Search Results

Search found 8158 results on 327 pages for 'deadlocked thread'.

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 8/327 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • WebLogic stuck thread protection

    - by doublep
    By default WebLogic kills stuck threads after 15 min (600 s), this is controlled by StuckThreadMaxTime parameter. However, I cannot find more details on how exactly "stuckness" is defined. Specifically: What is the point at which 15 min countdown begins. Request processing start? Last wait()-like method? Something else? Does this apply only to request-processing threads or to all threads? I.e. can a request-processing thread "escape" this protection by spawning a worker thread for a long task? Especially, can it delegate response writing to such a worker without 15 min countdown? My usecase is download of huge files through a permission system. Since a user needs to be authenticated and have permissions to view a file, I cannot (or at least don't know how) leave this to a simple HTTP server, e.g. Apache. And because files can be huge, download could (at least in theory) take more than 15 minutes.

    Read the article

  • Singletons, thread safety and structuremap

    - by Ben
    Hi, Currently I have the following class: public class PluginManager { private static bool s_initialized; private static object s_lock = new object(); public static void Initialize() { if (!s_initialized) { lock (s_lock) { if (!s_initialized) { // initialize s_initialized = true; } } } } } The important thing here is that Initialize() should only be executed once whilst the application is running. I thought that I would refactor this into a singleton class since this would be more thread safe?: public sealed class PluginService { static PluginService() { } private static PluginService _instance = new PluginService(); public static PluginService Instance { get { return _instance; } } private bool s_initialized; public void Initialize() { if (!s_initialized) { // initialize s_initialized = true; } } } Question one, is it still necessary to have the lock here (I have removed it) since we will only ever be working on the same instance? Finally, I want to use DI and structure map to initialize my servcices so I have refactored as below: public interface IPluginService { void Initialize(); } public class NewPluginService : IPluginService { private bool s_initialized; public void Initialize() { if (!s_initialized) { // initialize s_initialized = true; } } } And in my registry: ForRequestedType<IPluginService>() .TheDefaultIsConcreteType<NewPluginService>().AsSingletons(); This works as expected (singleton returning true in the following code): var instance1 = ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IPluginService>(); var instance2 = ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IPluginService>(); bool singleton = (instance1 == instance2); So my next question, is the structure map solution as thread safe as the singleton class (second example). The only downside is that this would still allow NewPluginService to be instantiated directly (if not using structure map). Many thanks, Ben

    Read the article

  • while(1) block my recv thread

    - by zp26
    Hello. I have a problem with this code. As you can see a launch with an internal thread recv so that the program is blocked pending a given but will continue its execution, leaving the task to lock the thread. My program would continue to receive the recv data socket new_sd and so I entered an infinite loop (the commented code). The problem is that by entering the while (1) my program block before recv, but not inserting it correctly receives a string, but after that stop. Someone could help me make my recv always waiting for information? Thanks in advance for your help. -(IBAction)Chat{ [NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(riceviDatiServer) toTarget:self withObject:nil]; } -(void)riceviDatiServer{ NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc]init]; labelRicevuti.text = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:@"In attesa di ricevere i dati"]; char datiRicevuti[500]; int ricevuti; //while(1){ ricevuti = recv(new_sd, &datiRicevuti, 500, 0); labelRicevuti.text = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:@"%s", datiRicevuti]; //} [pool release]; }

    Read the article

  • Is Structuremap singleton thread safe?

    - by Ben
    Hi, Currently I have the following class: public class PluginManager { private static bool s_initialized; private static object s_lock = new object(); public static void Initialize() { if (!s_initialized) { lock (s_lock) { if (!s_initialized) { // initialize s_initialized = true; } } } } } The important thing here is that Initialize() should only be executed once whilst the application is running. I thought that I would refactor this into a singleton class since this would be more thread safe?: public sealed class PluginService { static PluginService() { } private static PluginService _instance = new PluginService(); public static PluginService Instance { get { return _instance; } } private bool s_initialized; public void Initialize() { if (!s_initialized) { // initialize s_initialized = true; } } } Question one, is it still necessary to have the lock here (I have removed it) since we will only ever be working on the same instance? Finally, I want to use DI and structure map to initialize my servcices so I have refactored as below: public interface IPluginService { void Initialize(); } public class NewPluginService : IPluginService { private bool s_initialized; public void Initialize() { if (!s_initialized) { // initialize s_initialized = true; } } } And in my registry: ForRequestedType<IPluginService>() .TheDefaultIsConcreteType<NewPluginService>().AsSingletons(); This works as expected (singleton returning true in the following code): var instance1 = ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IPluginService>(); var instance2 = ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IPluginService>(); bool singleton = (instance1 == instance2); So my next question, is the structure map solution as thread safe as the singleton class (second example). The only downside is that this would still allow NewPluginService to be instantiated directly (if not using structure map). Many thanks, Ben

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET lock thread method

    - by Peter
    Hello, I'm developing an ASP.NET forms webapplication using C#. I have a method which creates a new Order for a customer. It looks similar to this; private string CreateOrder(string userName) { // Fetch current order Order order = FetchOrder(userName); if (order.OrderId == 0) { // Has no order yet, create a new one order.OrderNumber = Utility.GenerateOrderNumber(); order.Save(); } return order; } The problem here is, it is possible that 1 customer in two requests (threads) could cause this method to be called twice while another thread is also inside this method. This can cause two orders to be created. How can I properly lock this method, so it can only be executed by one thread at a time per customer? I tried; Mutex mutex = null; private string CreateOrder(string userName) { if (mutex == null) { mutex = new Mutex(true, userName); } mutex.WaitOne(); // Code from above mutex.ReleaseMutex(); mutex = null; return order; } This works, but on some occasions it hangs on WaitOne and I don't know why. Is there an error, or should I use another method to lock? Thanks

    Read the article

  • C# COM Cross Thread problem

    - by user364676
    Hi, we're developing a software to control a scientific measuring device. it provides a COM-Interface defines serveral functions to set measurement parameters and fires an event when it measured data. in order to test our software, i'm implementing a simulation of that device. the com-object runs a loop which periodically fires the event. another loop in the client app should now setup up the com-simulator using the given functions. i created a class for measuring parameters which will be instanciated when setting up a new measurement. // COM-Object public class MeasurementParams { public double Param1; public double Param2; } public class COM_Sim : ICOMDevice { public MeasurementParams newMeasurement; IClient client; public int NewMeasurement() { newMeasurment = new MeasurementParam(); } public int SetParam1(double val) { // why is newMeasurement null when method is called from client loop newMeasurement.Param1 = val; } void loop() { while(true) { // fire event client.HandleEvent; } } } public class Client : IClient { ICOMDevice server; public int HandleEvent() { // handle this event server.NewMeasurement(); server.SetParam1(0.0); } void loop() { while(true) { // do some stuff... server.NewMeasurement(); server.SetParam1(0.0); } } } both of the loops run in independent threads. when server.NewMeasurement() is called, the object on the server is set to a new instance. but in the next function, the object is null again. do the same when handling the server-event, it works perfectly, because the method runs in the servers thread. how to make it work from client-thread as well. as the client is meant to be working with the real device, i cannot modify the interfaces given by the manufactor. also i need to setup measurements independent from the event-handler, which will be fired not regulary. i assume this problem related to multithreaded-COM behavior but i found nothing on this topic.

    Read the article

  • Legacy application creates dialogs in non-ui thread.

    - by Frater
    I've been working support for a while on a legacy application and I've noticed a bit of a problem. The system is an incredibly complex client/server with standard and custom frameworks. One of the custom frameworks built into the application involves validating workflow actions. It finds potential errors, separates them into warnings and errors, and passes the results back to the client. The main difference between warnings and errors is that warnings ask the user if they wish to ignore the error. The issue I have is that the dialog for this prompt is created on a non-ui thread, and thus we get cross-threading issues when the dialog is shown. I have attempted to invoke the showing of the dialog, however this fails because the window handle has not been created. (InvokeRequired returns false, which I assume in this case means it cannot find a decent handle in its parent tree, rather than that it doesn't require it.) Does anyone have any suggestions for how I can create this dialog and get the UI thread to set it up and call it?

    Read the article

  • efficient thread-safe singleton in C++

    - by user168715
    The usual pattern for a singleton class is something like static Foo &getInst() { static Foo *inst = NULL; if(inst == NULL) inst = new Foo(...); return *inst; } However, it's my understanding that this solution is not thread-safe, since 1) Foo's constructor might be called more than once (which may or may not matter) and 2) inst may not be fully constructed before it is returned to a different thread. One solution is to wrap a mutex around the whole method, but then I'm paying for synchronization overhead long after I actually need it. An alternative is something like static Foo &getInst() { static Foo *inst = NULL; if(inst == NULL) { pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex); if(inst == NULL) inst = new Foo(...); pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex); } return *inst; } Is this the right way to do it, or are there any pitfalls I should be aware of? For instance, are there any static initialization order problems that might occur, i.e. is inst always guaranteed to be NULL the first time getInst is called?

    Read the article

  • .net thread safety

    - by george9170
    Why is locking a type considered very bad? For example, lock(typeof(DateTime)) I understand that static methods of any class in .net is considered thread safe, and that instance members are not. So it isn't necessary to lock DateTime while you are using it. The book I am reading doesn't explain why it is bad it just says it is. Any explanation will be great.

    Read the article

  • Simple thread-safe non-blocking file logger class in c#

    - by Jason Renlan
    I have a web application, that will log some information to a file. I am looking for a simple thread-safe non-blocking file logger class in c#. I have little experience with threading. I known there are great logging components out there like log4Net, Enterprise Library Logging Block, ELMAH, but I do not want an external dependence for my application. I was thinking about using this queue implementation http://www.codeproject.com/KB/cpp/lockfreeq.aspx

    Read the article

  • Linux's thread local storage implementation

    - by anon
    __thread Foo foo; How is "foo" actually resolved? Does the compiler silently replace every instance of "foo" with a function call? Is "foo" stored somewhere relative to the bottom of the stack, and the compiler stores this as "hey, for each thread, have this space near the bottom of the stack, and foo is stored as 'offset x from bottom of stack'"?

    Read the article

  • May volatile be in user defined types to help writing thread-safe code

    - by David Rodríguez - dribeas
    I know, it has been made quite clear in a couple of questions/answers before, that volatile is related to the visible state of the c++ memory model and not to multithreading. On the other hand, this article by Alexandrescu uses the volatile keyword not as a runtime feature but rather as a compile time check to force the compiler into failing to accept code that could be not thread safe. In the article the keyword is used more like a required_thread_safety tag than the actual intended use of volatile. Is this (ab)use of volatile appropriate? What possible gotchas may be hidden in the approach? The first thing that comes to mind is added confusion: volatile is not related to thread safety, but by lack of a better tool I could accept it. Basic simplification of the article: If you declare a variable volatile, only volatile member methods can be called on it, so the compiler will block calling code to other methods. Declaring an std::vector instance as volatile will block all uses of the class. Adding a wrapper in the shape of a locking pointer that performs a const_cast to release the volatile requirement, any access through the locking pointer will be allowed. Stealing from the article: template <typename T> class LockingPtr { public: // Constructors/destructors LockingPtr(volatile T& obj, Mutex& mtx) : pObj_(const_cast<T*>(&obj)), pMtx_(&mtx) { mtx.Lock(); } ~LockingPtr() { pMtx_->Unlock(); } // Pointer behavior T& operator*() { return *pObj_; } T* operator->() { return pObj_; } private: T* pObj_; Mutex* pMtx_; LockingPtr(const LockingPtr&); LockingPtr& operator=(const LockingPtr&); }; class SyncBuf { public: void Thread1() { LockingPtr<BufT> lpBuf(buffer_, mtx_); BufT::iterator i = lpBuf->begin(); for (; i != lpBuf->end(); ++i) { // ... use *i ... } } void Thread2(); private: typedef vector<char> BufT; volatile BufT buffer_; Mutex mtx_; // controls access to buffer_ };

    Read the article

  • Fast inter-thread communication mechanism

    - by Stan
    I need a fast inter-thread communication mechanism for passing work (void*) from TBB tasks to several workers which are running blocking operations. Currently I'm looking into using pipe()+libevent. Is there a faster and more elegant alternative for use with Intel Threading Building Blocks?

    Read the article

  • How do I write a analyzable thread dump format

    - by gamue
    I'm creating a global exception handling which collects some information before shutting down in some cases. One of this information is the current thread dump. i do this with following code: ManagementFactory.getThreadMXBean().dumpAllThreads(true, true); The problem is to write the information into a analyzable format for TDA. Is there a "simple" way to format the information instead of writing the format on my own?

    Read the article

  • How to debug hanging main thread in Delphi application

    - by Harriv
    Hi, I've written application in Delphi 2007, which some times hangs (not even every week, application is running 24/7). It looks like main thread gets stuck. What are the options to pinpoint the cause for this problem? Application is written in Delphi 2007, it uses RemObjects, DBExpress with Firebird, OPC communication using COM.

    Read the article

  • C# event handlers not thread safe?

    - by Daniel
    So i've read around that instead of calling a event directly with if (SomeEvent != null) SomeEvent(this, null); i should be doing SomeEventHandler temp = SomeEvent; if (temp != null) temp(this, null); Why is this so? How does the second version become thread safe? What is the best practice?

    Read the article

  • Java: thread-safe RandomAccessFile

    - by Folkert van Heusden
    Hi, After some serious googleing I found out that the RandomAccessFile-class is not thread-safe. Now I could use one semaphore to lock all reads and writes but I don't think that performs very well. In theory it should be possible to do multiple reads and one write at a time. How can I do this in Java? Is it possible at all? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Run a form in another thread

    - by Smith
    i have five forms in my c# project. one host an httplistener that i want to run continionsly. when the listener gets a message, it passes it to a static class, which in turn calls the appropriate forms for another processing. is it possible that the static class calls the new form in a new thread? if so please help me out

    Read the article

  • C++ Thread level constants

    - by Gokul
    Is there a way by which we can simulate thread level constants in C++? For example, if i have to make a call to template functions, then i need to mention the constants as template level parameters? I can use static const variables for template metaprogramming, but they are process level constants. I know, i am asking a question with a high probability of 'No'. Just thought of asking this to capitalize on the very rare probability :)) Thanks, Gokul.

    Read the article

  • Thread safety in C# arrays

    - by Betamoo
    Does having 2 different threads : one reading from a C# array (e.g from first location), and another one writing to the same C# array but to a different location(e.g to the last location) is thread safe or not? (And I mean here without locking reading nor writing)

    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 | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >