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 >

  • 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

  • [C++] Start a thread using a method pointer

    - by Michael
    Hi ! I'm trying to develop a thread abstraction (POSIX thread and thread from the Windows API), and I would very much like it to be able to start them with a method pointer, and not a function pointer. What I would like to do is an abstraction of thread being a class with a pure virtual method "runThread", which would be implanted in the future threaded class. I don't know yet about the Windows thread, but to start a POSIX thread, you need a function pointer, and not a method pointer. And I can't manage to find a way to associate a method with an instance so it could work as a function. I probably just can't find the keywords (and I've been searching a lot), I think it's pretty much what Boost::Bind() does, so it must exist. Can you help me ?

    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

  • 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

  • Have main thread wait for a boost thread complete a task (but not finish).

    - by JAKE6459
    I have found plenty on making one thread wait for another to finish executing before continuing, but that is not what I wanted to do. I am not very familiar with using any multi-threading apis but right now I'm trying to learn boost. My situation is that I am using my main thread (the starting one from int main()) to create an instance of a class that is in charge of interacting with the main GUI. A class function is then called that creates a boost thread which in turn creates the GUI and runs the message pump. The thing I want to do is when my main thread calls the classes member function to create the GUI, I don't want that function to return until I tell it to from the newly created thread. This way my main thread can't continue and call more functions from the GUI class that interact with the GUI thread until that thread has completed GUI creation and entered the message loop. I think I may be able to figure it out if it was multiple boost thread objects interacting with each other, but when it is the main thread (non-boost object) interacting with a boost thread object, I get lost. Eventually I want a loop in my main thread to call a class function (among other tasks) to check if the user as entered any new input into the GUI (buy any changes detected by the message loop being updated into a struct and changing a bool to tell the main thread in the class function a change has occurred). Any suggestions for any of this would be greatly appreciated. This is the member function called by the main thread. int ANNGUI::CreateGUI() { GUIMain = new Main(); GUIThread = new boost::thread(boost::bind(&Main::MainThreadFunc, GUIMain)); return 0; }; This is the boost thread starting function. void Main::MainThreadFunc() { ANNVariables = new GUIVariables; WndProc = new WindowProcedure; ANNWindowsClass = new WindowsClass(ANNVariables, WndProc); ANNWindow = new MainWindow(ANNVariables); GUIMessagePump = new MessagePump; ANNWindow-ShowWindows(); while(true) { GUIMessagePump-ProcessMessage(); } }; BTW, everything compiles fine and when I run it, it works I just put a sleep() in the main thread so I can play with the GUI a little.

    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

  • 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

  • Can two or more threads iterate over the same List<t> without any problems?

    - by CodingCrapper
    Talking about System.Collections.Generic.List here. With example below can Method1 and Method2 execute and the same time, on different threads without any problems? Thanks class Test { private readonly List<MyData> _data; public Test() { _data = LoadData(); } private List<MyData> LoadData() { //Get data from dv. } public void Method1() { foreach (var list in _data) { //do something } } public void Method2() { foreach (var list in _data) { //do something } } }

    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

  • Is it save 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 it ok? Thank You

    Read the article

  • 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

  • Iterators over a LInked List in a Game in Java

    - by Matthew
    I am using OpenGl in android and they have a callback method called draw that gets called with out my control. (As fast as the device can handle if I am not mistaken) I have a list of "GameObjects" that have a .draw method and a .update method. I have two different threads that handle each of those. So, the question is, can I declare two different iterators in two different methods in two different threads that iterate over the same Linked List? If so, do I simply declare ListIterator<GameObject> l = objets.listIterator() each time I want a new iterator and it won't interfere with other iterators?

    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

  • 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

  • What does the GDI+ background thread do?

    - by uj
    Upon initialization, GDI+ (non .NET) creates a background thread, which can optionally be suppressed subject to calling some hook functions. MSDN, however, doesn't say what this thread actually does. Google doesn't seem to know either. What is it for?

    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

  • Reading from a very large table using multiple threads (Java ) and writing them to a single file

    - by user2534926
    I am currently facing a situation where i have a table with almost 80 millions data and i have to take a dump of that table and store it into a csv file. Currently i am using a not so professional approach( with a perl script+DBI interface , printing the values to stdout and redirecting to a csv file). Now i am planning to use java threading approach. Can you suggest a way forward. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to put a form control on its own thread?

    - by BVernon
    I'm using a DataGridView and some operations that I do cause it to become unresponsive for periods of time. Normally I would put data processing in its own thread to make the form more responsive, but in this case it's the DataGridView itself that's taking so long. This leads me to wonder whether it's possible to have the main form on one thread and the DataGridView on another thread so it doesn't prevent the main form from responding. I completely understand that doing so is probably not 'safe' and likely opens up a can of worms that makes it hardly worth trying and I fully expect this post will be getting down votes for merely suggesting such a ridiculous idea. Is this possible? And if so how would you go about it?

    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

  • Why are my thread being terminated ?

    - by Sephy
    Hi, I'm trying to repeat calls to methods through 3 differents threads. But after I start my threads, during the next iteration of my loop, they are all terminated so nothing is executed... The code is as follows : public static void main(String[] args) { main = new Main(); pollingThread.start(); } static Thread pollingThread = new Thread() { @Override public void run() { while (isRunning) { main.poll(); // test the state of the threads try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } }; }; public void poll() { if (clientThread == null) { clientThread = new Thread(new Runnable() { @Override public void run() { //create some objects } }); clientThread.start(); } else if (clientThread.isAlive()) { // do some treatment } if (gestionnaireThread == null) { gestionnaireThread = new Thread(new Runnable() { @Override public void run() { //create some objects }; }); gestionnaireThread.start(); } else if (gestionnaireThread.isAlive()) { // do some treatment } if (marchandThread == null) { marchandThread = new Thread(new Runnable() { @Override public void run() { // create some objects }; }); marchandThread.start(); } else if (marchandThread.isAlive()) { // do some treatment } } And for some reason, when I test the state of my different threads, they appear as runnable and then a the 2nd iteration, they are all terminated... What am I doing wrong? I actually have no error, but the threads are terminated and so my loop keeps looping and telling me the threads are terminated.... Thanks for any help.

    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 >