Search Results

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

Page 281/604 | < Previous Page | 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288  | Next Page >

• Clarification on Threads and Run Loops In Cocoa

  - by dubbeat

  I'm trying to learn about threading and I'm thoroughly confused. I'm sure all the answers are there in the apple docs but I just found it really hard to breakdown and digest. Maybe somebody could clear a thing or 2 up for me. 1)performSelectorOnMainThread Does the above simply register an event in the main run loop or is it somehow a new thread even though the method says "mainThread"? If the purpose of threads is to relieve processing on the main thread how does this help? 2) RunLoops Is it true that if I want to create a completely seperate thread I use "detachNewThreadSelector"? Does calling start on this initiate a default run loop for the thread that has been created? If so where do run loops come into it? 3) And Finally , I've seen examples using NSOperationQueue. Is it true to say that If you use performSelectorOnMainThread the threads are in a queue anyway so NSOperation is not needed? 4) Should I forget about all of this and just use the Grand Central Dispatch instead?

  Read the article

• Are there any tools to optimize the number of consumer and producer threads on a JMS queue?

  - by lindelof

  I'm working on an application that is distributed over two JBoss instances and that produces/consumes JMS messages on several JMS queues. When we configured the application we had to determine which threading model we would use, in particular the number of producing and consuming threads per queue. We have done this in a rather ad-hoc fashion but after reading the most recent columns by Herb Sutter in Dr Dobbs (in particular this one) I would like to size our threads in a more rigorous manner. Are there any methods/tools to measure the throughput of JMS queues (in particular JBoss Messaging queues) as a function of the number of producing/consuming threads?

  Read the article

• How does jQuery have asynchronous functions?

  - by Sam.Rueby

  I'm surprised I can't find a clear answer to this. So, in jQuery, you can do this: $(someElements).fadeOut(1000); $(someElements).remove(); Which, will start a fadeOut animation, but before it finishes executing in the 1 second duration, the elements are removed from the DOM. But how is this possible? I keep reading the JavaScript is single threaded. ( Is javascript guaranteed to be single-threaded? ) This question is not "How do I fix this?" I know I can do either: $(someElements).fadeOut(1000).promise().done(function() { $(someElements).remove();});, or even better:$(someElements).fadeOut(1000, function() { $(this).remove(); } ); What I don't understand is how JavaScript runs in a "single thread" but I'm able to use these jQuery functions that execute asynchronously and visibly see the DOM change in different places at the same time. How does it work?

  Read the article

• multi-thread access MySQL error

  - by user188916

  I have written a simple multi-threaded C program to access MySQL,it works fine except when i add usleep() or sleep() function in each thread function. i created two pthreads in the main method, int main(){ mysql_library_init(0,NULL,NULL); printf("Hello world!\n"); init_pool(&p,100); pthread_t producer; pthread_t consumer_1; pthread_t consumer_2; pthread_create(&producer,NULL,produce_fun,NULL); pthread_create(&consumer_1,NULL,consume_fun,NULL); pthread_create(&consumer_2,NULL,consume_fun,NULL); mysql_library_end(); } void * produce_fun(void *arg){ pthread_detach(pthread_self()); //procedure while(1){ usleep(500000); printf("producer...\n"); produce(&p,cnt++); } pthread_exit(NULL); } void * consume_fun(void *arg){ pthread_detach(pthread_self()); MYSQL db; MYSQL *ptr_db=mysql_init(&db); mysql_real_connect(); //procedure while(1){ usleep(1000000); printf("consumer..."); int item=consume(&p); addRecord_d(ptr_db,"test",item); } mysql_thread_end(); pthread_exit(NULL); } void addRecord_d(MYSQL *ptr_db,const char *t_name,int item){ char query_buffer[100]; sprintf(query_buffer,"insert into %s values(0,%d)",t_name,item); //pthread_mutex_lock(&db_t_lock); int ret=mysql_query(ptr_db,query_buffer); if(ret){ fprintf(stderr,"%s%s\n","cannot add record to ",t_name); return; } unsigned long long update_id=mysql_insert_id(ptr_db); // pthread_mutex_unlock(&db_t_lock); printf("add record (%llu,%d) ok.",update_id,item); } the program output errors like: [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] [New Thread 0xb7ae3b70 (LWP 7712)] Hello world! [New Thread 0xb72d6b70 (LWP 7713)] [New Thread 0xb6ad5b70 (LWP 7714)] [New Thread 0xb62d4b70 (LWP 7715)] [Thread 0xb7ae3b70 (LWP 7712) exited] producer... producer... consumer...consumer...add record (31441,0) ok.add record (31442,1) ok.producer... producer... consumer...consumer...add record (31443,2) ok.add record (31444,3) ok.producer... producer... consumer...consumer...add record (31445,4) ok.add record (31446,5) ok.producer... producer... consumer...consumer...add record (31447,6) ok.add record (31448,7) ok.producer... Error in my_thread_global_end(): 2 threads didn't exit [Thread 0xb72d6b70 (LWP 7713) exited] [Thread 0xb6ad5b70 (LWP 7714) exited] [Thread 0xb62d4b70 (LWP 7715) exited] Program exited normally. and when i add pthread_mutex_lock in function addRecord_d,the error still exists. So what exactly the problem is?

  Read the article

• pthread_join from a signal handler

  - by liv2hak

  I have a capture program which in addition do capturing data and writing it into a file also prints some statistics.The function that prints the statistics static void* report(void) { /*Print statistics*/ } is called roughly every second using an ALARM that expires every second.So The program is like void capture_program() { pthread_t report_thread while(!exit_now) { if(pthread_create(&report_thread,NULL,report,NULL)){ fprintf(stderr,"Error creating reporting thread! \n"); } /* Capturing code -------------- -------------- */ if(doreport) usleep(5); } } void *report(void *param) { while(true) { if(doreport) { doreport = 0 //access some register from hardware usleep(5) } } } The expiry of the timer sets the doreport flag.If this flag is set report() is called which clears the flag.I am using usleep to alternate between two threads in the program.This seems to work fine. I also have a signal handler to handle SIGINT (i.e CTRL+C) static void anysig(int sig) { if (sig != SIGINT) dagutil_set_signal_handler(SIG_DFL); /* Tell the main loop to exit */ exit_now = 1; return; } My question: 1) Is it safe to call pthread_join from inside the signal handler? 2) Should I use exit_now flag for the report thread as well?

  Read the article

• Parallel software?

  - by mavric

  What is the meaning of "parallel software" and what are the differences between "parallel software" and "regular software"? What are its advantages and disadvantages? Does writing "parallel software" require a specific hardware or programming language ?

  Read the article

• Multithreaded Delegates/Events

  - by Matt

  I am trying to disable parts of the UI in a .NET app based on polling done on a background thread. The background thread checks to see if the global database connection the app uses is still open and operable. What I need to do, and would prefer to do it without polling on the UI thread, is to add an event handler that can be raised by the background thread if the connection status changes. That way, any form can have a handler that will disable those parts of the UI that require the connection to function. Attempting to use a straight event declaration in the class that holds the thread sub, and raising the event in the background thread causing cross-thread execution errors regarding accessing UI controls from other threads. Obviously, there is a correct way to do this, but we have limited experience with events (single threaded apps mainly), and almost none with delegates. I've read through documentation and examples for delegates, and it seems to be closer to what we need, but I'm not sure how to make it work in this instance. The app is written mainly in VB.NET, but an example or help in C# is fine too.

  Read the article

• Performing time consuming operation on STL container within a lock

  - by Ashley

  I have an unordered_map of an unordered_map which stores a pointer of objects. The unordered map is being shared by multiple threads. I need to iterate through each object and perform some time consuming operation (like sending it through network etc) . How could I lock the multiple unordered_map so that it won't blocked for too long? typedef std::unordered_map<string, classA*>MAP1; typedef std::unordered_map<int, MAP1*>MAP2; MAP2 map2; pthread_mutex_lock(&mutexA) //how could I lock the maps? Could I reduce the lock granularity? for(MAP2::iterator it2 = map2.begin; it2 != map2.end; it2++) { for(MAP1::iterator it1 = *(it2->second).begin(); it1 != *(it2->second).end(); it1++) { //perform some time consuming operation on it1->second eg sendToNetwork(*(it1->second)); } } pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutexA)

  Read the article

• C - How to use both aio_read() and aio_write().

  - by Slav

  I implement game server where I need to both read and write. So I accept incoming connection and start reading from it using aio_read() but when I need to send something, I stop reading using aio_cancel() and then use aio_write(). Within write's callback I resume reading. So, I do read all the time but when I need to send something - I pause reading. It works for ~20% of time - in other case call to aio_cancel() fails with "Operation now in progress" - and I cannot cancel it (even within permanent while cycle). So, my added write operation never happens. How to use these functions well? What did I missed? EDIT: Used under Linux 2.6.35. Ubuntu 10 - 32 bit. Example code: void handle_read(union sigval sigev_value) { /* handle data or disconnection */ } void handle_write(union sigval sigev_value) { /* free writing buffer memory */ } void start() { const int acceptorSocket = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0); struct sockaddr_in addr; memset(&addr, 0, sizeof(struct sockaddr_in)); addr.sin_family = AF_INET; addr.sin_addr.s_addr = INADDR_ANY; addr.sin_port = htons(port); bind(acceptorSocket, (struct sockaddr*)&addr, sizeof(struct sockaddr_in)); listen(acceptorSocket, SOMAXCONN); struct sockaddr_in address; socklen_t addressLen = sizeof(struct sockaddr_in); for(;;) { const int incomingSocket = accept(acceptorSocket, (struct sockaddr*)&address, &addressLen); if(incomingSocket == -1) { /* handle error ... */} else { //say socket to append outcoming messages at writing: const int currentFlags = fcntl(incomingSocket, F_GETFL, 0); if(currentFlags < 0) { /* handle error ... */ } if(fcntl(incomingSocket, F_SETFL, currentFlags | O_APPEND) == -1) { /* handle another error ... */ } //start reading: struct aiocb* readingAiocb = new struct aiocb; memset(readingAiocb, 0, sizeof(struct aiocb)); readingAiocb->aio_nbytes = MY_SOME_BUFFER_SIZE; readingAiocb->aio_fildes = socketDesc; readingAiocb->aio_buf = mySomeReadBuffer; readingAiocb->aio_sigevent.sigev_notify = SIGEV_THREAD; readingAiocb->aio_sigevent.sigev_value.sival_ptr = (void*)mySomeData; readingAiocb->aio_sigevent.sigev_notify_function = handle_read; if(aio_read(readingAiocb) != 0) { /* handle error ... */ } } } } //called at any time from server side: send(void* data, const size_t dataLength) { //... some thread-safety precautions not needed here ... const int cancellingResult = aio_cancel(socketDesc, readingAiocb); if(cancellingResult != AIO_CANCELED) { //this one happens ~80% of the time - embracing previous call to permanent while cycle does not help: if(cancellingResult == AIO_NOTCANCELED) { puts(strerror(aio_return(readingAiocb))); // "Operation now in progress" /* don't know what to do... */ } } //otherwise it's okay to send: else { aio_write(...); } }

  Read the article

• Java Thread - Memory consistency errors

  - by Yatendra Goel

  I was reading a Sun's tutorial on Concurrency. But I couldn't understand exactly what memory consistency errors are? I googled about that but didn't find any helpful tutorial or article about that. I know that this question is a subjective one, so you can provide me links to articles on the above topic. It would be great if you explain it with a simple example.

  Read the article

• A member variable's hashCode() value is different

  - by Jacques René Mesrine

  There's a piece of code that looks like this. The problem is that during bootup, 2 initialization takes place. (1) Some method does a reflection on ForumRepository & performs a newInstance() purely to invoke #setCacheEngine. (2) Another method following that invokes #start(). I am noticing that the hashCode of the #cache member variable is different sometimes in some weird scenarios. Since only 1 piece of code invokes #setCacheEngine, how can the hashCode change during runtime (I am assuming that a different instance will have a different hashCode). Is there a bug here somewhere ? public class ForumRepository implements Cacheable { private static CacheEngine cache; private static ForumRepository instance; public void setCacheEngine(CacheEngine engine) { cache = engine; } public synchronized static void start() { instance = new ForumRepository(); } public synchronized static void addForum( ... ) { cache.add( .. ); System.out.println( cache.hashCode() ); // snipped } public synchronized static void getForum( ... ) { ... cache.get( .. ); System.out.println( cache.hashCode() ); // snipped } }

  Read the article

• Why doesn't Perl threading work when I call readdir beforehand?

  - by Kevin

  Whenever I call readdir before I create a thread, I get an error that looks like this: perl(2820,0x7fff70c33ca0) malloc: * error for object 0x10082e600: pointer being freed was not allocated * set a breakpoint in malloc_error_break to debug Abort trap What's strange is that it happens when I call readdir before I create a thread (i.e. readdir is not called in any concurrent code). I don't even use the results from readdir, just making the call to it seems to screw things up. When I get rid of it, things seem to work fine. Some example code is below: opendir(DIR, $someDir); my @allFiles = readdir(DIR); close(DIR); my $thread = threads-create(\&sub1); $thread-join(); sub sub1 { print "in thread\n" }

  Read the article

• Multiple instances of the same Async task (Windows Phone)

  - by Bart Teunissen

  After googeling for ages, and reading some stuff about async task in books. I made a my first program with an async task in it. Only to find out, that i can only start one task. I want to run the task more then once. This is where i found out that that doesn't seem to work. to be a little bit clearer, here are some parts of my code: InitFunction(var); This is the Task itself public async Task InitFunction(string var) { _VarHandle = await _AdsClient.GetSymhandleByNameAsync(var); _Data = await _AdsClient.ReadAsync<T>(_VarHandle); _AdsClient.AddNotificationAsync<T>(_VarHandle, AdsTransmissionMode.OnChange, 1000, this); } This works like a charm when i execute the task only once.. But is there a possibility to run it multiple times. Something like this? InitFunction(var1); InitFunction(var2); InitFunction(var3); Because if i do this now (multiple tasks at once), the task it wants to start is still running, and it throws an exeption. if someone could help me with this, that would be awesome! ~ Bart

  Read the article

• Various way to stop a thread - which is the correct way

  - by Yan Cheng CHEOK

  I had came across different suggestion of stopping a thread. May I know, which is the correct way? Or it depends? Using Thread Variable http://download.oracle.com/javase/1.4.2/docs/guide/misc/threadPrimitiveDeprecation.html private volatile Thread blinker; public void stop() { blinker = null; } public void run() { Thread thisThread = Thread.currentThread(); while (blinker == thisThread) { try { thisThread.sleep(interval); } catch (InterruptedException e){ } repaint(); } } Using boolean flag private volatile boolean flag; public void stop() { flag = false; } public void run() { while (flag) { try { thisThread.sleep(interval); } catch (InterruptedException e){ } repaint(); } } Using Thread Variable together with interrupt private volatile Thread blinker; public void stop() { blinker.interrupt(); blinker = null; } public void run() { Thread thisThread = Thread.currentThread(); while (!thisThread.isInterrupted() && blinker == thisThread) { try { thisThread.sleep(interval); } catch (InterruptedException e){ } repaint(); } }

  Read the article

• Best way to implement game loop without freezing UI thread

  - by Matt H

  I'm trying to make a simple 2D game in Java. So far I have a JFrame, with a menubar, and a class which extends JPanel and overrides it's paint method. Now, I need to get a game loop going, where I will update the position of images and so on. However, I'm stuck at how best to achieve this. Should I use multi-threading, because surely, if you put an infinite loop on the main thread, the UI (and thus my menu bar) will freeze up? Here's my code so far: import java.awt.Color; import java.awt.Graphics; import javax.swing.JPanel; @SuppressWarnings("serial") public class GameCanvas extends JPanel { public void paint(Graphics g) { while (true) { g.setColor(Color.DARK_GRAY); try { Thread.sleep(100); } catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } } } import javax.swing.JFrame; import javax.swing.JMenu; import javax.swing.JMenuBar; import javax.swing.JMenuItem; @SuppressWarnings("serial") public class Main extends JFrame { GameCanvas canvas = new GameCanvas(); final int FRAME_HEIGHT = 400; final int FRAME_WIDTH = 400; public static void main(String args[]) { new Main(); } public Main() { super("Game"); JMenuBar menuBar = new JMenuBar(); JMenu fileMenu = new JMenu("File"); JMenuItem startMenuItem = new JMenuItem("Pause"); menuBar.add(fileMenu); fileMenu.add(startMenuItem); super.add(canvas); super.setVisible(true); super.setSize(FRAME_WIDTH, FRAME_WIDTH); super.setDefaultCloseOperation(JFrame.EXIT_ON_CLOSE); super.setJMenuBar(menuBar); } } Any pointers/tips? Also, where should I put my loop? In my main class, or my GameCanvas class? Any help is appreciated, thanks.

  Read the article

• Multithreaded Multiplication a Large Non-sparse, Non-square Matrices in C/C++

  - by andand

  All, I'm looking for recommendations for C or C++ libraries (preferably open source) that use multi-threaded techniques to multiply large, non-square, (e.g. 65536xn in size where n < 65536) non-sparse matrices. Thanks. -&&

  Read the article

• VB.net avoiding cross thread exception with extension method

  - by user574632

  Hello I am trying to implement a solution for updating form controls without using a delegate. I am attempting to use the 1st solution on this page: http://www.dreamincode.net/forums/blog/143/entry-2337-handling-the-dreaded-cross-thread-exception/ Imports System.ComponentModel Imports System.Runtime.CompilerServices Public Module MyInvoke <Extension()> _ Public Sub CustomInvoke(Of T As ISynchronizeInvoke)(ByVal control As T, ByVal toPerform As Action(Of T)) If control.InvokeRequired Then control.Invoke(toPerform, New Object() {control}) toPerform(control) End If End Sub End Module The site gives this as example of how to use: Label1.CustomInvoke(l => l.Text = "Hello World!") But i get 'l' is not declared error. As you can see im very new to VB or any OOP. I can get the second solution on that page to work (using delegates) but i have quite a few things to do in this thread and it seems like i would need to write a new delegate sub for each thing, which seems wasteful. What i need to do is select the 1st item from a combobox, update a textbox.text with the selected item, and pass the selected item to a function. Then wait for x seconds and start again, selecting the second item. I can get it to work in a single threaded application, but i need the interface to remain responsive. Any help greatly appreciated. EDIT: OK so changing the syntax worked for the example. However if i change it from Label1.CustomInvoke(Sub(l) l.text = "hello world!") (which worked just fine) to: Dim indexnumber As Integer = 0 ComboBox1.CustomInvoke(Sub(l) l.SelectedIndex = indexnumber) I get a cross threading error as though i didnt even use this method: Cross-thread operation not valid: Control 'ComboBox1' accessed from a thread other than the thread it was created on. So now im back to where i started? Any further help very much appreciated.

  Read the article

• Why do debug symbols so adversely affect the performance of threaded applications on Linux?

  - by fluffels

  Hi. I'm writing a ray tracer. Recently, I added threading to the program to exploit the additional cores on my i5 Quad Core. In a weird turn of events the debug version of the application is now running slower, but the optimized build is running faster than before I added threading. I'm passing the "-g -pg" flags to gcc for the debug build and the "-O3" flag for the optimized build. Host system: Ubuntu Linux 10.4 AMD64. I know that debug symbols add significant overhead to the program, but the relative performance has always been maintained. I.e. a faster algorithm will always run faster in both debug and optimization builds. Any idea why I'm seeing this behavior?

  Read the article

• VB.NET Two different approaches to generic cross-threaded operations; which is better?

  - by BASnappl

  VB.NET 2010, .NET 4 Hello, I recently read about using SynchronizationContext objects to control the execution thread for some code. I have been using a generic subroutine to handle (possibly) cross-thread calls for things like updating UI controls that utilizes Invoke. I'm an amateur and have a hard time understanding the pros and cons of any particular approach. I am looking for some insight on which approach might be preferable and why. Update: This question is motivated, in part, by statements such as the following from the MSDN page on Control.InvokeRequired. An even better solution is to use the SynchronizationContext returned by SynchronizationContext rather than a control for cross-thread marshaling. Method 1: Public Sub InvokeControl(Of T As Control)(ByVal Control As T, ByVal Action As Action(Of T)) If Control.InvokeRequired Then Control.Invoke(New Action(Of T, Action(Of T))(AddressOf InvokeControl), New Object() {Control, Action}) Else Action(Control) End If End Sub Method 2: Public Sub UIAction(Of T As Control)(ByVal Control As T, ByVal Action As Action(Of Control)) SyncContext.Send(New Threading.SendOrPostCallback(Sub() Action(Control)), Nothing) End Sub Where SyncContext is a Threading.SynchronizationContext object defined in the constructor of my UI form: Public Sub New() InitializeComponent() SyncContext = WindowsFormsSynchronizationContext.Current End Sub Then, if I wanted to update a control (e.g., Label1) on the UI form, I would do: InvokeControl(Label1, Sub(x) x.Text = "hello") or UIAction(Label1, Sub(x) x.Text = "hello") So, what do y'all think? Is one way preferred or does it depend on the context? If you have the time, verbosity would be appreciated! Thanks in advance, Brian

  Read the article

• Does an asynchronous call always create/call a new thread?

  - by Ted Smith

  Does asynchronous call always create a new thread? Example: If Javascript is single threaded then how can it do an async postback? Is it actually blocking until it gets a callback? If so, is this really an async call?

  Read the article

• Apply [ThreadStatic] attribute to a method in external assembly

  - by Sen Jacob

  Can I use an external assembly's static method like [ThreadStatic] method? Here is my situation. The assembly class (which I do not have access to its source) has this structure public class RegistrationManager() { private RegistrationManager() {} public static void RegisterConfiguration(int ID) {} public static object DoWork() {} public static void UnregisterConfiguration(int ID) {} } Once registered, I cannot call the DoWork() with a different ID without unregistering the previously registered one. Actually I want to call the DoWork() method with different IDs simultaneously with multi-threading. If the RegisterConfiguration(int ID) method was [ThreadStatic], I could have call it in different threads without problems with calls, right? So, can I apply the [ThreadStatic] attribute to this method or is there any other way I can call the two static methods same time without waiting for other thread to unregister it? If I check it like the following, it should work. for(int i=0; i < 10; i++) { new Thread(new ThreadStart(() => Checker(i))).Start(); } public string Checker(int i) { public static void RegisterConfiguration(i); // Now i cannot register second time public static object DoWork(i); Thread.Sleep(5000); // DoWork() may take a little while to complete before unregistered public static void UnregisterConfiguration(i); }

  Read the article

• Processing a database queue across multiple threads - design advice

  - by rwmnau

  I have a SQL Server table full of orders that my program needs to "follow up" on (call a webservice to see if something has been done with them). My application is multi-threaded, and could have instances running on multiple servers. Currently, every so often (on a Threading timer), the process selects 100 rows, at random (ORDER BY NEWID()), from the list of "unconfirmed" orders and checks them, marking off any that come back successfully. The problem is that there's a lot of overlap between the threads, and between the different processes, and their's no guarantee that a new order will get checked any time soon. Also, some orders will never be "confirmed" and are dead, which means that they get in the way of orders that need to be confirmed, slowing the process down if I keep selecting them over and over. What I'd prefer is that all outstanding orders get checked, systematically. I can think of two easy ways do this: The application fetches one order to check at a time, passing in the last order it checked as a parameter, and SQL Server hands back the next order that's unconfirmed. More database calls, but this ensures that every order is checked in a reasonable timeframe. However, different servers may re-check the same order in succession, needlessly. The SQL Server keeps track of the last order it asked a process to check up on, maybe in a table, and gives a unique order to every request, incrementing its counter. This involves storing the last order somewhere in SQL, which I wanted to avoid, but it also ensures that threads won't needlessly check the same orders at the same time Are there any other ideas I'm missing? Does this even make sense? Let me know if I need some clarification.

  Read the article

• Should I make my MutexLock volatile?

  - by sje397

  I have some code in a function that goes something like this: void foo() { { // scope the locker MutexLocker locker(&mutex); // do some stuff.. } bar(); } The function call bar() also locks the mutex. I am having an issue whereby the program crashes (for someone else, who has not as yet provided a stack trace or more details) unless the mutex lock inside bar is disabled. Is it possible that some optimization is messing around with the way I have scoped the locker instance, and if so, would making it volatile fix it? Is that a bad idea? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Cannot make a static reference to the non-static type MyRunnable

  - by kaiwii ho

  Here is the whole code : import java.util.ArrayList; public class Test{ ThreadLocal<ArrayList<E>>arraylist=new ThreadLocal<ArrayList<E>>(){ @Override protected ArrayList<E> initialValue() { // TODO Auto-generated method stub //return super.initialValue(); ArrayList<E>arraylist=new ArrayList<E>(); for(int i=0;i<=20;i++) arraylist.add((E) new Integer(i)); return arraylist; } }; class MyRunnable implements Runnable{ private Test mytest; public MyRunnable(Test test){ mytest=test; // TODO Auto-generated constructor stub } @Override public void run() { System.out.println("before"+mytest.arraylist.toString()); ArrayList<E>myarraylist=(ArrayList<E>) mytest.arraylist.get(); myarraylist.add((E) new Double(Math.random())); mytest.arraylist.set(myarraylist); System.out.println("after"+mytest.arraylist.toString()); } // TODO Auto-generated method stub } public static void main(String[] args){ Test test=new Test<Double>(); System.out.println(test.arraylist.toString()); new Thread(new MyRunnable(test)).start(); new Thread(new MyRunnable(test)).start(); System.out.println(arraylist.toString()); } } my questions are: 1\ why the new Thread(new MyRunnable(test)).start(); cause the error: Cannot make a static reference to the non-static type MyRunnable ? 2\ what is the static reference refer to right here? thx in advanced

  Read the article

• Do something else if ReadWriteSlimlock is held

  - by user43838

  Hi everyone, I have implemented ReaderWriterLockSlim, Now i don't want it to wait at the lock. I want to do something else if the lock is held. I considered using is isWriterLockHeld but it does not makes much sense to me, Since if two threads come in at the same time and enter the if statement at the same time one will still be waiting at the lock here is my code. ReaderWriterLockSlim rw = GetLoadingLock(parameters); rw = GetLoadingLock(parameters); try { rw.EnterWriteLock(); item = this.retrieveCacheItem(parameters.ToString(), false); if (item != null) { parameters.DataCameFromCache = true; // if the data was found in the cache, return it immediately return item.data; } else { try { object loaditem = null; itemsLoading[parameters.ToString()] = true; loaditem = this.retrieveDataFromStore(parameters); return loaditem; } finally { itemsLoading.Remove(parameters.ToString()); } } } finally { rw.ExitWriteLock(); } Can anyone please guide me in the right direction with this. Thanks

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288  | Next Page >