Search Results

Search found 1638 results on 66 pages for 'multithreading'.

Page 24/66 | < Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >

  • Why is my Map broken?

    - by Kirk
    Scenario: Creating a server which has Room objects which contain User objects. I want to store the rooms in a Map of some sort by Id (a string). Desired Behavior: When a user makes a request via the server, I should be able to look up the Room by id from the library and then add the user to the room, if that's what the request needs. Currently I use the static function in my Library.java class where the Map is stored to retrieve Rooms: public class Library { private static Hashtable<String, Rooms> myRooms = new Hashtable<String, Rooms>(); public static addRoom(String s, Room r) { myRooms.put(s, r); } public static Room getRoomById(String s) { return myRooms.get(s); } } In another class I'll do the equivalent of myRoom.addUser(user); What I'm observing using Hashtable, is that no matter how many times I add a user to the Room returned by getRoomById, the user is not in the room later. I thought that in Java, the object that was returned was essentially a reference to the data, the same object that was in the Hashtable with the same references; but, it isn't behaving like that. Is there a way to get this behavior? Maybe with a wrapper of some sort? Am I just using the wrong variant of map? Help?

    Read the article

  • Form gets disposed somehow

    - by mnn
    I have a client-server application, in which I use classic Sockets and threads for receiving/sending data and listening for clients. The application works fine, but after some random time I get the ObjectDisposedException: System.ObjectDisposedException: Cannot access a disposed object. Object name: 'MainForm'. at System.Windows.Forms.Control.MarshaledInvoke(Control caller, Delegate method, Object[] args, Boolean synchronous) at System.Windows.Forms.Control.Invoke(Delegate method, Object[] args) at System.Windows.Forms.Control.Invoke(Delegate method) That code is called from client Socket thread and I use Invoke() method to run the code on UI thread. I'm sure that I don't manually dispose the form nor using Close() (form is closed by user clicking Close button), so I don't know what could cause its disposing.

    Read the article

  • System.WIndows.Application static members are thread safe?

    - by Lirik
    The Application static members are supposed to be thread safe: The public static (Shared in Visual Basic) members of this type are thread safe. In addition, the FindResource and TryFindResource methods and the Properties and Resources properties are thread safe.1 How much can we trust that statement in a multithreaded environment when calling static member methods of System.Windows.Application? Update: It's all in reference to this question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2463822/threading-errors-with-application-loadcomponent-key-already-exists/2463866#2463866 I never thought I'd see a real bug in the library, but this must be the day for me... that question seems to show a genuine bug. Usually it's "user error," but this doesn't seem to be the case.

    Read the article

  • Sending message from working non-gui thread to the main window

    - by bartek
    I'm using WinApi. Is SendMessage/PostMessage a good, thread safe method of communicating with the main window? Suppose, the working thread is creating a bitmap, that must be displayed on the screen. The working thread allocates a bitmap, sends a message with a pointer to this bitmap and waits until GUI thread processes it (for example using SendMessage). The working thread shares no data with other threads. Am I running into troubles with such design? Are there any other possibilities that do not introduce thread synchronizing, locking etc. ?

    Read the article

  • Core dump of a multithreaded program

    - by benjamin button
    Hi, i have regularly worked with single threaded programs. i never saw a multithreded program crashing since i havent worked on any. is there any difference between both teh core dumps? is there any additional information provided in the core dump of a multithreaded program when compared to a single threaded program?

    Read the article

  • Java Swing Threading with Updatable JProgressBar

    - by Anthony Sparks
    First off I've been working with Java's Concurency package quite a bit lately but I have found an issue that I am stuck on. I want to have and Application and the Application can have a SplashScreen with a status bar and the loading of other data. So I decided to use SwingUtilities.invokeAndWait( call the splash component here ). The SplashScreen then appears with a JProgressBar and runs a group of threads. But I can't seem to get a good handle on things. I've looked over SwingWorker and tried using it for this purpose but the thread just returns. Here is a bit of sudo-code. and the points I'm trying to achieve. Have an Application that has a SplashScreen that pauses while loading info Be able to run multiple threads under the SplashScreen Have the progress bar of the SplashScreen Update-able yet not exit until all threads are done. Launching splash screen try { SwingUtilities.invokeAndWait( SplashScreen ); } catch (InterruptedException e) { } catch (InvocationTargetException e) { } Splash screen construction SplashScreen extends JFrame implements Runnable{ public void run() { //run threads //while updating status bar } } I have tried many things including SwingWorkers, Threads using CountDownLatch's, and others. The CountDownLatch's actually worked in the manner I wanted to do the processing but I was unable to update the GUI. When using the SwingWorkers either the invokeAndWait was basically nullified (which is their purpose) or it wouldn't update the GUI still even when using a PropertyChangedListener. If someone else has a couple ideas it would be great to hear them. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Multi:Threading - Is this the right approach?

    - by HonorGod
    Experts - I need some advice in the following scenario. I have a configuration file with a list of tasks. Each task can have zero, one or more dependencies. I wanted to execute these tasks in parallel [right now they are being executed sequentially] The idea is to have a main program to read the configuration file and load all the tasks. Read individual tasks and give it to an executor [callable] that will perform the task and return results in a Future. When the task is submitted to the executor (thread) it will monitor for its dependencies to finish first and perform its own task. Is this the right approach? Are there any other better approaches using java 1.5 features?

    Read the article

  • Can I spread out a long running stored proc accross multiple CPU's?

    - by Russ
    [Also on SuperUser - http://superuser.com/questions/116600/can-i-spead-out-a-long-running-stored-proc-accross-multiple-cpus] I have a stored procedure in SQL server the gets, and decrypts a block of data. ( Credit cards in this case. ) Most of the time, the performance is tolerable, but there are a couple customers where the process is painfully slow, taking literally 1 minute to complete. ( Well, 59377ms to return from SQL Server to be exact, but it can vary by a few hundred ms based on load ) When I watch the process, I see that SQL is only using a single proc to perform the whole process, and typically only proc 0. Is there a way I can change my stored proc so that SQL can multi-thread the process? Is it even feasible to cheat and to break the calls in half, ( top 50%, bottom 50% ), and spread the load, as a gross hack? ( just spit-balling here ) My stored proc: USE [Commerce] GO /****** Object: StoredProcedure [dbo].[GetAllCreditCardsByCustomerId] Script Date: 03/05/2010 11:50:14 ******/ SET ANSI_NULLS ON GO SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON GO ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[GetAllCreditCardsByCustomerId] @companyId UNIQUEIDENTIFIER, @DecryptionKey NVARCHAR (MAX) AS SET NoCount ON DECLARE @cardId uniqueidentifier DECLARE @tmpdecryptedCardData VarChar(MAX); DECLARE @decryptedCardData VarChar(MAX); DECLARE @tmpTable as Table ( CardId uniqueidentifier, DecryptedCard NVarChar(Max) ) DECLARE creditCards CURSOR FAST_FORWARD READ_ONLY FOR Select cardId from CreditCards where companyId = @companyId and Active=1 order by addedBy desc --2 OPEN creditCards --3 FETCH creditCards INTO @cardId -- prime the cursor WHILE @@Fetch_Status = 0 BEGIN --OPEN creditCards DECLARE creditCardData CURSOR FAST_FORWARD READ_ONLY FOR select convert(nvarchar(max), DecryptByCert(Cert_Id('Oh-Nay-Nay'), EncryptedCard, @DecryptionKey)) FROM CreditCardData where cardid = @cardId order by valueOrder OPEN creditCardData FETCH creditCardData INTO @tmpdecryptedCardData -- prime the cursor WHILE @@Fetch_Status = 0 BEGIN print 'CreditCardData' print @tmpdecryptedCardData set @decryptedCardData = ISNULL(@decryptedCardData, '') + @tmpdecryptedCardData print '@decryptedCardData' print @decryptedCardData; FETCH NEXT FROM creditCardData INTO @tmpdecryptedCardData -- fetch next END CLOSE creditCardData DEALLOCATE creditCardData insert into @tmpTable (CardId, DecryptedCard) values ( @cardId, @decryptedCardData ) set @decryptedCardData = '' FETCH NEXT FROM creditCards INTO @cardId -- fetch next END select CardId, DecryptedCard FROM @tmpTable CLOSE creditCards DEALLOCATE creditCards

    Read the article

  • Can I spread out a long running stored proc accross multiple CPU's?

    - by Russ
    [Also on SuperUser - http://superuser.com/questions/116600/can-i-spead-out-a-long-running-stored-proc-accross-multiple-cpus] I have a stored procedure in SQL server the gets, and decrypts a block of data. ( Credit cards in this case. ) Most of the time, the performance is tolerable, but there are a couple customers where the process is painfully slow, taking literally 1 minute to complete. ( Well, 59377ms to return from SQL Server to be exact, but it can vary by a few hundred ms based on load ) When I watch the process, I see that SQL is only using a single proc to perform the whole process, and typically only proc 0. Is there a way I can change my stored proc so that SQL can multi-thread the process? Is it even feasible to cheat and to break the calls in half, ( top 50%, bottom 50% ), and spread the load, as a gross hack? ( just spit-balling here ) My stored proc: USE [Commerce] GO /****** Object: StoredProcedure [dbo].[GetAllCreditCardsByCustomerId] Script Date: 03/05/2010 11:50:14 ******/ SET ANSI_NULLS ON GO SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON GO ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[GetAllCreditCardsByCustomerId] @companyId UNIQUEIDENTIFIER, @DecryptionKey NVARCHAR (MAX) AS SET NoCount ON DECLARE @cardId uniqueidentifier DECLARE @tmpdecryptedCardData VarChar(MAX); DECLARE @decryptedCardData VarChar(MAX); DECLARE @tmpTable as Table ( CardId uniqueidentifier, DecryptedCard NVarChar(Max) ) DECLARE creditCards CURSOR FAST_FORWARD READ_ONLY FOR Select cardId from CreditCards where companyId = @companyId and Active=1 order by addedBy desc --2 OPEN creditCards --3 FETCH creditCards INTO @cardId -- prime the cursor WHILE @@Fetch_Status = 0 BEGIN --OPEN creditCards DECLARE creditCardData CURSOR FAST_FORWARD READ_ONLY FOR select convert(nvarchar(max), DecryptByCert(Cert_Id('Oh-Nay-Nay'), EncryptedCard, @DecryptionKey)) FROM CreditCardData where cardid = @cardId order by valueOrder OPEN creditCardData FETCH creditCardData INTO @tmpdecryptedCardData -- prime the cursor WHILE @@Fetch_Status = 0 BEGIN print 'CreditCardData' print @tmpdecryptedCardData set @decryptedCardData = ISNULL(@decryptedCardData, '') + @tmpdecryptedCardData print '@decryptedCardData' print @decryptedCardData; FETCH NEXT FROM creditCardData INTO @tmpdecryptedCardData -- fetch next END CLOSE creditCardData DEALLOCATE creditCardData insert into @tmpTable (CardId, DecryptedCard) values ( @cardId, @decryptedCardData ) set @decryptedCardData = '' FETCH NEXT FROM creditCards INTO @cardId -- fetch next END select CardId, DecryptedCard FROM @tmpTable CLOSE creditCards DEALLOCATE creditCards

    Read the article

  • Java Performance measurement

    - by portoalet
    Hi, I am doing some Java performance comparison between my classes, and wondering if there is some sort of Java Performance Framework to make writing performance measurement code easier? I.e, what I am doing now is trying to measure what effect does it have having a method as "synchronized" as in PseudoRandomUsingSynch.nextInt() compared to using an AtomicInteger as my "synchronizer". So I am trying to measure how long it takes to generate random integers using 3 threads accessing a synchronized method looping for say 10000 times. I am sure there is a much better way doing this. Can you please enlighten me? :) public static void main( String [] args ) throws InterruptedException, ExecutionException { PseudoRandomUsingSynch rand1 = new PseudoRandomUsingSynch((int)System.currentTimeMillis()); int n = 3; ExecutorService execService = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(n); long timeBefore = System.currentTimeMillis(); for(int idx=0; idx<100000; ++idx) { Future<Integer> future = execService.submit(rand1); Future<Integer> future1 = execService.submit(rand1); Future<Integer> future2 = execService.submit(rand1); int random1 = future.get(); int random2 = future1.get(); int random3 = future2.get(); } long timeAfter = System.currentTimeMillis(); long elapsed = timeAfter - timeBefore; out.println("elapsed:" + elapsed); } the class public class PseudoRandomUsingSynch implements Callable<Integer> { private int seed; public PseudoRandomUsingSynch(int s) { seed = s; } public synchronized int nextInt(int n) { byte [] s = DonsUtil.intToByteArray(seed); SecureRandom secureRandom = new SecureRandom(s); return ( secureRandom.nextInt() % n ); } @Override public Integer call() throws Exception { return nextInt((int)System.currentTimeMillis()); } } Regards

    Read the article

  • How can I limit access to a particular class to one caller at a time in an ASMX web service?

    - by MusiGenesis
    I have a web service method in which I create a particular type of object, use it for a few seconds, and then dispose it. Because of problems arising from multiple threads creating and using instances of this class at the same time, I need to restrict the method so that only one caller at a time ever has one of these objects. To do this, I am creating a private static object: private static object _lock = new object(); ... and then inside the web service method I do this around the critical code: lock (_lock) { using (DangerousObject do = new DangerousObject()) { do.MakeABigMess(); do.CleanItUp(); } } I'm not sure this is working, though. Do I have this right? Will this code ensure that only one instance of DangerousObject is instantiated and in use at a time? Or does each caller get their own copy of _lock, rendering my code here laughable?

    Read the article

  • Thread scheduling C

    - by MRP
    include <pthread.h> include <stdio.h> include <stdlib.h> #define NUM_THREADS 4 #define TCOUNT 5 #define COUNT_LIMIT 13 int done = 0; int count = 0; int thread_ids[4] = {0,1,2,3}; int thread_runtime[4] = {0,5,4,1}; pthread_mutex_t count_mutex; pthread_cond_t count_threshold_cv; void *inc_count(void *t) { int i; long my_id = (long)t; long run_time = thread_runtime[my_id]; if (my_id==2 && done ==0) { for(i=0; i< 5 ; i++) { if( i==4 ){done =1;} pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); count++; if (count == COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_signal(&count_threshold_cv); printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d Threshold reached.\n", my_id, count); } printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d, unlocking mutex\n", my_id, count); pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); } } if (my_id==3 && done==1) { for(i=0; i< 4 ; i++) { if(i == 3 ){ done = 2;} pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); count++; if (count == COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_signal(&count_threshold_cv); printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d Threshold reached.\n", my_id, count); } printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d, unlocking mutex\n", my_id, count); pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); } } if (my_id==4&& done == 2) { for(i=0; i< 8 ; i++) { pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); count++; if (count == COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_signal(&count_threshold_cv); printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d Threshold reached.\n",my_id, count); } printf("inc_count(): thread %ld, count = %d, unlocking mutex\n", my_id, count); pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); } } pthread_exit(NULL); } void *watch_count(void *t) { long my_id = (long)t; printf("Starting watch_count(): thread %ld\n", my_id); pthread_mutex_lock(&count_mutex); if (count<COUNT_LIMIT) { pthread_cond_wait(&count_threshold_cv, &count_mutex); printf("watch_count(): thread %ld Condition signal received.\n", my_id); count += 125; printf("watch_count(): thread %ld count now = %d.\n", my_id, count); } pthread_mutex_unlock(&count_mutex); pthread_exit(NULL); } int main (int argc, char *argv[]) { int i, rc; long t1=1, t2=2, t3=3, t4=4; pthread_t threads[4]; pthread_attr_t attr; pthread_mutex_init(&count_mutex, NULL); pthread_cond_init (&count_threshold_cv, NULL); pthread_attr_init(&attr); pthread_attr_setdetachstate(&attr,PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE); pthread_create(&threads[0], &attr, watch_count, (void *)t1); pthread_create(&threads[1], &attr, inc_count, (void *)t2); pthread_create(&threads[2], &attr, inc_count, (void *)t3); pthread_create(&threads[3], &attr, inc_count, (void *)t4); for (i=0; i<NUM_THREADS; i++) { pthread_join(threads[i], NULL); } printf ("Main(): Waited on %d threads. Done.\n", NUM_THREADS); pthread_attr_destroy(&attr); pthread_mutex_destroy(&count_mutex); pthread_cond_destroy(&count_threshold_cv); pthread_exit(NULL); } so this code creates 4 threads. thread 1 keeps track of the count value while the other 3 increment the count value. the run time is the number of times the thread will increment the count value. I have a done value that allows the first thread to increment the count value first until its run time is up.. so its like a First Come First Serve. my question is, is there a better way of implementing this? I have read about SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_RR.. I guess I dont know how to implement them into this code or if it can be.

    Read the article

  • java share data between thread

    - by ayush
    i have a java process that reads data from a socket server. Thus i have a BufferedReader and a PrintWriter object corresponding to that socket. Now in the same java process i have a multithreaded java server that accepts client connections. I want to achieve a functionality where all these clients that i accept can read data from the BufferedReader object that i mentioned above.(so that they can multiplex the data) How do i make these individual client threads read the data from BuffereReader single object? Sorry for the confusion.

    Read the article

  • BackgroundWorker vs background Thread

    - by freddy smith
    I have a stylistic question about the choice of background thread implementation I should use on a windows form app. Currently I have a BackgroundWorker on a form that has an infinite (while(true)) loop. In this loop I use WaitHandle.WaitAny to keep the thread snoozing until something of interest happens. One of the event handles I wait on is a "stopthread" event so that I can break out of the loop. This event is signaled when from my overridden Form.Dispose(). I read somewhere that BackgroundWorker is really intended for operations that you dont want to tie up the UI with and have an finite end - like downloading a file, or processing a sequence of items. In this case the "end" is unknown and only when the window is closed. Therefore would it be more appropriate for me to use a background Thread instead of BackgroundWorker for this purpose?

    Read the article

  • Practices for Foreground/Background threads in .NET

    - by Andrei Taptunov
    I work with in-house legacy communication framework which exposes some high level abstractions. These abstractions are wrappers with some logic around .NET threads. When I looked at code I've noticed that some abstractions are wrappers around foreground threads while others are wrappers around background threads. The sad thing is that I don't see any logic why in some cases foreground threads are used and background in other cases. Are there any guidelines or patterns & practices when it's better to choose one over another on server side and client side (I believe there should be some difference)?

    Read the article

  • How can I make these images download on a seperate thread?

    - by Andy Barlow
    Hello!! I have the following code running on my Android device. It works great and displays my list items wonderfully. It's also clever in the fact it only downloads the data when it's needed by the ArrayAdapter. However, whilst the download of the thumbnail is occurring, the entire list stalls and you cannot scroll until it's finished downloading. Is there any way of threading this so it'll still scroll happily, maybe show a place holder for the downloading image, finish the download, and then show? Any help with this would be really apreciated. Thank-you kindly. Andy Barlow private class CatalogAdapter extends ArrayAdapter { private ArrayList<SingleQueueResult> items; //Must research what this actually does! public CatalogAdapter(Context context, int textViewResourceId, ArrayList<SingleQueueResult> items) { super(context, textViewResourceId, items); this.items = items; } /** This overrides the getview of the ArrayAdapter. It should send back our new custom rows for the list */ @Override public View getView(int position, View convertView, ViewGroup parent) { View v = convertView; if (v == null) { LayoutInflater vi = (LayoutInflater)getSystemService(Context.LAYOUT_INFLATER_SERVICE); v = vi.inflate(R.layout.mylists_rows, null); } final SingleQueueResult result = items.get(position); // Sets the text inside the rows as they are scrolled by! if (result != null) { TextView title = (TextView)v.findViewById(R.id.mylist_title); TextView format = (TextView)v.findViewById(R.id.mylist_format); title.setText(result.getTitle()); format.setText(result.getThumbnail()); // Download Images ImageView myImageView = (ImageView)v.findViewById(R.id.mylist_thumbnail); downloadImage(result.getThumbnail(), myImageView); } return v; } } // This should run in a seperate thread public void downloadImage(String imageUrl, ImageView myImageView) { try { url = new URL(imageUrl); URLConnection conn = url.openConnection(); conn.connect(); InputStream is = conn.getInputStream(); BufferedInputStream bis = new BufferedInputStream(is); Bitmap bm = BitmapFactory.decodeStream(bis); bis.close(); is.close(); myImageView.setImageBitmap(bm); } catch (IOException e) { /* Reset to Default image on any error. */ //this.myImageView.setImageDrawable(getResources().getDrawable(R.drawable.default)); } }

    Read the article

  • UdpClient receiving and sending at the same time

    - by SoMoS
    Hello, I am maintaining other's code and its using the class UdpClient. The code declares one instance of UdpClient and receives data continuosly using the UdpClient.Receive(). When data is received it is processed in another thread and the UdpClient calls Receive() again. At the same time when the data is processed the same client is sending a response back. Question: Is this a bug? I think so because UdpClient is not thread safe so you can not call two methods at the same time. Anyways code is working fine but ...

    Read the article

  • What should be the ideal number of parallel java threads for copying a large set of files from a qua

    - by ukgenie
    What should be the ideal number of parallel java threads for copying a large set of files from a quad core linux box to an external shared folder? I can see that with a single thread it is taking a hell lot of time to move the files one by one. Multiple threads is improving the copy performance, but I don't know what should be the exact number of threads. I am using Java executor service to create the thread pool.

    Read the article

  • Calling QAxWidget method outside of the GUI thread

    - by user304361
    I'm beginning to wonder if this is impossible, but I thought I'd ask in case there's a clever way to get around the problems I'm having. I have a Qt application that uses an ActiveX control. The control is held by a QAxWidget, and the QAxWidget itself is contained within another QWidget (I needed to add additional signals/slots to the widget, and I couldn't just subclass QAxWidget because the class doesn't permit that). When I need to interact with the ActiveX control, I call a method of the QWidget, which in turn calls the dynamicCall method of the QAxWidget in order to invoke the appropriate method of the ActiveX control. All of that is working fine. However, one method of the ActiveX control takes several seconds to return. When I call this method, my entire GUI locks up for a few seconds until the method returns. This is undesirable. I'd like the ActiveX control to go off and do its processing by itself and come back to me when it's done without locking up the Qt GUI. I've tried a few things without success: Creating a new QThread and calling QAxWidget::dynamicCall from the new thread Connecting a signal to the appropriate slot method of the QAxWidget and calling the method using signals/slots instead of using dynamicCall Calling QAxWidget::dynamicCall using QtConcurrent::run Nothing seems to affect the behavior. No matter how or where I use dynamicCall (or trigger the appropriate slot of the QAxWidget), the GUI locks until the ActiveX control completes its operation. Is there any way to detach this ActiveX processing from the Qt GUI thread so that the GUI doesn't lock up while the ActiveX control is running a method? Is there something clever I can do with QAxBase or QAxObject to get my desired results?

    Read the article

  • Is NSPasteboard thread-safe?

    - by Joe
    Is it safe to write data to an NSPasteboard object from a background thread? I can't seem to find a definitive answer anywhere. I think the assumption is that the data will be written to the pasteboard before the drag begins. Background: I have an application that is fetching data from Evernote. When the application first loads, it gets the meta data for each note, but not the note content. The note stubs are then listed in an outline view. When the user starts to drag a note, the notes are passed to the background thread that handles getting the note content from Evernote. Having the main thread block until the data is gotten results in a significant delay and a poor user experience, so I have the [outlineView:writeItems:toPasteboard:] function return YES while the background thread processes the data and invokes the main thread to write the data to the pasteboard object. If the note content gets transferred before the user drops the note somewhere, everything works perfectly. If the user drops the note somewhere before the data has been processed... well, everything blocks forever. Is it safe to just have the background thread write the data to the pasteboard?

    Read the article

  • How do you implement Software Transactional Memory?

    - by Joseph Garvin
    In terms of actual low level atomic instructions and memory fences (I assume they're used), how do you implement STM? The part that's mysterious to me is that given some arbitrary chunk of code, you need a way to go back afterward and determine if the values used in each step were valid. How do you do that, and how do you do it efficiently? This would also seem to suggest that just like any other 'locking' solution you want to keep your critical sections as small as possible (to decrease the probability of a conflict), am I right? Also, can STM simply detect "another thread entered this area while the computation was executing, therefore the computation is invalid" or can it actually detect whether clobbered values were used (and thus by luck sometimes two threads may execute the same critical section simultaneously without need for rollback)?

    Read the article

  • UpdateAllViews() from within a worker thread?

    - by Harvey
    I have a worker thread in a class that is owned by a ChildView. (I intend to move this to the Doc eventually.) When the worker thread completes a task I want all the views to be updated. How can I make a call to tell the Doc to issue an UpdateAllViews()? Or is there a better approach? Thank you. Added by OP: I am looking for a simple solution. The App is running on a single user, single CPU computer and does not need network (or Internet) access. There is nothing to cause a deadlock. I think I would like to have the worker thread post (or send) a message to cause the views to update. Everything I read about threading seems way more complicated than what I need - and, yes, I understand that all those precautions are necessary for applications that are running in multiprocessor, multiuser, client-server systems, etc. But none of those apply in my situation. I am just stuck at getting the right combination of getting the window handle, posting the message and responding to the message in the right functions and classes to compile and function at all.

    Read the article

  • C# Execute Method (with Parameters) with ThreadPool

    - by washtik
    We have the following piece of code (idea for this code was found on this website) which will spawn new threads for the method "Do_SomeWork()". This enables us to run the method multiple times asynchronously. The code is: var numThreads = 20; var toProcess = numThreads; var resetEvent = new ManualResetEvent(false); for (var i = 0; i < numThreads; i++) { new Thread(delegate() { Do_SomeWork(Parameter1, Parameter2, Parameter3); if (Interlocked.Decrement(ref toProcess) == 0) resetEvent.Set(); }).Start(); } resetEvent.WaitOne(); However we would like to make use of ThreadPool rather than create our own new threads which can be detrimental to performance. The question is how can we modify the above code to make use of ThreadPool keeping in mind that the method "Do_SomeWork" takes multiple parameters and also has a return type (i.e. method is not void). Also, this is C# 2.0.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >