Search Results

Search found 16324 results on 653 pages for 'per thread'.

Page 9/653 | < Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >

  • Adding row to DataGridView from Thread

    - by she hates me
    Hello, I would like to add rows to DataGridView from two seperate threads. I tried something with delegates and BeginInvoke but doesn't work. Here is my row updater function which is called from another function in a thread. public delegate void GRIDLOGDelegate(string ulke, string url, string ip = ""); private void GRIDLOG(string ulke, string url, string ip = "") { if (this.InvokeRequired) { // Pass the same function to BeginInvoke, // but the call would come on the correct // thread and InvokeRequired will be false. object[] myArray = new object[3]; myArray[0] = ulke; myArray[1] = url; myArray[2] = ip; this.BeginInvoke(new GRIDLOGDelegate(GRIDLOG), new object[] { myArray }); return; } //Yeni bir satir daha olustur string[] newRow = new string[] { ulke, url, ip }; dgLogGrid.Rows.Add(newRow); }

    Read the article

  • localtime_r supposed to be thread safe, but causing errors in Valgrind DRD

    - by Nik
    I searched google as much as I could but I couldn't find any good answers to this. localtime_r is supposed to be a thread-safe function for getting the system time. However, when checking my application with Valgrind --tool=drd, it consistantly tells me that there is a data race condition on this function. Are the common search results lying to me, or am I just missing something? It doesn't seem efficient to surround each localtime_r call with a mutex, especially if it is supposed to by thread safe in the first place. here is how i'm using it: timeval handlerTime; gettimeofday(&handlerTime,NULL); tm handlerTm; localtime_r(&handlerTime.tv_sec,&handlerTm); Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • [WPF] The calling thread cannot access this object because a different thread owns it.

    - by zunyite
    Why I can't create CroppedBitmap in the following code ? I got an exception : The calling thread cannot access this object because a different thread owns it. public MainWindow() { InitializeComponent(); ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem((o) => { //load a large image file var bf = BitmapFrame.Create( new Uri("D:\\1172735642.jpg"), BitmapCreateOptions.DelayCreation | BitmapCreateOptions.IgnoreColorProfile, BitmapCacheOption.None); bf.Freeze(); Dispatcher.BeginInvoke( new Action(() => { CroppedBitmap cb = new CroppedBitmap(bf, new Int32Rect(1,1,5,5)); cb.Freeze(); //set Image's source to cb.... }), System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherPriority.ApplicationIdle); } ); }

    Read the article

  • Java Thread - Synchronization issue

    - by Yatendra Goel
    From Sun's tutorial: Synchronized methods enable a simple strategy for preventing thread interference and memory consistency errors: if an object is visible to more than one thread, all reads or writes to that object's variables are done through synchronized methods. (An important exception: final fields, which cannot be modified after the object is constructed, can be safely read through non-synchronized methods, once the object is constructed) This strategy is effective, but can present problems with liveness, as we'll see later in this lesson. Q1. Is the above statements mean that if an object of a class is going to be shared among multiple threads, then all instance methods of that class (except getters of final fields) should be made synchronized, since instance methods process instance variables?

    Read the article

  • Python Threading, loading one thread after another

    - by Michael
    Hi, I'm working on a media player and am able to load in a single .wav and play it. As seen in the code below. foo = wx.FileDialog(self, message="Open a .wav file...", defaultDir=os.getcwd(), defaultFile="", style=wx.FD_MULTIPLE) foo.ShowModal() queue = foo.GetPaths() self.playing_thread = threading.Thread(target=self.playFile, args=(queue[0], 'msg')) self.playing_thread.start() But the problem is, when I try to make the above code into a loop for multiple .wav files. Such that while playing_thread.isActive == True, create and .start() the thread. Then if .isActive == False, pop queue[0] and load the next .wav file. Problem is, my UI will lock up and I'll have to terminate the program. Any ideas would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Static dictionary in .Net Thread safety

    - by Emmanuel
    Reading msdn documentation for dictionaries it says : "Public static (Shared in Visual Basic) members of this type are thread safe. Any instance members are not guaranteed to be thread safe." Those this mean that with a dictionary such as this : static object syncObject = new object(); static Dictionary<string,MyObject> mydictionary= new Dictionary<string, MyObject>(); Is doing something like the code below unnecessary? lock (syncObject) { context = new TDataContext(); mydictionary.Add("key", myObject); }

    Read the article

  • Optimal strategy to make a C++ hash table, thread safe

    - by Ajeet
    (I am interested in design of implementation NOT a readymade construct that will do it all.) Suppose we have a class HashTable (not hash-map implemented as a tree but hash-table) and say there are eight threads. Suppose read to write ratio is about 100:1 or even better 1000:1. Case A) Only one thread is a writer and others including writer can read from HashTable(they may simply iterate over entire hash table) Case B) All threads are identical and all could read/write. Can someone suggest best strategy to make the class thread safe with following consideration 1. Top priority to least lock contention 2. Second priority to least number of locks My understanding so far is thus : One BIG reader-writer lock(semaphore). Specialize the semaphore so that there could be eight instances writer-resource for case B, where each each writer resource locks one row(or range for that matter). (so i guess 1+8 mutexes) Please let me know if I am thinking on the correct line, and how could we improve on this solution.

    Read the article

  • OIM 11g : Multi-thread approach for writing custom scheduled job

    - by Saravanan V S
    In this post I have shared my experience of designing and developing an OIM schedule job that uses multi threaded approach for updating data in OIM using APIs.  I have used thread pool (in particular fixed thread pool) pattern in developing the OIM schedule job. The thread pooling pattern has noted advantages compared to thread per task approach. I have listed few of the advantage here ·         Threads are reused ·         Creation and tear-down cost of thread is reduced ·         Task execution latency is reduced ·         Improved performance ·         Controlled and efficient management of memory and resources used by threads More about java thread pool http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/concurrency/pools.html The following diagram depicts the high-level architectural diagram of the schedule job that process input from a flat file to update OIM process form data using fixed thread pool approach    The custom scheduled job shared in this post is developed to meet following requirement 1)      Need to process a CSV extract that contains identity, account identifying key and list of data to be updated on an existing OIM resource account. 2)      CSV file can contain data for multiple resources configured in OIM 3)      List of attribute to update and mapping between CSV column to OIM fields may vary between resources The following are three Java class developed for this requirement (I have given only prototype of the code that explains how to use thread pools in schedule task) CustomScheduler.java - Implementation of TaskSupport class that reads and passes the parameters configured on the schedule job to Thread Executor class. package com.oracle.oim.scheduler; import java.util.HashMap; import com.oracle.oim.bo.MultiThreadDataRecon; import oracle.iam.scheduler.vo.TaskSupport; public class CustomScheduler extends TaskSupport {      public void execute(HashMap options) throws Exception {             /*  Read Schedule Job Parameters */             String param1 = (String) options.get(“Parameter1”);             .             int noOfThread = (int) options.get(“No of Threads”);             .             String paramn = (int) options.get(“ParamterN”); /* Provide all the required input configured on schedule job to Thread Pool Executor implementation class like 1) Name of the file, 2) Delimiter 3) Header Row Numer 4) Line Escape character 5) Config and resource map lookup 6) No the thread to create */ new MultiThreadDataRecon(all_required_parameters, noOfThreads).reconcile();       }       public HashMap getAttributes() { return null; }       public void setAttributes() {       } } MultiThreadDataRecon.java – Helper class that reads data from input file, initialize the thread executor and builds the task queue. package com.oracle.oim.bo; import <required file IO classes>; import  <required java.util classes>; import  <required OIM API classes>; import <csv reader api>; public class MultiThreadDataRecon {  private int noOfThreads;  private ExecutorService threadExecutor = null;  public MetaDataRecon(<required params>, int noOfThreads)  {       //Store parameters locally       .       .       this.noOfThread = noOfThread;  }        /**        *  Initialize         */  private void init() throws Exception {       try {             // Initialize CSV file reader API objects             // Initialize OIM API objects             /* Initialize Fixed Thread Pool Executor class if no of threads                 configured is more than 1 */             if (noOfThreads > 1) {                   threadExecutor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(noOfThreads);             } else {                   threadExecutor = Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor();             }             /* Initialize TaskProcess clas s which will be executing task                 from the Queue */                TaskProcessor.initializeConfig(params);       } catch (***Exception e) {                   // TO DO       }  }       /**        *  Method to reconcile data from CSV to OIM        */ public void reconcile() throws Exception {        try {             init();             while(<csv file has line>){                   processRow(line);             }             /* Initiate thread shutdown */             threadExecutor.shutdown();             while (!threadExecutor.isTerminated()) {                 // Wait for all task to complete.             }            } catch (Exception e) {                   // TO DO            } finally {                   try {                         //Close all the file handles                   } catch (IOException e) {                         //TO DO                   }             }       }       /**        * Method to process         */       private void processRow(String row) {             // Create task processor instance with the row data              // Following code push the task to work queue and wait for next                available thread to execute             threadExecutor.execute(new TaskProcessor(rowData));       } } TaskProcessor.java – Implementation of “Runnable” interface that executes the required business logic to update data in OIM. package com.oracle.oim.bo; import <required APIs> class TaskProcessor implements Runnable {       //Initialize required member variables       /**        * Constructor        */       public TaskProcessor(<row data>) {             // Initialize and parse csv row       }       /*       *  Method to initialize required object for task execution       */       public static void initializeConfig(<params>) {             // Process param and initialize the required configs and object       }           /*        * (non-Javadoc)        *         * @see java.lang.Runnable#run()        */            public void run() {             if (<is csv data valid>){                   processData();             }       }  /**   * Process the the received CSV input   */  private void processData() {     try{       //Find the user in OIM using the identity matching key value from CSV       // Find the account to be update from user’s account based on account identifying key on CSV       // Update the account with data from CSV       }catch(***Exception e){           //TO DO       }   } }

    Read the article

  • per pixel based collision detection.

    - by pengume
    I was wondering if anyone had any ideas on how to get per pixel collision detection for the android. I saw that the andEngine has great collision detection on rotation as well but couldn't see where the actual detection happened per pixel. Also noticed a couple solutions for java, could these be replicated for use with the Android SDK? Maybe someone here has a clean piece of code I could look at to help understand what is going on with per pixel detection and also why when rotating it is a different process.

    Read the article

  • How many per-core licenses do I need?

    - by GavinPayneUK
      With SQL Server 2012, your licensing requirements can chose to use or be required to use a per-core model depending on the edition you’re deploying. This is a change to previous editions which used a per-CPU socket model that made counting how many per-CPU licences you needed easier – cores and HyperThreading didn’t influence the CPU socket count.  Any complications which people did have typically came from running SQL Server in a virtualised environment, was a vCPU a socket or did licensing...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Is a 1:* write:read thread system safe?

    - by Di-0xide
    Theoretically, thread-safe code should fix race conditions. Race conditions, as I understand it, occur because two threads attempt to write to the same location at the same time. However, what about a threading model in which a single thread is designed to write to a location, and several slave/worker threads simply read from the location? Assuming the value/timing at which they read the data isn't relevant/doesn't hinder the worker thread's outcome, wouldn't this be considered 'thread safe', or am I missing something in my logic?

    Read the article

  • 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

  • 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

< Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >