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

  • Multithreaded Applications

    - by j-t-s
    Hi All I have been reading the articles on MSDN, but my mind is dead (this usually happens when I read MSDN (No offense MSDN, but your articles confuse me at times.)), and I'm trying to do some "background work" in may app, but not sure how. It's just a single method. But the application hangs, and I have to wait up to 1 - 3 minutes for it to become ...unhanged? Are there any simple examples that are laying 'roun online somewhere that I can have a look at/play around with? Thank you all

    Read the article

  • How do I pause main() until all other threads have died?

    - by thechiman
    In my program, I am creating several threads in the main() method. The last line in the main method is a call to System.out.println(), which I don't want to call until all the threads have died. I have tried calling Thread.join() on each thread however that blocks each thread so that they execute sequentially instead of in parallel. Is there a way to block the main() thread until all other threads have finished executing? Here is the relevant part of my code: public static void main(String[] args) { //some other initialization code //Make array of Thread objects Thread[] racecars = new Thread[numberOfRaceCars]; //Fill array with RaceCar objects for(int i=0; i<numberOfRaceCars; i++) { racecars[i] = new RaceCar(laps, args[i]); } //Call start() on each Thread for(int i=0; i<numberOfRaceCars; i++) { racecars[i].start(); try { racecars[i].join(); //This is where I tried to using join() //It just blocks all other threads until the current //thread finishes. } catch(InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } //This is the line I want to execute after all other Threads have finished System.out.println("It's Over!"); } Thanks for the help guys! Eric

    Read the article

  • Using two threads and controlling one from the other in java?

    - by sidra
    Can someone please help me out. I need to use two threads in a way that one thread will run permanently while(true) and will keep track of a positioning pointer (some random value coming in form a method). This thread has a logic, if the value equals something, it should start the new thread. And if the value does not equal it should stop the other thread. Can someone give me some code snippet (block level) about how to realize this?

    Read the article

  • How to have a run in an Service?

    - by user1497664
    I have implemented an service that runs in a seperate process. This service contains a separate thread where i have a socket connection. This thread has a run() where it is continuously sending data to the port. My problem is after triggering the run() in the thread i don't get any contact with it anymore, i can see in the program that have open the socket that it consciously sends the data but the idea was that i while it is running i could change data that it sends for an example time. here is my run in the external thread: public void run() { if(run) { // Team and player names message is sent when entering in a game setBaseMessage(); SendMessageToCOMPort(base_message + CalculateCRC(base_message)); sleep(); // waits for 100 ms } } Anyone have any idea what might be wrong ?

    Read the article

  • How to call 3 threads sequentially many times?

    - by Hello
    How to call 3 threads sequentially many times? For example: In iteration 1, execution order should be "Thread0-thread1-thread2" then in iteration 2 should be same i.e "Thread0 - thread1-thread2" and so on. The sample code is just executing 3 threads only once. It is not going to 2nd iteration. Thread0 = CreateThread( NULL,0,ThreadProc0, NULL, CREATE_SUSPENDED, &ThreadID); Thread1 = CreateThread( NULL,0,ThreadProc1, NULL, CREATE_SUSPENDED, &ThreadID); Thread2 = CreateThread( NULL,0,ThreadProc2, NULL, CREATE_SUSPENDED, &ThreadID); for(i=0;i<iterations;i++) //Iterations in calling threads { ResumeThread(Thread0); WaitForSingleObject(Thread0, INFINITE); ResumeThread(Thread1); WaitForSingleObject(Thread1, INFINITE); ResumeThread(Thread2); WaitForSingleObject(Thread2, INFINITE); } // Close thread and semaphore handles

    Read the article

  • How to show and update popup in 1 thread

    - by user3713986
    I have 1 app. 2 Forms are MainFrm and PopupFrm, 1 thread to update some information to PopupFrm Now to update PopupFrm i use: In MainFrm.cs private PopupFrm mypop; MainFrm() { .... PopupFrm mypop= new PopupFrm(); mypop.Show(); } MyThread() { Process GetData();... mypop.Update(); ... } In PopupFrm.cs public void Update() { this.Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate .... }); } Problem here that mypopup alway display when MainFrm display (Start application not when has data to update). So i change MainFrm.cs to : private PopupFrm mypop; private bool firstdisplay=false; MainFrm() { .... PopupFrm mypop= new PopupFrm(); //mypop.Show(); } MyThread() { Process GetData();... if(!firstdisplay) { mypop.Show(); firstdisplay=true; } mypop.Update(); ... } But it can not update Popup GUI. So how can i fix this issue ? Thanks all.

    Read the article

  • Is a Critical Section around an integer getter and setter redundant?

    - by Tim Gradwell
    Do critical sections inside trivial int accessors actually do anything useful? int GetFoo() { CriticalSection(crit_id); return foo; } void SetFoo(int value) { CriticalSection(crit_id); foo = value; } Is it possible for two threads to be attempting to read and write foo simultaneously? I'd have thought 'no' unless integers are written byte-at-a-time, in which case I can see the use. But I'd have though modern cpus would read/write integers in a single atomic action...

    Read the article

  • Waiting on threads

    - by Paul Reiners
    I have a method that contains the following (Java) code: doSomeThings(); doSomeOtherThings(); doSomeThings() creates some threads, each of which will run for only a finite amount of time. The problem is that I don't want doSomeOtherThings() to be called until all the threads launched by doSomeThings() are finished. (Also doSomeThings() will call methods that may launch new threads and so on. I don't want to execute doSomeOtherThings() until all these threads have finished.) This is because doSomeThings(), among other things will set myObject to null, while doSomeOtherThings() calls myObject.myMethod() and I do not want myObject to be null at that time. Is there some standard way of doing this kind of thing (in Java)?

    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

  • Execute PHP file in background

    - by Spyric
    I have some php code, that execute for a very long time. I need to realise next scheme: User enter on some page(page 1) This page starts execution of my large PHP script in background .(Every change is writting to database) We sent every N seconds query to database to get current status of execution. I don't want to use exec command because 1000 users makes 1000 php processes. It's not way for me...

    Read the article

  • Is it safe to read global data from multiple threads?

    - by user362515
    The scenario is as follows: Create an instance of a class (std::map) and sore it as global variable. Spawn threads. Threads read and use the same global instance of the class All spawned threads quit Global class instance is destroyed No mutex, no thread modifies the global class instance. Is this OK? Thank You

    Read the article

  • Java Multi threading - Avoid duplicate request processing

    - by seawaves
    I have following multi threaded environment scenario - Requests are coming to a method and I want to avoid the duplicate processing of concurrent requests coming. As multiple similar requests might be waiting for being processed in blocked state. I used hashtable to keep track of processed request, but it will create memory leaks, so how should keep track of processed request and avoid the same requests to be processed which may be in blocking state.

    Read the article

  • Any reason NOT to slap the 'synchronized' keyword everywhere?

    - by unknown
    In my java project, almost every non-static method I've written is synchronized. I've decided to fix up some code today, by removing most of the synchronized keywords. Right there I created several threading issues that took quite a while to fix, with no increase in performance. In the end I reverted everything. I don't see anyone else writing code with "synchronized" everywhere. So is there any reason I shouldn't have "synchronized" everywhere? What if I don't care too much about performance (ie. the method isn't called more than once every few seconds)?

    Read the article

  • how a thread can signal when it's finished?

    - by Kyle
    #include <iostream> #include <boost/thread.hpp> using std::endl; using std::cout; using namespace boost; mutex running_mutex; struct dostuff { volatile bool running; dostuff() : running(true) {} void operator()(int x) { cout << "dostuff beginning " << x << endl; this_thread::sleep(posix_time::seconds(2)); cout << "dostuff is done doing stuff" << endl; mutex::scoped_lock running_lock(running_mutex); running = false; } }; bool is_running(dostuff& doer) { mutex::scoped_lock running_lock(running_mutex); return doer.running; } int main() { cout << "Begin.." << endl; dostuff doer; thread t(doer, 4); if (is_running(doer)) cout << "Cool, it's running.\n"; this_thread::sleep(posix_time::seconds(3)); if (!is_running(doer)) cout << "Cool, it's done now.\n"; else cout << "still running? why\n"; // This happens! :( return 0; } Why is the output of the above program: Begin.. Cool, it's running. dostuff beginning 4 dostuff is done doing stuff still running? why How can dostuff correctly flag when it is done? I do not want to sit around waiting for it, I just want to be notified when it's done.

    Read the article

  • C# start a static thread

    - by user595605
    I have a Queue of items I want to process in a thread, and any instance of a class can add items to the Queue to be processed. My idea for doing this is to have a static Thread in the class that processes the items, the only problem is that I don't know where to start this thread, since I can't start it in its initialization. Is there a way I can start a static thread? Or should I be changing the architecture completely?

    Read the article

  • linux process scheduling delayed for long time

    - by Medicine
    I have done strace on my multi-threaded c++ application running on linux after couple hours of running, none of the threads got run, for about 12 seconds. I have seen that the unfinished select system call which is called with a timeout was unfinished before the thread was suspended, reported after it resumed that, it took 11.x seconds for the operation to finish. This is clear indication that the process got starved for a long time. All threads in the process are created with default scheduling policy(SCHED_OTHER) of linux and default priority. There are another 5 similar apps running on the same box which are also heavy I/O bound like this app due to heavy data received on the socket. But most of the time, this app is getting scheduled delay. The other apps are created with same sched policy and priority as this i.e. the defaults. why is only this process gets blocked almost all of the time? Could it be because this process is more I/O intensive as in more busy due to may be higher rates of data? So, the linux dynamic priority adjusting in play here which pushed this process down?

    Read the article

  • how do I repaint an applet while moving a sprite?

    - by Nagrom_17
    I have a little java applet where I create 2 threads, one thread repaints and the other moves an image from a point to where the user clicks. The problem is that when I call the move function it loops until the image is where the user clicks but it wont repaint until I break out of the loop even though the thread doing the moving and the thread doing the painting are separate. shortened version of key points: my program is an applet using the paint() method I have 2 threads one moves an image and the other paints that image when I am moving the image it is in a while loop the painting thread is still calling repaint() but that is as far as the call goes, it never repaints thank you for your time.

    Read the article

  • C# 4.0 how to pass variables to threads?

    - by Aviatrix
    How would i pass some parameters to a new thread that runs a function from another class ? What i'm trying to do is to pass an array or multiple variables to a function that sits in another class and its called by a new thread. i have tried to do it like this Functions functions = new Functions(); string[] data; Thread th = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart(functions.Post())); th.Start(data); but it shows error "No overload for method 'Post' takes 0 arguments" Any ideas ?

    Read the article

  • Running a loop (such as one for a mock webserver) within a thread

    - by bob c
    I'm trying to run a mock webserver within a thread within a class. I've tried passing the class' @server property to the thread block but as soon as I try to do server.accept the thread stops. Is there some way to make this work? I want to basically be able to run a webserver off of this script while still taking user input via stdin.gets. Is this possible? class Server def initialize() @server = TCPServer.new(8080) end def run() @thread = Thread.new(@server) { |server| while true newsock = server.accept puts "some stuff after accept!" next if !newsock # some other stuff end } end end def processCommand() # some user commands here end test = Server.new while true do processCommand(STDIN.gets) end In the above sample, the thread dies on server.accept

    Read the article

  • unprotected access to member in property get

    - by Lenik
    I have a property public ObservableCollection<string> Name { get { return _nameCache; } } _nameCache is updated by multiple threads in other class methods. The updates are guarded by a lock. The question is: should I use the same lock around my return statement? Will not using a lock lead to a race condition?

    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 | 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66  | Next Page >