Search Results

Search found 15087 results on 604 pages for 'python multithreading'.

Page 260/604 | < Previous Page | 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267  | Next Page >

  • What are shared by multi threads in the same process?

    - by skydoor
    I found that each thread still has its own registers. Also has its own stack, but other threads can read and write the stack memory. My questions, what are shared by the multi threads in the same process? What I can imagine is 1) address space of the process; 2) stack, register; 3) variables Can any body elaborate it and add more?

    Read the article

  • Pylons importing Psycopg2 error

    - by resopollution
    Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/psycopg2/__init__.py", line 60, in <module> from _psycopg import BINARY, NUMBER, STRING, DATETIME, ROWID ImportError: dlopen(/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/psycopg2/_psycopg.so, 2): Symbol not found: _PQbackendPID Referenced from: /Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/psycopg2/_psycopg.so Expected in: flat namespace in /Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/psycopg2/_psycopg.so Psycopg2 was working fine before, but now I get this error. Any ideas on this issue much appreciated. EDIT: so after dealing with so many psycopg2 errors everytime I set up my mac, I've decided to use VMWareFusion running Ubuntu instead.

    Read the article

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

    Read the article

  • Difference in output from use of synchronized keyword and join()

    - by user2964080
    I have 2 classes, public class Account { private int balance = 50; public int getBalance() { return balance; } public void withdraw(int amt){ this.balance -= amt; } } and public class DangerousAccount implements Runnable{ private Account acct = new Account(); public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException{ DangerousAccount target = new DangerousAccount(); Thread t1 = new Thread(target); Thread t2 = new Thread(target); t1.setName("Ravi"); t2.setName("Prakash"); t1.start(); /* #1 t1.join(); */ t2.start(); } public void run(){ for(int i=0; i<5; i++){ makeWithdrawl(10); if(acct.getBalance() < 0) System.out.println("Account Overdrawn"); } } public void makeWithdrawl(int amt){ if(acct.getBalance() >= amt){ System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " is going to withdraw"); try{ Thread.sleep(500); }catch(InterruptedException e){ e.printStackTrace(); } acct.withdraw(amt); System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " has finished the withdrawl"); }else{ System.out.println("Not Enough Money For " + Thread.currentThread().getName() + " to withdraw"); } } } I tried adding synchronized keyword in makeWithdrawl method public synchronized void makeWithdrawl(int amt){ and I keep getting this output as many times I try Ravi is going to withdraw Ravi has finished the withdrawl Ravi is going to withdraw Ravi has finished the withdrawl Ravi is going to withdraw Ravi has finished the withdrawl Ravi is going to withdraw Ravi has finished the withdrawl Ravi is going to withdraw Ravi has finished the withdrawl Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw This shows that only Thread t1 is working... If I un-comment the the line saying t1.join(); I get the same output. So how does synchronized differ from join() ? If I don't use synchronize keyword or join() I get various outputs like Ravi is going to withdraw Prakash is going to withdraw Prakash has finished the withdrawl Ravi has finished the withdrawl Prakash is going to withdraw Ravi is going to withdraw Prakash has finished the withdrawl Ravi has finished the withdrawl Prakash is going to withdraw Ravi is going to withdraw Prakash has finished the withdrawl Ravi has finished the withdrawl Account Overdrawn Account Overdrawn Not Enough Money For Ravi to withdraw Account Overdrawn Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Account Overdrawn Not Enough Money For Ravi to withdraw Account Overdrawn Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Account Overdrawn So how does the output from synchronized differ from join() ?

    Read the article

  • How to log correct context with Threadpool threads using log4net?

    - by myotherme
    I am trying to find a way to log useful context from a bunch of threads. The problem is that a lot of code is dealt with on Events that are arriving via threadpool threads (as far as I can tell) so their names are not in relation to any context. The problem can be demonstrated with the following code: class Program { private static readonly log4net.ILog log = log4net.LogManager.GetLogger(System.Reflection.MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().DeclaringType); static void Main(string[] args) { new Thread(TestThis).Start("ThreadA"); new Thread(TestThis).Start("ThreadB"); Console.ReadLine(); } private static void TestThis(object name) { var nameStr = (string)name; Thread.CurrentThread.Name = nameStr; log4net.ThreadContext.Properties["ThreadContext"] = nameStr; log4net.LogicalThreadContext.Properties["LogicalThreadContext"] = nameStr; log.Debug("From Thread itself"); ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(x => log.Debug("From threadpool Thread: " + nameStr)); } } The Conversion pattern is: %date [%thread] %-5level %logger [%property] - %message%newline The output is like so: 2010-05-21 15:08:02,357 [ThreadA] DEBUG LogicalContextTest.Program [{LogicalThreadContext=ThreadA, log4net:HostName=xxx, ThreadContext=ThreadA}] - From Thread itself 2010-05-21 15:08:02,357 [ThreadB] DEBUG LogicalContextTest.Program [{LogicalThreadContext=ThreadB, log4net:HostName=xxx, ThreadContext=ThreadB}] - From Thread itself 2010-05-21 15:08:02,404 [7] DEBUG LogicalContextTest.Program [{log4net:HostName=xxx}] - From threadpool Thread: ThreadA 2010-05-21 15:08:02,420 [16] DEBUG LogicalContextTest.Program [{log4net:HostName=xxx}] - From threadpool Thread: ThreadB As you can see the last two rows have no Names of useful information to distinguish the 2 threads, other than manually adding the name to the message (which I want to avoid). How can I get the Name/Context into the log for the threadpool threads without adding it to the message at every call?

    Read the article

  • AppDomain.CurrentDomain.DomainUnload not be raised in Console app

    - by Guy
    I have an assembly that when accessed spins up a single thread to process items placed on a queue. In that assembly I attach a handler to the DomainUnload event: AppDomain.CurrentDomain.DomainUnload += new EventHandler(CurrentDomain_DomainUnload); That handler joins the thread to the main thread so that all items on the queue can complete processing before the application terminates. The problem that I am experiencing is that the DomainUnload event is not getting fired when the console application terminates. Any ideas why this would be? Using .NET 3.5 and C#

    Read the article

  • How to spin an independent dispacher thread for a Silverlight UserControl

    - by ondesertverge
    I am trying to move a lot of different elements by 1 pixel very often and in parallel. Trying to do this on one dispatcher thread means that the elements are visited one after another. The result is that the more elements I have the slower they will all move. In WPF I was able to use a HostVisual as described here to solve this. I can't seem to find anything similar in Silverlight. Is this a drawback of the lightweight framework or is there something I haven't stumbled upon yet? I am using SL4.

    Read the article

  • cannot import name formats

    - by cadthecoder
    what does it mean? i ve googled but found nothing =/ ImportError at /admin/ cannot import name formats Request Method: GET Request URL: http://127.0.0.1:8000/admin/ Exception Type: ImportError Exception Value: cannot import name formats Exception Location: /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/django/contrib/admin/util.py in <module>, line 3 Python Executable: /usr/bin/python Python Version: 2.6.0 Python Path: ['/home/cad/project/lkd/gezegen/lkd_gezegen', '/usr/lib64/python26.zip', '/usr/lib64/python2.6', '/usr/lib64/python2.6/plat-linux2', '/usr/lib64/python2.6/lib-tk', '/usr/lib64/python2.6/lib-old', '/usr/lib64/python2.6/lib-dynload', '/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages', '/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/Numeric', '/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/PIL', '/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/gst-0.10', '/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/gtk-2.0', '/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/wx-2.8-gtk2-unicode', '/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages']

    Read the article

  • Why does C# thread die?

    - by JackN
    This is my 1st C# project so I may be doing something obviously improper in the code below. I am using .NET, WinForms (I think), and this is a desktop application until I get the bugs out. UpdateGui() uses Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate to update various GUI controls based on received serial data and sends a GetStatus() command out the serial port 4 times a second. Thread Read() reads the response from serial port whenever it arrives which should be near immediate. SerialPortFixer is a SerialPort IOException Workaround in C# I found at http://zachsaw.blogspot.com/2010/07/serialport-ioexception-workaround-in-c.html. After one or both threads die I'll see something like The thread 0x1288 has exited with code 0 (0x0). in the debug code output. Why do UpdateGui() and/or Read() eventually die? public partial class UpdateStatus : Form { private readonly byte[] Command = new byte[32]; private readonly byte[] Status = new byte[32]; readonly Thread readThread; private static readonly Mutex commandMutex = new Mutex(); private static readonly Mutex statusMutex = new Mutex(); ... public UpdateStatus() { InitializeComponent(); SerialPortFixer.Execute("COM2"); if (serialPort1.IsOpen) { serialPort1.Close(); } try { serialPort1.Open(); } catch (Exception e) { labelWarning.Text = LOST_COMMUNICATIONS + e; labelStatus.Text = LOST_COMMUNICATIONS + e; labelWarning.Visible = true; } readThread = new Thread(Read); readThread.Start(); new Timer(UpdateGui, null, 0, 250); } static void ProcessStatus(byte[] status) { Status.State = (State) status[4]; Status.Speed = status[6]; // MSB Status.Speed *= 256; Status.Speed += status[5]; var Speed = Status.Speed/GEAR_RATIO; Status.Speed = (int) Speed; ... } public void Read() { while (serialPort1 != null) { try { serialPort1.Read(Status, 0, 1); if (Status[0] != StartCharacter[0]) continue; serialPort1.Read(Status, 1, 1); if (Status[1] != StartCharacter[1]) continue; serialPort1.Read(Status, 2, 1); if (Status[2] != (int)Command.GetStatus) continue; serialPort1.Read(Status, 3, 1); ... statusMutex.WaitOne(); ProcessStatus(Status); Status.update = true; statusMutex.ReleaseMutex(); } catch (Exception e) { Console.WriteLine(@"ERROR! Read() " + e); } } } public void GetStatus() { const int parameterLength = 0; // For GetStatus statusMutex.WaitOne(); Status.update = false; statusMutex.ReleaseMutex(); commandMutex.WaitOne(); if (!SendCommand(Command.GetStatus, parameterLength)) { Console.WriteLine(@"ERROR! SendCommand(GetStatus)"); } commandMutex.ReleaseMutex(); } private void UpdateGui(object x) { try { Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate { Text = DateTime.Now.ToLongTimeString(); statusMutex.WaitOne(); if (Status.update) { if (Status.Speed > progressBarSpeed.Maximum) { Status.Speed = progressBarSpeed.Maximum; } progressBarSpeed.Value = Status.Speed; labelSpeed.Text = Status.Speed + RPM; ... } else { labelWarning.Text = LOST_COMMUNICATIONS; labelStatus.Text = LOST_COMMUNICATIONS; labelWarning.Visible = true; } statusMutex.ReleaseMutex(); GetStatus(); }); } catch (Exception e) { Console.WriteLine(@"ERROR! UpdateGui() " + e); } } }

    Read the article

  • controlling threads flow

    - by owca
    I had a task to write simple game simulating two players picking up 1-3 matches one after another until the pile is gone. I managed to do it for computer choosing random value of matches but now I'd like to go further and allow humans to play the game. Here's what I already have : http://paste.pocoo.org/show/201761/ Class Player is a computer player, and PlayerMan should be human being. Problem is, that thread of PlayerMan should wait until proper value of matches is given but I cannot make it work this way. Logic is as follows: thread runs until matches equals to zero. If player number is correct at the moment function pickMatches() is called. After decreasing number of matches on table, thread should wait and another thread should be notified. I know I must use wait() and notify() but I can't place them right. Class Shared keeps the value of current player, and also amount of matches. public void suspendThread() { suspended = true; } public void resumeThread() { suspended = false; } @Override public void run(){ int matches=1; int which = 0; int tmp=0; Shared data = this.selectData(); String name = this.returnName(); int number = this.getNumber(); while(data.getMatches() != 0){ while(!suspended){ try{ which = data.getCurrent(); if(number == which){ matches = pickMatches(); tmp = data.getMatches() - matches; data.setMatches(tmp, number); if(data.getMatches() == 0){ System.out.println(" "+ name+" takes "+matches+" matches."); System.out.println("Winner is player: "+name); stop(); } System.out.println(" "+ name+" takes "+matches+" matches."); if(number != 0){ data.setCurrent(0); } else{ data.setCurrent(1); } } this.suspendThread(); notifyAll(); wait(); }catch(InterruptedException exc) {} } } } @Override synchronized public int pickMatches(){ Scanner scanner = new Scanner(System.in); int n = 0; Shared data = this.selectData(); System.out.println("Choose amount of matches (from 1 to 3): "); if(data.getMatches() == 1){ System.out.println("There's only 1 match left !"); while(n != 1){ n = scanner.nextInt(); } } else{ do{ n = scanner.nextInt(); } while(n <= 1 && n >= 3); } return n; } }

    Read the article

  • How to keep a process running on a remote windows server

    - by DutrowLLC
    I need to implement a background process that runs on a remote windows server 24/7. My development environment is C#/ASP.NET 3.5. The purpose of the process is to: Send reminder e-mails to employees and customers at appropriate times (say 5:00PM on the day before a job is scheduled) Query and save GPS coordinates of employees when they are supposed to be out on jobs so that I can later verify that their positions were where they were supposed to be. If the process fails (which it probably will, especially when updates are added), I need for it to be restarted immediately (or within just a few minutes) as I would have very serious problems if this process failed to send a notification, log a GPS coordinate, or any of the other tasks its meant to perform.

    Read the article

  • CPU Affinity Masks (Putting Threads on different CPUs)

    - by hahuang65
    I have 4 threads, and I am trying to set thread 1 to run on CPU 1, thread 2 on CPU 2, etc. However, when I run my code below, the affinity masks are returning the correct values, but when I do a sched_getcpu() on the threads, they all return that they are running on CPU 4. Anybody know what my problem here is? Thanks in advance! #define _GNU_SOURCE #include <stdio.h> #include <pthread.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sched.h> #include <errno.h> void *pthread_Message(char *message) { printf("%s is running on CPU %d\n", message, sched_getcpu()); } int main() { pthread_t thread1, thread2, thread3, thread4; pthread_t threadArray[4]; cpu_set_t cpu1, cpu2, cpu3, cpu4; char *thread1Msg = "Thread 1"; char *thread2Msg = "Thread 2"; char *thread3Msg = "Thread 3"; char *thread4Msg = "Thread 4"; int thread1Create, thread2Create, thread3Create, thread4Create, i, temp; CPU_ZERO(&cpu1); CPU_SET(1, &cpu1); temp = pthread_setaffinity_np(thread1, sizeof(cpu_set_t), &cpu1); printf("Set returned by pthread_getaffinity_np() contained:\n"); for (i = 0; i < CPU_SETSIZE; i++) if (CPU_ISSET(i, &cpu1)) printf("CPU1: CPU %d\n", i); CPU_ZERO(&cpu2); CPU_SET(2, &cpu2); temp = pthread_setaffinity_np(thread2, sizeof(cpu_set_t), &cpu2); for (i = 0; i < CPU_SETSIZE; i++) if (CPU_ISSET(i, &cpu2)) printf("CPU2: CPU %d\n", i); CPU_ZERO(&cpu3); CPU_SET(3, &cpu3); temp = pthread_setaffinity_np(thread3, sizeof(cpu_set_t), &cpu3); for (i = 0; i < CPU_SETSIZE; i++) if (CPU_ISSET(i, &cpu3)) printf("CPU3: CPU %d\n", i); CPU_ZERO(&cpu4); CPU_SET(4, &cpu4); temp = pthread_setaffinity_np(thread4, sizeof(cpu_set_t), &cpu4); for (i = 0; i < CPU_SETSIZE; i++) if (CPU_ISSET(i, &cpu4)) printf("CPU4: CPU %d\n", i); thread1Create = pthread_create(&thread1, NULL, (void *)pthread_Message, thread1Msg); thread2Create = pthread_create(&thread2, NULL, (void *)pthread_Message, thread2Msg); thread3Create = pthread_create(&thread3, NULL, (void *)pthread_Message, thread3Msg); thread4Create = pthread_create(&thread4, NULL, (void *)pthread_Message, thread4Msg); pthread_join(thread1, NULL); pthread_join(thread2, NULL); pthread_join(thread3, NULL); pthread_join(thread4, NULL); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • How to give highest priority to events generated from main thread than those generated from secondar

    - by martjno
    I have a c++ application written in wxWidgets, which has a main thread (GUI) and a working thread (calculations). The working thread executes commands requested by the main thread and communicates the result to the main thread posting an event after every step of the processing. The problem is that when the working thread is sending many events consecutively, the gui requests made by the user (i.e. interrupt the processing clicking a button) won't be processed by the event handler until the working thread has finished. This is actually happening on OSX, on Windows it works perfectly. I've tried to wxThread::SetPriority and wxThread::Yield but nothing changes. It is working if I put wxThread::Sleep in the working thread, but this slows down very much the processing.

    Read the article

  • Lock-Free, Wait-Free and Wait-freedom algorithms for non-blocking multi-thread synchronization.

    - by GJ
    In multi thread programming we can find different terms for data transfer synchronization between two or more threads/tasks. When exactly we can say that some algorithem is: 1)Lock-Free 2)Wait-Free 3)Wait-Freedom I understand what means Lock-free but when we can say that some synchronization algorithm is Wait-Free or Wait-Freedom? I have made some code (ring buffer) for multi-thread synchronization and it use Lock-Free methods but: 1) Algorithm predicts maximum execution time of this routine. 2) Therad which call this routine at beginning set unique reference, what mean that is inside of this routine. 3) Other threads which are calling the same routine check this reference and if is set than count the CPU tick count (measure time) of first involved thread. If that time is to long interrupt the current work of involved thread and overrides him job. 4) Thread which not finished job because was interrupted from task scheduler (is reposed) at the end check the reference if not belongs to him repeat the job again. So this algorithm is not really Lock-free but there is no memory lock in use, and other involved threads can wait (or not) certain time before overide the job of reposed thread. Added RingBuffer.InsertLeft function: function TgjRingBuffer.InsertLeft(const link: pointer): integer; var AtStartReference: cardinal; CPUTimeStamp : int64; CurrentLeft : pointer; CurrentReference: cardinal; NewLeft : PReferencedPtr; Reference : cardinal; label TryAgain; begin Reference := GetThreadId + 1; //Reference.bit0 := 1 with rbRingBuffer^ do begin TryAgain: //Set Left.Reference with respect to all other cores :) CPUTimeStamp := GetCPUTimeStamp + LoopTicks; AtStartReference := Left.Reference OR 1; //Reference.bit0 := 1 repeat CurrentReference := Left.Reference; until (CurrentReference AND 1 = 0)or (GetCPUTimeStamp - CPUTimeStamp > 0); //No threads present in ring buffer or current thread timeout if ((CurrentReference AND 1 <> 0) and (AtStartReference <> CurrentReference)) or not CAS32(CurrentReference, Reference, Left.Reference) then goto TryAgain; //Calculate RingBuffer NewLeft address CurrentLeft := Left.Link; NewLeft := pointer(cardinal(CurrentLeft) - SizeOf(TReferencedPtr)); if cardinal(NewLeft) < cardinal(@Buffer) then NewLeft := EndBuffer; //Calcolate distance result := integer(Right.Link) - Integer(NewLeft); //Check buffer full if result = 0 then //Clear Reference if task still own reference if CAS32(Reference, 0, Left.Reference) then Exit else goto TryAgain; //Set NewLeft.Reference NewLeft^.Reference := Reference; SFence; //Try to set link and try to exchange NewLeft and clear Reference if task own reference if (Reference <> Left.Reference) or not CAS64(NewLeft^.Link, Reference, link, Reference, NewLeft^) or not CAS64(CurrentLeft, Reference, NewLeft, 0, Left) then goto TryAgain; //Calcolate result if result < 0 then result := Length - integer(cardinal(not Result) div SizeOf(TReferencedPtr)) else result := cardinal(result) div SizeOf(TReferencedPtr); end; //with end; { TgjRingBuffer.InsertLeft } RingBuffer unit you can find here: RingBuffer, CAS functions: FockFreePrimitives, and test program: RingBufferFlowTest Thanks in advance, GJ

    Read the article

  • Limiting one of each Runnable type in ExecutorService queue.

    - by Andrew
    I have an Executors.newFixedThreadPool(1) that I send several different tasks to (all implementing Runnable), and they get queued up and run sequentially correct? What is the best way to only allow one of each task to be either running or queued up at one time? I want to ignore all tasks sent to the ExecutorService that are already in the queue.

    Read the article

  • Some more multitasking java issues

    - by owca
    I had a task to write simple game simulating two players picking up 1-3 matches one after another until the pile is gone. I managed to do it for computer choosing random value of matches but now I'd like to go further and allow humans to play the game. Here's what I already have : http://paste.pocoo.org/show/200660/ Class Player is a computer player, and PlayerMan should be human being. Problem is, that thread of PlayerMan should wait until proper value of matches is given but I cannot make it work this way. When I type the values it sometimes catches them and decrease amount of matches but that's not exactly what I was up to :) Logics is : I check the value of current player. If it corresponds to this of the thread currently active I use scanner to catch the amount of matches. Else I wait one second (I know it's kinda harsh solution, but I have no other idea how to do it). Class Shared keeps the value of current player, and also amount of matches. By the way, is there any way I can make Player and Shared attributes private instead of public and still make the code work ? CONSOLE and INPUT-DIALOG is just for choosing way of inserting values. class PlayerMan extends Player{ static final int CONSOLE=0; static final int INPUT_DIALOG=1; private int input; public PlayerMan(String name, Shared data, int c){ super(name, data); input = c; } @Override public void run(){ Scanner scanner = new Scanner(System.in); int n = 0; System.out.println("Matches on table: "+data.matchesAmount); System.out.println("which: "+data.which); System.out.println("number: "+number); while(data.matchesAmount != 0){ if(number == data.which){ System.out.println("Choose amount of matches (from 1 to 3): "); n = scanner.nextInt(); if(data.matchesAmount == 1){ System.out.println("There's only 1 match left !"); while(n != 1){ n = scanner.nextInt(); } } else{ do{ n = scanner.nextInt(); } while(n <= 1 && n >= 3); } data.matchesAmount = data.matchesAmount - n; System.out.println(" "+ name+" takes "+n+" matches."); if(number != 0){ data.which = 0; } else{ data.which = 1; } } else{ try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch(InterruptedException exc) { System.out.println("End of thread."); return; } } System.out.println("Matches on table: "+data.matchesAmount); } if(data.matchesAmount == 0){ System.out.println("Winner is player: "+name); stop(); } } }

    Read the article

  • Swingworker producing duplicate output/output out of order?

    - by Stefan Kendall
    What is the proper way to guarantee delivery when using a SwingWorker? I'm trying to route data from an InputStream to a JTextArea, and I'm running my SwingWorker with the execute method. I think I'm following the example here, but I'm getting out of order results, duplicates, and general nonsense. Here is my non-working SwingWorker: class InputStreamOutputWorker extends SwingWorker<List<String>,String> { private InputStream is; private JTextArea output; public InputStreamOutputWorker(InputStream is, JTextArea output) { this.is = is; this.output = output; } @Override protected List<String> doInBackground() throws Exception { byte[] data = new byte[4 * 1024]; int len = 0; while ((len = is.read(data)) > 0) { String line = new String(data).trim(); publish(line); } return null; } @Override protected void process( List<String> chunks ) { for( String s : chunks ) { output.append(s + "\n"); } } }

    Read the article

  • Can I spead 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Deadlock sample in .net?

    - by DotNetBeginner
    Can anybody give a simple Deadlock sample code in c# ? And please tell the simplest way to find deadlock in your C# code sample. (May be the tool which will detect the dead lock in the given sample code.) NOTE: I have VS 2008

    Read the article

  • Symbian qt threading

    - by Umesha MS
    Hi, 1) In symbian c++ thread is not recommended. Instead of that they recommend active object for multi tasking. Presently I am using QT to develop a application in symbian. Since there is no active object in QT I thought of using thread. My question is , can I use thread, is it is recommended. If it is not recommended, how to achieve multitasking. 2) I have created a sample thread class as shown bellow. When I call test function from the constructer of the main window thread will start but UI will be in hung state, infact main window itself will not be displayed. Please help me to solve the problem. class CSampleThread: public QThread { Q_OBJECT public: CSampleThread(QObject *parent = 0) : QThread(parent) {} virtual ~CSampleThread() {} void test(){ QThread::start(LowPriority); } protected: void run() { while(true){} } };

    Read the article

  • Whats wrong with my backgroundwork method

    - by diver-d
    I am trying to get a background worker process working in a wpf application. it creates 2 files then crashes. BackgroundWorker worker = new BackgroundWorker(); worker.DoWork += delegate(object s, DoWorkEventArgs args) { CreateFile(i.ToString()); }; worker.RunWorkerAsync(); private void CreateFile(string fileName) { string path = string.Format(@"{0}\{1}.txt", directory, fileName); using (StreamWriter sw = new StreamWriter(path)) { sw.WriteLine(fileName); } } I get this error " The requested operation cannot be performed on a file with a user-mapped section open." what am I doing wrong? Any help would be great

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267  | Next Page >