Search Results

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

Page 275/604 | < Previous Page | 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282  | Next Page >

  • help me reason about F# threads

    - by Kevin Cantu
    In goofing around with some F# (via MonoDevelop), I have written a routine which lists files in a directory with one thread: let rec loop (path:string) = Array.append ( path |> Directory.GetFiles ) ( path |> Directory.GetDirectories |> Array.map loop |> Array.concat ) And then an asynchronous version of it: let rec loopPar (path:string) = Array.append ( path |> Directory.GetFiles ) ( let paths = path |> Directory.GetDirectories if paths <> [||] then [| for p in paths -> async { return (loopPar p) } |] |> Async.Parallel |> Async.RunSynchronously |> Array.concat else [||] ) On small directories, the asynchronous version works fine. On bigger directories (e.g. many thousands of directories and files), the asynchronous version seems to hang. What am I missing? I know that creating thousands of threads is never going to be the most efficient solution -- I only have 8 CPUs -- but I am baffled that for larger directories the asynchronous function just doesn't respond (even after a half hour). It doesn't visibly fail, though, which baffles me. Is there a thread pool which is exhausted? How do these threads actually work?

    Read the article

  • How to manage db connections on server?

    - by simpatico
    I have a severe problem with my database connection in my web application. Since I use a single database connection for the whole application from singleton Database class, if i try concurrent db operations (two users) the database rollsback the transactions. This is my static method used: All threads/servlets call static Database.doSomething(...) methods, which in turn call the the below method. private static /* synchronized*/ Connection getConnection(final boolean autoCommit) throws SQLException { if (con == null) { con = new MyRegistrationBean().getConnection(); } con.setAutoCommit(true); //TODO return con; } What's the recommended way to manage this db connection/s I have, so that I don't incurr in the same problem.

    Read the article

  • Is System.nanoTime() consistent across threads?

    - by obvio171
    I want to count the time elapsed between two events in nanoseconds. To do that, I can use System.nanoTime() as mentioned here. The problem is that the two events are happening in different threads. Since nanoTime() doesn't return an absolute timestamp but instead can only be used to calculate time differences, I'd like to know if the values I get on the two different threads are consistent with the physical time elapsed between the two events.

    Read the article

  • ReaderWriterLockSlim and Pulse/Wait

    - by Jono
    Is there an equivalent of Monitor.Pulse and Monitor.Wait that I can use in conjunction with a ReaderWriterLockSlim? I have a class where I've encapsulated multi-threaded access to an underlying queue. To enqueue something, I acquire a lock that protects the underlying queue (and a couple of other objects) then add the item and Monitor.Pulse the locked object to signal that something was added to the queue. public void Enqueue(ITask task) { lock (mutex) { underlying.Enqueue(task); Monitor.Pulse(mutex); } } On the other end of the queue, I have a single background thread that continuously processes messages as they arrive on the queue. It uses Monitor.Wait when there are no items in the queue, to avoid unnecessary polling. (I consider this to be good design, but any flames (within reason) are welcome if they help me learn otherwise.) private void DequeueForProcessing(object state) { while (true) { ITask task; lock (mutex) { while (underlying.Count == 0) { Monitor.Wait(mutex); } task = underlying.Dequeue(); } Process(task); } } As more operations are added to this class (requiring read-only access to the lock protected underlying), someone suggested using ReaderWriterLockSlim. I've never used the class before, and assuming it can offer some performance benefit, I'm not against it, but only if I can keep the Pulse/Wait design.

    Read the article

  • Is Work Stealing always the most appropriate user-level thread scheduling algorithm?

    - by Il-Bhima
    I've been investigating different scheduling algorithms for a thread pool I am implementing. Due to the nature of the problem I am solving I can assume that the tasks being run in parallel are independent and do not spawn any new tasks. The tasks can be of varying sizes. I went immediately for the most popular scheduling algorithm "work stealing" using lock-free deques for the local job queues, and I am relatively happy with this approach. However I'm wondering whether there are any common cases where work-stealing is not the best approach. For this particular problem I have a good estimate of the size of each individual task. Work-stealing does not make use of this information and I'm wondering if there is any scheduler which will give better load-balancing than work-stealing with this information (obviously with the same efficiency). NB. This question ties up with a previous question.

    Read the article

  • pthread_exit and/or pthread_join causing Abort and SegFaults.

    - by MJewkes
    The following code is a simple thread game, that switches between threads causing the timer to decrease. It works fine for 3 threads, causes and Abort(core dumped) for 4 threads, and causes a seg fault for 5 or more threads. Anyone have any idea why this might be happening? #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <pthread.h> #include <errno.h> #include <assert.h> int volatile num_of_threads; int volatile time_per_round; int volatile time_left; int volatile turn_id; int volatile thread_running; int volatile can_check; void * player (void * id_in){ int id= (int)id_in; while(1){ if(can_check){ if (time_left<=0){ break; } can_check=0; if(thread_running){ if(turn_id==id-1){ turn_id=random()%num_of_threads; time_left--; } } can_check=1; } } pthread_exit(NULL); } int main(int argc, char *args[]){ int i; int buffer; pthread_t * threads =(pthread_t *)malloc(num_of_threads*sizeof(pthread_t)); thread_running=0; num_of_threads=atoi(args[1]); can_check=0; time_per_round = atoi(args[2]); time_left=time_per_round; srandom(time(NULL)); //Create Threads for (i=0;i<num_of_threads;i++){ do{ buffer=pthread_create(&threads[i],NULL,player,(void *)(i+1)); }while(buffer == EAGAIN); } can_check=1; time_left=time_per_round; turn_id=random()%num_of_threads; thread_running=1; for (i=0;i<num_of_threads;i++){ assert(!pthread_join(threads[i], NULL)); } return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Multithreaded Unit Testing

    - by scope-creep
    Hi, Can anybody recommend any good books on unit testing for multitesting applications. Also can any body recommend appplications or utilities which can be used for multithreaded testing, similar to the java tool ConTest, (which i've not used but a fried recommended) Any help particularly related to C# unit testing for multithreaded apps in particularly welcome. thanks. Bob.

    Read the article

  • How do I make my ArrayList Thread-Safe? Another approach to problem in Java?

    - by thechiman
    I have an ArrayList that I want to use to hold RaceCar objects that extend the Thread class as soon as they are finished executing. A class, called Race, handles this ArrayList using a callback method that the RaceCar object calls when it is finished executing. The callback method, addFinisher(RaceCar finisher), adds the RaceCar object to the ArrayList. This is supposed to give the order in which the Threads finish executing. I know that ArrayList isn't synchronized and thus isn't thread-safe. I tried using the Collections.synchronizedCollection(c Collection) method by passing in a new ArrayList and assigning the returned Collection to an ArrayList. However, this gives me a compiler error: Race.java:41: incompatible types found : java.util.Collection required: java.util.ArrayList finishingOrder = Collections.synchronizedCollection(new ArrayList(numberOfRaceCars)); Here is the relevant code: public class Race implements RaceListener { private Thread[] racers; private ArrayList finishingOrder; //Make an ArrayList to hold RaceCar objects to determine winners finishingOrder = Collections.synchronizedCollection(new ArrayList(numberOfRaceCars)); //Fill array with RaceCar objects for(int i=0; i<numberOfRaceCars; i++) { racers[i] = new RaceCar(laps, inputs[i]); //Add this as a RaceListener to each RaceCar ((RaceCar) racers[i]).addRaceListener(this); } //Implement the one method in the RaceListener interface public void addFinisher(RaceCar finisher) { finishingOrder.add(finisher); } What I need to know is, am I using a correct approach and if not, what should I use to make my code thread-safe? Thanks for the help!

    Read the article

  • Simple multi-threading - combining statements to two lines.

    - by Adam
    If I have: ThreadStart starter = delegate { MessageBox.Show("Test"); }; new Thread(starter).Start(); How can I combine this into one line of code? I've tried: new Thread(delegate { MessageBox.Show("Test"); }).Start(); But I get this error: The call is ambiguous between the following methods or properties: 'System.Threading.Thread.Thread(System.Threading.ThreadStart)' and 'System.Threading.Thread.Thread(System.Threading.ParameterizedThreadStart)'

    Read the article

  • Java - Call to start method on thread : how does it route to Runnable interface's run () ?

    - by Bhaskar
    Ok , I know the two standard ways to create a new thread and run it in Java : 1 Implement Runnable in a class , define run method ,and pass an instance of the class to a new Thread. When the start method on the thread instance is called , the run method of the class instance will be invoked. 2 Let the class derive from Thread, so it can to override the method run() and then when a new instance's start method is called , the call is routed to overridden method. In both methods , basically a new Thread object is created and its start method invoked. However , while in the second method , the mechanism of the call being routed to the user defined run() method is very clear ,( its a simple runtime polymorphism in play ), I dont understand how the call to start method on the Thread object gets routed to run() method of the class implementing Runnable interface. Does the Thread class have an private field of Type Runnable which it checks first , and if it is set then invokes the run method if it set to an object ? that would be a strange mechanism IMO. How does the call to start() on a thread get routed to the run method of the Runnable interface implemented by the class whose object is passed as a parameter when contructing the thread ?

    Read the article

  • why does setting stderr=subprocess.STDOUT fix a subprocess.check_output call?

    - by ShankarG
    I have a python script running on a small server that is called in three different ways - from within another python script, by cron, or by gammu-smsd (an SMS daemon with the wonderful mobile utility [gammu]). The script is for maintenance and contained the following kludge to measure used space on the system (presumably this is possible from within Python, but this was quick and dirty): reportdict['Used Space'] = subprocess.check_output(["df / | tail -1 | awk '{ print $5; }'"], shell=True)[0:-1] Oddly enough this line would only fail when the script was called by a shell script running from gammu-smsd. The line would fail with a CalledProcessError exception saying "returned exit status 2", even though the output attribute of the CalledProcessError object contained the correct output. The only command in the sequence of shell commands that would give such an error status would be awk, with status 2 indicating a fatal error. If the python script with this line was called by cron, by another python script, or from the command line, this line would work fine. I broke my head trying to fix the environment for the script, thinking this must be the problem. Finally though I put in stderr=subprocess.STDOUT, like so: reportdict['Used Space'] = subprocess.check_output(["df / | tail -1 | awk '{ print $5; }'"], stderr=subprocess.STDOUT, shell=True)[0:-1] This was a debug measure to help me figure out if some output was coming on stderr. But after this the script started working, even when called from gammu-smsd! Why might this be the case? I ask for future reference when using subprocess...

    Read the article

  • Polling servers at the same port - Threads and Java

    - by John
    Hi there. I'm currently busy working on an IP ban tool for the early versions of Call of Duty 1. (Apparently such a feature wasn't implemented in these versions). I've finished a single threaded application but it won't perform well enough for multiple servers, which is why I am trying to implement threading. Right now, each server has its own thread. I have a Networking class, which has a method; "GetStatus" -- this method is synchronized. This method uses a DatagramSocket to communicate with the server. Since this method is static and synchronized, I shouldn't get in trouble and receive a whole bunch of "Address already in use" exceptions. However, I have a second method named "SendMessage". This method is supposed to send a message to the server. How can I make sure "SendMessage" cannot be invoked when there's already a thread running in "GetStatus", and the other way around? If I make both synchronized, I will still get in trouble if Thread A is opening a socket on Port 99999 and invoking "SendMessage" while Thread B is opening a socket on the same port and invoking "GetStatus"? (Game servers are usually hosted on the same ports) I guess what I am really after is a way to make an entire class synchronized, so that only one method can be invoked and run at a time by a single thread. Hope that what I am trying to accomplish/avoid is made clear in this text. Any help is greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Threading calls to web service in a web service - (.net 2.0)

    - by Ryan Ternier
    Got a question regarding best practices for doing parallel web service calls, in a web service. Our portal will get a message, split that message into 2 messages, and then do 2 calls to our broker. These need to be on separate threads to lower the timeout. One solution is to do something similar to (pseudo code): XmlNode DNode = GetaGetDemoNodeSomehow(); XmlNode ENode = GetAGetElNodeSomehow(); XmlNode elResponse; XmlNode demResponse; Thread dThread = new Thread(delegate { //Web Service Call GetDemographics d = new GetDemographics(); demResponse = d.HIALRequest(DNode); }); Thread eThread = new Thread(delegate { //Web Service Call GetEligibility ge = new GetEligibility(); elResponse = ge.HIALRequest(ENode); }); dThread.Start(); eThread.Start(); dThread.Join(); eThread.Join(); //combine the resulting XML and return it. //Maybe throw a bit of logging in to make architecture happy Another option we thought of is to create a worker class, and pass it the service information and have it execute. This would allow us to have a bit more control over what is going on, but could add additional overhead. Another option brought up would be 2 asynchronous calls and manage the returns through a loop. When the calls are completed (success or error) the loop picks it up and ends. The portal service will be called about 50,000 times a day. I don't want to gold plate this sucker. I'm looking for something light weight. The services that are being called on the broker do have time out limits set, and are already heavily logged and audited, so I'm not worried on that part. This is .NET 2.0 , and as much as I would love to upgrade I can't right now. So please leave all the goodies of 2.0 out please.

    Read the article

  • How do I create a Thread Manager for an Android App ?

    - by MrBuBBLs
    Hi, I would like to know how to start and code a thread manager for my Android App. My app is going to fill a list with a network I/O and I have to manage threads for that. I never done this before and I don't know where to start. I heard about Thread Pool and other stuff, but I'm quite confused. Could someone please help me make my way through ? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Limiting the number of threads executing a method at a single time.

    - by Steve_
    We have a situation where we want to limit the number of paralell requests our application can make to its application server. We have potentially 100+ background threads running that will want to at some point make a call to the application server but only want 5 threads to be able to call SendMessage() (or whatever the method will be) at any one time. What is the best way of achieving this? I have considered using some sort of gatekeeper object that blocks threads coming into the method until the number of threads executing in it has dropped below the threshold. Would this be a reasonable solution or am I overlooking the fact that this might be dirty/dangerous? We are developing in C#.NET 3.5. Thanks, Steve

    Read the article

  • What is the optimal number of threads for performing IO operations in java?

    - by marc
    In Goetz's "Java Concurrency in Practice", in a footnote on page 101, he writes "For computational problems like this that do not I/O and access no shared data, Ncpu or Ncpu+1 threads yield optimal throughput; more threads do not help, and may in fact degrade performance..." My question is, when performing I/O operations such as file writing, file reading, file deleting, etc, are there guidelines for the number of threads to use to achieve maximum performance? I understand this will be just a guide number, since disk speeds and a host of other factors play into this. Still, I'm wondering: can 20 threads write 1000 separate files to disk faster than 4 threads can on a 4-cpu machine?

    Read the article

  • Setting Up virtualenv with python2.6

    - by Zach
    I'm setting up a virtualenv, but it seems to be using python2.5 by default. I'm using this command virtualenv newenv --no-site-packages -p python because the python found on my path is python2.6. I believe this to be true because when I type python and go into the shell, it tells me it's 2.6. When I create the virtualenv with the above command and launch the shell, it tells me I'm in 2.5. Anyone else have this issue?

    Read the article

  • How to automatically run in the background?

    - by Hun1Ahpu
    I'm not sure that it's not implemented yet, I hope that it is. But I know that in .Net programmers should manually run time-consuming task in the background thread. So every time we handle some UI event and we understand that this will take some time we also understand that this will hang UI thread and our application. And then we make all this Background work things and handle callbacks or whatever. So my question is: Is there in some language/platform a mechanism that will automatically run time-consuming tasks in the background and will do all related work itself? So we just write the code for handling specific UI event and this code will be somehow detected as time-consuming and will be executed in background. And if there isn't, then why?

    Read the article

  • C++ threaded class design from non-threaded class

    - by macs
    I'm working on a library doing audio encoding/decoding. The encoder shall be able to use multiple cores (i.e. multiple threads, using boost library), if available. What i have right now is a class that performs all encoding-relevant operations. The next step i want to take is to make that class threaded. So i'm wondering how to do this. I thought about writing a thread-class, creating n threads for n cores and then calling the encoder with the appropriate arguments. But maybe this is an overkill and there is no need for another class, so i'm going to make use of the "user interface" for thread-creation. I hope there are any suggestions.

    Read the article

  • Thread.sleep vs Monitor.Wait vs RegisteredWaitHandle?

    - by Royi Namir
    (the following items has different goals , but im interesting knowing how they "PAUSEd") questions Thread.sleep - Does it impact performance on a system ?does it tie up a thread with its wait ? what about Monitor.Wait ? what is the difference in the way they "wait"? do they tie up a thread with their wait ? what aboutRegisteredWaitHandle ? This method accepts a delegate that is executed when a wait handle is signaled. While it’s waiting, it doesn’t tie up a thread. so some thread are paused and can be woken by a delegate , while others just wait ? spin ? can someone please make things clearer ? edit http://www.albahari.com/threading/part2.aspx

    Read the article

  • How does one implement a truly asynchronous java thread

    - by Ritesh M Nayak
    I have a function that needs to perfom two operations, one which finishes fast and one which takes a long time to run. I want to be able to delegate the long running operation to a thread and I dont care when the thread finishes, but the threads needs to complete. I implemented this as shown below , but, my secondoperation never gets done as the function exits after the start() call. How I can ensure that the function returns but the second operation thread finishes its execution as well and is not dependent on the parent thread ? public void someFunction(String data) { smallOperation() Blah a = new Blah(); Thread th = new Thread(a); th.Start(); } class SecondOperation implements Runnable { public void run(){ // doSomething long running } }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282  | Next Page >