I'm asking for candidates for the standard set of HARD problems for concurrent software in the real world.

    Read the article

  • makecontext segfault?

    - by cdietschrun
    I am working on a homework assignment that will be due in the next semester. It requires us to implement our own context switching/thread library using the ucontext API. The professor provides code that does it, but before a thread returns, he manually does some work and calls an ISR that finds another thread to use and swapcontexts to it or if none are left, exits. The point of the assignment is to use the uc_link field of the context so that when it hits a return it takes care of the work. I've created a function (type void/void args) that just does the work the functions did before (clean up and then calls ISR). The professor said he wanted this. So all that's left is to do a makecontext somewhere along the way on the context in the uc_link field so that it runs my thread, right? Well, when I do makecontext on seemingly any combination of ucontext_t's and function, I get a segfault and gdb provides no help.. I can skip the makecontext and my program exist 'normally' when it hits a return in the threads I created because (presumably) the uc_link field is not properly setup (which is what I'm trying to do). I also can't find anything on why makecontext would segfault. Can anyone help? stack2.ss_sp = (void *)(malloc(STACKSIZE)); if(stack2.ss_sp == NULL){ printf("thread failed to get stack space\n"); exit(8); } stack2.ss_size = STACKSIZE; stack2.ss_flags = 0; if(getcontext(&main_context) == -1){ perror("getcontext in t_init, rtn_env"); exit(5); } //main_context.uc_stack = t_state[i].mystk; main_context.uc_stack = stack2; main_context.uc_link = 0; makecontext(&main_context, (void (*)(void))thread_rtn, 0); I've also tried just thread_rtn, &thread_rtn and other things. thread_rtn is declared as void thread_rtn(void). later, in each thread. run_env is of type ucontext_t: ... t_state[i].run_env.uc_link = &main_context;

    Read the article

  • Interrupt a thread in DatagramSocket.receive

    - by SEK
    I'm building an application that listens on both TCP and UDP, and I've run into some trouble with my shutdown mechanism. When I call Thread.interrupt() on each of the listening threads, the TCP thread is interrupted from listening, whereas the UDP listener isn't. To be specific, the TCP thread uses Socket.accept(), which simply returns (without actually connecting). Whereas the UDP thread uses DatagramSocket.receive, and doesn't exit that method. Is this an issue in my JRE, my OS, or should I just switch to (Datagram)Socket.close()?

    Read the article

  • The cross-thread usage of "HttpContext.Current" property and related things

    - by smwikipedia
    I read from < Essential ASP.NET with Examples in C# the following statement: Another useful property to know about is the static Current property of the HttpContext class. This property always points to the current instance of the HttpContext class for the request being serviced. This can be convenient if you are writing helper classes that will be used from pages or other pipeline classes and may need to access the context for whatever reason. By using the static Current property to retrieve the context, you can avoid passing a reference to it to helper classes. For example, the class shown in Listing 4-1 uses the Current property of the context to access the QueryString and print something to the current response buffer. Note that for this static property to be correctly initialized, the caller must be executing on the original request thread, so if you have spawned additional threads to perform work during a request, you must take care to provide access to the context class yourself. I am wondering about the root cause of the bold part, and one thing leads to another, here is my thoughts: We know that a process can have multiple threads. Each of these threads have their own stacks, respectively. These threads also have access to a shared memory area, the heap. The stack then, as I understand it, is kind of where all the context for that thread is stored. For a thread to access something in the heap it must use a pointer, and the pointer is stored on its stack. So when we make some cross-thread calls, we must make sure that all the necessary context info is passed from the caller thread's stack to the callee thread's stack. But I am not quite sure if I made any mistake. Any comments will be deeply appreciated. Thanks. ADD Here the stack is limited to user stack.

    Read the article

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

    - by user65374
    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

  • [java] run 2 threads simultaneously

    - by lamsaitat
    hi all, in the case of an IM client. i have made 2 separate threads to handle sending packets (by std io) and receiving packets. the question is how to make these 2 threads run simultaneously so that i can keep prompting for input while at the same time be ready to receive packets at any time? i have already tried setting a timer but the data is always lost receiving.

    Read the article

  • What happens if you break out of a Lock() statement?

    - by cyclotis04
    I'm writing a program which listens to an incoming TcpClient and handles data when it arrives. The Listen() method is run on a separate thread within the component, so it needs to be threadsafe. If I break out of a do while loop while I'm within a lock() statement, will the lock be released? If not, how do I accomplish this? Thanks! (Any other advice on the subject of Asynchronous TCP Sockets is welcome as well.) private void Listen() { do { lock (_client) { if (!_client.Connected) break; lock (_stateLock) { if (!_listening) break; if (_client.GetStream().DataAvailable) HandleData(); } } Thread.Sleep(0); } while (true); }

    Read the article

  • How to use CriticalSection - MFC?

    - by mapples
    I' am working on a small example and am a bit of curious using criticalsection in my example. What I'am doing is,I have a CStringArray(which has 10 elements added to it).I want to copy these 10 elements(string) to another CStringArray(am doing this to understand threading and Critical section),I have created 2 threads,Thread1 will copy the first 5 element to another CStringArray and Thread2 will copy the rest.Here two CStringArray are being used,I know only 1 thread can access it at a time.I wanted to know how this can be solved by using criticalsection or any other method. void CThreadingEx4Dlg::OnBnClickedOk() { // TODO: Add your control notification handler code here thread1 = AfxBeginThread((AFX_THREADPROC)MyThreadFunction1,this); thread2 = AfxBeginThread((AFX_THREADPROC)MyThreadFunction2,this); } UINT MyThreadFunction1(LPARAM lparam) { CThreadingEx4Dlg* pthis = (CThreadingEx4Dlg*)lparam; pthis->MyFunction(0,5); return 0; } UINT MyThreadFunction2(LPARAM lparam) { CThreadingEx4Dlg* pthis = (CThreadingEx4Dlg*)lparam; pthis->MyFunction(6,10); return 0; } void CThreadingEx4Dlg::MyFunction(int minCount,int maxCount) { for(int i=minCount;i<=maxCount;i++) { CString temp; temp = myArray.GetAt(i); myShiftArray.Add(temp); } }

    Read the article

  • vs2002: c# multi threading question..

    - by dotnet-practitioner
    I would like to invoke heavy duty method dowork on a separate thread and kill it if its taking longer than 3 seconds. Is there any problem with the following code? class Class1 { /// <summary> /// The main entry point for the application. /// </summary> /// [STAThread] static void Main(string[] args) { Console.WriteLine("starting new thread"); Thread t = new Thread(new ThreadStart(dowork)); t.Start(); DateTime start = DateTime.Now; TimeSpan span = DateTime.Now.Subtract(start); bool wait = true; while (wait == true) { if (span.Seconds>3) { t.Abort(); wait = false; } span = DateTime.Now.Subtract(start); } Console.WriteLine("ending new thread after seconds = {0}", span.Seconds); Console.WriteLine("all done"); Console.ReadLine(); } static void dowork() { Console.WriteLine("doing heavy work inside hello"); Thread.Sleep(7000); Console.WriteLine("*** finished**** doing heavy work inside hello"); } }

    Read the article

  • How to tell if there is an available thread in a thread pool in java

    - by Gormcito
    I am trying to proccess a queue of tasks from a database table as fast as possible while also limiting the number of threads to process the tasks. I am using a fixed sized thread pool with Executors.newFixedThreadPool(N); I want to know if there is a way of knowing if the thread pool is full, by that I mean are there currently 50 threads running, if so then I'll wait for a thread to be available before starting a new one instead of sleeping the main thread. Code of what I would like to do: ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(N); ResultSet results; while( true ) { results = getWaitingTasksStmt.executeQuery(); while( results.next() && executor.notFull() ) { executor.submit( new thread( new runnableInheritedClass(results) ) ); } }

    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

  • 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

  • std::thread and class constructor and destructor

    - by toeplitz
    When testing threads in C++11 I have created the following example: #include <iostream> #include <thread> class Foo { public: Foo(void) { std::cout << "Constructor called: " << this << std::endl; } ~Foo(void) { std::cout << "Destructor called: " << this << std::endl; } void operator()() const { std::cout << "Operatior called: " << this << std::endl; } }; void test_normal(void) { std::cout << "====> Standard example:" << std::endl; Foo f; } void test_thread(void) { std::cout << "====> Thread example:" << std::endl; Foo f; std::thread t(f); t.detach(); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { test_normal(); test_thread(); for(;;); } Which prints the following: Why is the destructor called 6 times for the thread? And why does the thread report different memory locations?

    Read the article

  • pthread_exit return value

    - by Manty
    This is surprising for me. void * thread_func(void *arg) { pthread_exit(&ret); } int main(void) { pthread_t thr; int *exit_status; pthread_create(&thr, NULL, thread_func, NULL); sleep(2); pthread_join(thr, (void **)&exit_status); printf("value of exit status - %d\n", *exit_status); ret = 20; pthread_join(thr, (void **)&exit_status); printf("value of exit status - %d\n", *exit_status); return 0; } The output is value of exit status - 50 value of exit status - 20 I was expecting both the times the exit_status would be the actual exit value(50 in my case) of the thread. Instead it is just returning the value of the global variable which I used for pthread_exit. Is it not a bug?

    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

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 | 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65  | Next Page >