Search Results

Search found 6694 results on 268 pages for 'wait states'.

Page 95/268 | < Previous Page | 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102  | Next Page >

  • InnoSetup: Check oldest version of app and show info message.

    - by jitm
    Hello, How to check that oldest version of application was installed during process of installation new version? What do I mean? I want before start installation start check process with dialog "please wait", if my installation found old version I can provide dialog "update or delete old and install new". How can I do it? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Why do sockets not die when server dies? Why does a socket die when server is alive?

    - by Roman
    I try to play with sockets a bit. For that I wrote very simple "client" and "server" applications. Client: import java.net.*; public class client { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { InetAddress localhost = InetAddress.getLocalHost(); System.out.println("before"); Socket clientSideSocket = null; try { clientSideSocket = new Socket(localhost,12345,localhost,54321); } catch (ConnectException e) { System.out.println("Connection Refused"); } System.out.println("after"); if (clientSideSocket != null) { clientSideSocket.close(); } } } Server: import java.net.*; public class server { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { ServerSocket listener = new ServerSocket(12345); while (true) { Socket serverSideSocket = listener.accept(); System.out.println("A client-request is accepted."); } } } And I found a behavior that I cannot explain: I start a server, than I start a client. Connection is successfully established (client stops running and server is running). Then I close the server and start it again in a second. After that I start a client and it writes "Connection Refused". It seems to me that the server "remember" the old connection and does not want to open the second connection twice. But I do not understand how it is possible. Because I killed the previous server and started a new one! I do not start the server immediately after the previous one was killed (I wait like 20 seconds). In this case the server "forget" the socket from the previous server and accepts the request from the client. I start the server and then I start the client. Connection is established (server writes: "A client-request is accepted"). Then I wait a minute and start the client again. And server (which was running the whole time) accept the request again! Why? The server should not accept the request from the same client-IP and client-port but it does!

    Read the article

  • Tee a Pipe Asynchronously

    - by User1
    I would like to write the same information to two pipes, but I don't want to wait for the first pipe to read. Here's an example mkfifo one mkfifo two echo hi | tee one two & cat one & cat two & cat one does not start reading until cat two is run. Is there a way to make cat one run without waiting?

    Read the article

  • INSERT and transaction searilization in PostreSQL

    - by Alexander
    Hello! I have a question. Transaction isolation level set to serializable. When the one user open transaction and INSERT or UPDATE data in "table1" and then another user open transaction and try to INSERT data to the same table is second user need to wait 'til the first user commits the transaction?

    Read the article

  • JUnit terminates child threads

    - by Marco
    Hi to all, When i test the execution of a method that creates a child thread, the JUnit test ends before the child thread and kills it. How do i force JUnit to wait for the child thread to complete its execution? Thanks

    Read the article

  • throw exception

    - by Unknown
    Why can't you throw an InterruptedException in the following way: try { System.in.wait(5) //Just an example } catch (InterruptedException exception) { exception.printStackTrace(); //On this next line I am confused as to why it will not let me throw the exception throw exception; } I went to http://java24hours.com, but it didn't tell me why I couldn't throw an InterruptedException. If anyone knows why, PLEASE tell me! I'm desperate! :S

    Read the article

  • Does watir's browser.text.include? count text inside invisible divs? If so, how to search only for v

    - by karlthorwald
    Does watir's browser.text.include? count text inside invisible divs? If so, how to search only for visible text? I put all the instructions into the html from the beginning and use jQuery to hide and unhide the relevant parts. How can I use watir's waiter to wait for only text that is visible? My problem is, that the waiter always returns true, even before I have shown a certain text.

    Read the article

  • waiting for 2 different events in a single thread

    - by João Portela
    component A (in C++) - is blocked waiting for alarm signals (not relevant) and IO signals (1 udp socket). has one handler for each of these. component B (java) - has to receive the same information the component A udp socket receives. periodicaly gives instructions that should be sent through component A udp socket. How to join both components? it is strongly desirable that: the changes to attach component B to component A are minimal (its not my code and it is not very pleasent to mess with). the time taken by the new operations (usually communicating with component B) interfere very little with the usual processing time of component A - this means that if the operations are going to take a "some" time I would rather use a thread or something to do them. note: since component A receives udp packets more frequently that it has component B instructions to forward, if necessary, it can only forward the instructions (when available) from the IO handler. my initial ideia was to develop a component C (in C++) that would sit inside the component A code (is this called an adapter?) that when instanciated starts the java process and makes the necessary connections (that not so little overhead in the initialization is not a problem). It would have 2 stacks, one for the data to give component B (lets call it Bstack) and for the data to give component A (lets call it Astack). It would sit on its thread (lets call it new-thread) waiting for data to be available in Bstack to send it over udp, and listen on the udp socket to put data on the Astack. This means that the changes to component A are only: when it receives a new UDP packet put it on the Bstack, and if there is something on the Astack sent it over its UDP socket (I decided for this because this socket would only be used in the main thread). One of the problems is that I don't know how to wait for both of these events at the same time using only one thread. so my questions are: Do I really need to use the main thread to send the data over component A socket or can I do it from the new-thread? (I think the answer is no, but I'm not sure about race conditions on sockets) how to I wait for both events? boost::condition_variable or something similar seems the solution in the case of the stack and boost::asio::io_service io_service.run() seems like the thing to use for the socket. Is there any other alternative solution for this problem that I'm not aware of? Thanks for reading this long text but I really wanted you to understand the problem.

    Read the article

  • Several client waiting for the same event

    - by ff8mania
    I'm developing a communication API to be used by a lot of generic clients to communicate with a proprietary system. This proprietary system exposes an API, and I use a particular classes to send and wait messages from this system: obviously the system alert me that a message is ready using an event. The event is named OnMessageArrived. My idea is to expose a simple SendSyncMessage(message) method that helps the user/client to simply send a message and the method returns the response. The client: using ( Communicator c = new Communicator() ) { response = c.SendSync(message); } The communicator class is done in this way: public class Communicator : IDisposable { // Proprietary system object ExternalSystem c; String currentRespone; Guid currentGUID; private readonly ManualResetEvent _manualResetEvent; private ManualResetEvent _manualResetEvent2; String systemName = "system"; String ServerName = "server"; public Communicator() { _manualResetEvent = new ManualResetEvent(false); //This methods are from the proprietary system API c = SystemInstance.CreateInstance(); c.Connect(systemName , ServerName); } private void ConnectionStarter( object data ) { c.OnMessageArrivedEvent += c_OnMessageArrivedEvent; _manualResetEvent.WaitOne(); c.OnMessageArrivedEvent-= c_OnMessageArrivedEvent; } public String SendSync( String Message ) { Thread _internalThread = new Thread(ConnectionStarter); _internalThread.Start(c); _manualResetEvent2 = new ManualResetEvent(false); String toRet; int messageID; currentGUID = Guid.NewGuid(); c.SendMessage(Message, "Request", currentGUID.ToString()); _manualResetEvent2.WaitOne(); toRet = currentRespone; return toRet; } void c_OnMessageArrivedEvent( int Id, string root, string guid, int TimeOut, out int ReturnCode ) { if ( !guid.Equals(currentGUID.ToString()) ) { _manualResetEvent2.Set(); ReturnCode = 0; return; } object newMessage; c.FetchMessage(Id, 7, out newMessage); currentRespone = newMessage.ToString(); ReturnCode = 0; _manualResetEvent2.Set(); } } I'm really noob in using waithandle, but my idea was to create an instance that sends the message and waits for an event. As soon as the event arrived, checks if the message is the one I expect (checking the unique guid), otherwise continues to wait for the next event. This because could be (and usually is in this way) a lot of clients working concurrently, and I want them to work parallel. As I implemented my stuff, at the moment if I run client 1, client 2 and client 3, client 2 starts sending message as soon as client 1 has finished, and client 3 as client 2 has finished: not what I'm trying to do. Can you help me to fix my code and get my target? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Is Spring.Threading.Helpers still supported?

    - by Paul Morrison
    I am converting some old C# code, and it has a CountDownLatch using a package called Spring.Threading.Helpers. The odd thing is that I can't find this package on Google - so a) is it still supported? And, if so, where is it documented? b) What I really want to do is wait for a count to get to zero, but interrupt every so many msecs. Would it just be simpler to set up another thread, and do WaitOnes on an Event specifying an interval? TIA

    Read the article

  • Thread sleep and thread join.

    - by Dhruv Gairola
    hi guys, if i put a thread to sleep in a loop, netbeans gives me a caution saying Invoking Thread.sleep in loop can cause performance problems. However, if i were to replace the sleep with join, no such caution is given. Both versions compile and work fine tho. My code is below (check the last few lines for "Thread.sleep() vs t.join()"). public class Test{ //Display a message, preceded by the name of the current thread static void threadMessage(String message) { String threadName = Thread.currentThread().getName(); System.out.format("%s: %s%n", threadName, message); } private static class MessageLoop implements Runnable { public void run() { String importantInfo[] = { "Mares eat oats", "Does eat oats", "Little lambs eat ivy", "A kid will eat ivy too" }; try { for (int i = 0; i < importantInfo.length; i++) { //Pause for 4 seconds Thread.sleep(4000); //Print a message threadMessage(importantInfo[i]); } } catch (InterruptedException e) { threadMessage("I wasn't done!"); } } } public static void main(String args[]) throws InterruptedException { //Delay, in milliseconds before we interrupt MessageLoop //thread (default one hour). long patience = 1000 * 60 * 60; //If command line argument present, gives patience in seconds. if (args.length > 0) { try { patience = Long.parseLong(args[0]) * 1000; } catch (NumberFormatException e) { System.err.println("Argument must be an integer."); System.exit(1); } } threadMessage("Starting MessageLoop thread"); long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis(); Thread t = new Thread(new MessageLoop()); t.start(); threadMessage("Waiting for MessageLoop thread to finish"); //loop until MessageLoop thread exits while (t.isAlive()) { threadMessage("Still waiting..."); //Wait maximum of 1 second for MessageLoop thread to //finish. /*******LOOK HERE**********************/ Thread.sleep(1000);//issues caution unlike t.join(1000) /**************************************/ if (((System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime) > patience) && t.isAlive()) { threadMessage("Tired of waiting!"); t.interrupt(); //Shouldn't be long now -- wait indefinitely t.join(); } } threadMessage("Finally!"); } } As i understand it, join waits for the other thread to complete, but in this case, arent both sleep and join doing the same thing? Then why does netbeans throw the caution?

    Read the article

  • jquery: popup menu upon clicking link ?

    - by wefwgeweg
    is there any way to "wait for user action on popupmenu" after an element is clicked ? for example: person A clicks on link. javascript menu popups asking what the user would like to do with this link. user should not be allowed to click anywhere else but the popup menu. after user clicks an action on the menu, the default browser action should happen (ie. link to the next page)

    Read the article

  • timeout stringwithcontentsofurl

    - by sergiobuj
    Hi, I have this call to stringwithcontentsofurl: [NSString stringWithContentsOfURL:url usedEncoding:NSASCIIStringEncoding error:nil]; How can I give that a simple timeout? I don't want to use threads or operation queues (the content of the url is about 100 characters), I just don't want to wait too long when the connection is slow.

    Read the article

  • Watin: Clicking on a element works in debug mode but not otherwise

    - by Vadi
    I've below code which basically clicks on a Click event present a table, browser.Frame("f").Element("Table1").Click(); it works properly when during debug mode (like if i put a break point and execute it). But, it does not work when i run it in a flow, I've used SimpleTimer to wait until Settings.WaitForCompleteTimeOut, but no use. Any help?

    Read the article

  • Flex saving progress bar

    - by Deena
    Hi, I am developing a static flex application which does not have a database connection, all the values are hardcoded(its just a prototype for the original app). Now when i click the save button, i need to get a message like saving in progress... please wait, I need to display this message for 3 seconds. Please let me know how could this be done. Thanks! Cheers, Deena

    Read the article

  • Redirecting one file to another using dub2 and strtok

    - by Sergiy Zakharov
    OK, here goes. I have to write a program, in which I need to use strtok and dup2 to redirect one file to another, but I need to also have the user to actually put the command cat < file1 file2, but not from the shell, but instead by using my program. That's why I need strtok. And the reason my program doesn't work is probably because of that, because I don't really understand how strtok works. I found a similar program on the internet, but they just take the ls command and redirect it to the file. That's it. My program is much more complicated. I mean, it would've been easier just to say in shell cat < file1 file2, but for some reason they want us to do it this way. So, anyways, here is what I have so far (here I just combined what I have found on the internet with what I already had from before. We had to do something similar but then the user would just go ls or ls -l. Very simple stuff. This is much harder, for me, at least.) #include <fcntl.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <errno.h> #include <sys/wait.h> #include <string.h> int main() { pid_t pid; char line[256]; char *args[129]; int i; int fd; int status; char *temp; while (1) { printf(">"); if (fgets(line, 256, stdin) == 0) { exit(0); } else { pid = fork(); if (pid == 0) { i = 0; temp = strtok("<",line); while (temp != NULL) { args[i++] = temp; temp = strtok(">",line); args[i] = '\0'; } fd = open("hello", O_RDONLY); dup2(fd, STDIN_FILENO); fd = open("world", O_WRONLY|O_CREAT|O_TRUNC, S_IRWXU); dup2(fd, STDOUT_FILENO ); close(fd); execvp(args[0], args); } else { close(fd); wait(&status); } } } } Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Why sockets does not die when server dies? Why socket dies when server is alive?

    - by Roman
    I try to play with sockets a bit. For that I wrote very simple "client" and "server" applications. Client: import java.net.*; public class client { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { InetAddress localhost = InetAddress.getLocalHost(); System.out.println("before"); Socket clientSideSocket = null; try { clientSideSocket = new Socket(localhost,12345,localhost,54321); } catch (ConnectException e) { System.out.println("Connection Refused"); } System.out.println("after"); if (clientSideSocket != null) { clientSideSocket.close(); } } } Server: import java.net.*; public class server { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { ServerSocket listener = new ServerSocket(12345); while (true) { Socket serverSideSocket = listener.accept(); System.out.println("A client-request is accepted."); } } } And I found a behavior that I cannot explain: I start a server, than I start a client. Connection is successfully established (client stops running and server is running). Then I close the server and start it again in a second. After that I start a client and it writes "Connection Refused". It seems to me that the server "remember" the old connection and does not want to open the second connection twice. But I do not understand how it is possible. Because I killed the previous server and started a new one! I do not start the server immediately after the previous one was killed (I wait like 20 seconds). In this case the server "forget" the socket from the previous server and accepts the request from the client. I start the server and then I start the client. Connection is established (server writes: "A client-request is accepted"). Then I wait a minute and start the client again. And server (which was running the whole time) accept the request again! Why? The server should not accept the request from the same client-IP and client-port but it does!

    Read the article

  • ThreadPoolExecutor fixed thread pool with custom behaviour

    - by Simone Margaritelli
    i'm new to this topic ... i'm using a ThreadPoolExecutor created with Executors.newFixedThreadPool( 10 ) and after the pool is full i'm starting to get a RejectedExecutionException . Is there a way to "force" the executor to put the new task in a "wait" status instead of rejecting it and starting it when the pool is freed ? Thanks Issue regarding this https://github.com/evilsocket/dsploit/issues/159 Line of code involved https://github.com/evilsocket/dsploit/blob/master/src/it/evilsocket/dsploit/net/NetworkDiscovery.java#L150

    Read the article

  • Simple Scala actor question

    - by 7zark7
    I'm sure this is a very simple question, but embarrassed to say I can't get my head around it: I have a list of values in Scala. I would like to use use actors to make some (external) calls with each value, in parallel. I would like to wait until all values have been processed, and then proceed. There's no shared values being modified. Could anyone advise? Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102  | Next Page >