Search Results

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

Page 290/604 | < Previous Page | 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297  | Next Page >

• Windows App. Thread Aborting Issue

  - by Patrick

  I'm working on an application that has to make specific decisions based on files that are placed into a folder being watched by a file watcher. Part of this decision making process involves renaming files before moving them off to another folder to be processed. Since I'm working with files of all different sizes I created an object that checks the file in a seperate thread to verify that it is "available" and when it is it fires an event. When I run the rename code from inside this available event it works. public void RenameFile_Test() { string psFilePath = @"C:\File1.xlsx"; tgt_File target = new FileObject(psFilePath); target.FileAvailable += new FileEventHandler(OnFileAvailable); target.FileUnAvailable += new FileEventHandler(OnFileUnavailable); } private void OnFileAvailable(object source, FileEventArgs e) { ((FileObject)source).RenameFile(@"C:\File2.xlsx"); } The problem I'm running into is that when the extensions are different from the source file and the rename to file I am making a call to a conversion factory that returns a factory object based on the type of conversion and then converts the file accordingly before doing the rename. When I run that particular piece of code in unit test it works, the factory object is returned, and the conversion happens correctly. But when I run it within the process I get up to the... moExcelApp = new Application(); part of converting an .xls or .xlsx to a .csv and i get a "Thread was being Aborted" error. Any thoughts? Update: There is a bit more information and a bit of map of how the application works currently. Client Application running FSW On File Created event Creates a FileObject passing in the path of the file. On construction the file is validated: if file exists is true then, Thread toAvailableCheck = new Thread(new ThreadStart(AvailableCheck)); toAvailableCheck.Start(); The AvailableCheck Method repeatedly tries to open a streamreader to the file until the reader is either created or the number of attempts times out. If the reader is opened, it fires the FileAvailable event, if not it fires the FileUnAvailable event, passing back itself in the event. The client application is wired to catch those events from inside the Oncreated event of the FSW. the OnFileAvailable method then calls the rename functionality which contains the excel interop call. If the file is being renamed (not converted, extensions stay the same) it does a move to change the name from the old file name to the new, and if its a conversion it runs a conversion factory object which returns the correct type of conversion based on the extensions of the source file and the destination file name. If it is a simple rename it works w/o a problem. If its a conversion (which is the XLS to CSV object that is returned as a part of the factory) the very first thing it does is create a new application object. That is where the application bombs. When i test the factory and conversion/rename process outside of the thread and in its own unit test the process works w/o a problem. Update: I tested the Excel Interop inside a thread by doing this: [TestMethod()] public void ExcelInteropTest() { Thread toExcelInteropThreadTest = new Thread(new ThreadStart(Instantiate_App)); toExcelInteropThreadTest.Start(); } private void Instantiate_App() { Application moExcelApp = new Application(); moExcelApp.Quit(); } And on the line where the application is instatntiated I got the 'A first chance exception of type 'System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' error. So I added; toExcelInteropThreadTest.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.MTA); after the thread instantiation and before the thread start call and still got the same error. I'm getting the notion that I'm going to have to reconsider the design.

  Read the article

• Threadpool with pasistant worker instances

  - by Matt Smokey-waters Holmes

  So basically what im trying to do is queue up tasks in a thread pool to be executed as soon as a worker becomes free, i have found various examples of this but in all cases the examples have been setup to use a new Worker instance for each job, i want persistent workers. Im trying to make a ftp backup tool, i have it working but because of the limitations of a single connection it is slow. What i ideally want to do is have a single connection for scanning directories and building up a file list then four workers to download said files. Here is an example of my worker /** * FTP Worker */ public class Worker implements Runnable { protected FTPClient _ftp; // Connection details protected String _host = ""; protected String _user = ""; protected String _pass = ""; // worker status protected boolean _working = false; public Worker(String host, String user, String pass) { this._host = host; this._user = user; this._pass = pass; } // Check if the worker is in use public boolean inUse() { return this._working; } @Override public void run() { this._ftp = new FTPClient(); this._connect(); } // Download a file from the ftp server public boolean download(String base, String path, String file) { this._working = true; boolean outcome = true; //create directory if not exists File pathDir = new File(base + path); if (!pathDir.exists()) { pathDir.mkdirs(); } //download file try { OutputStream output = new FileOutputStream(base + path + file); this._ftp.retrieveFile(file, output); output.close(); } catch (Exception e) { outcome = false; } finally { this._working = false; return outcome; } } // Connect to the server protected boolean _connect() { try { this._ftp.connect(this._host); this._ftp.login(this._user, this._pass); } catch (Exception e) { return false; } return this._ftp.isConnected(); } // Disconnect from the server protected void _disconnect() { try { this._ftp.disconnect(); } catch (Exception e) { /* do nothing */ } } } and basically i want to be able to call Worker.download(...) for each task in a queue whenever a worker becomes available without having to create a new connection to the ftp server for each download Any help would be appreciated as iv'e never used threads before and I'm going round in circles at the moment

  Read the article

• java threads don't see shared boolean changes

  - by andymur

  Here the code class Aux implements Runnable { private Boolean isOn = false; private String statusMessage; private final Object lock; public Aux(String message, Object lock) { this.lock = lock; this.statusMessage = message; } @Override public void run() { for (;;) { synchronized (lock) { if (isOn && "left".equals(this.statusMessage)) { isOn = false; System.out.println(statusMessage); } else if (!isOn && "right".equals(this.statusMessage)) { isOn = true; System.out.println(statusMessage); } if ("left".equals(this.statusMessage)) { System.out.println("left " + isOn); } } } } } public class Question { public static void main(String [] args) { Object lock = new Object(); new Thread(new Aux("left", lock)).start(); new Thread(new Aux("right", lock)).start(); } } In this code I expect to see: left, right, left right and so on, but when Thread with "left" message changes isOn to false, Thread with "right" message don't see it and I get ("right true" and "left false" console messages), left thread don't get isOn in true, but right Thread can't change it cause it always see old isOn value (true). When i add volatile modifier to isOn nothing changes, but if I change isOn to some class with boolean field and change this field then threads are see changes and it works fine Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Thread Code...anything wrong with this, must use java 1.4

  - by bmw0128

  I have a servlet automatically firing up when the app server starts, and in its init(), I'm making another thread: init(){ new FooThread() } in FooThread(), i want to periodically check the status of a DB value, then depending on the value, make a web service call. When these two tasks complete, I want the thread to sleep to wait a certain period then repeat. This cycle would just continue forever. FooThread: public class FooThread implements Runnable{ Thread t; FooThread(){ t = new Thread(this, "BBSThread"); logger.info("*** about to start " + t.getName()); t.start(); logger.info("*** started: " + t); } public void run() { try{ while(true){ //do the db check, then conditionally do the web services call logger.info("*** calling sleep() ***"); Thread.sleep(50000); logger.info("*** now awake ***"); } } catch (InterruptedException e) { System.out.println("*** FooThread interrupted"); } } }

  Read the article

• How do I read and write to a file using threads in java?

  - by WarmWaffles

  I'm writing an application where I need to read blocks in from a single file, each block is roughly 512 bytes. I am also needing to write blocks simultaneously. One of the ideas I had was BlockReader implements Runnable and BlockWriter implements Runnable and BlockManager manages both the reader and writer. The problem that I am seeing with most examples that I have found was locking problems and potential deadlock situations. Any ideas how to implement this?

  Read the article

• Persistance Queue Implementation

  - by Winter

  I was reading an article on Batch Processing in java over at JDJ http://java.sys-con.com/node/415321 . The article mentioned using a persistence queue as a Batch Updater instead of immediately sending an individual insert or update to the database. The author doesn't give a concrete example of this concept so I googled Persistence Queue but that didn't come up with much. Does anyone know of a good example of this?

  Read the article

• Can I have multiple instance of the mandlebrot example in one program?

  - by yan bellavance

  Basically what I did is I took the Mandlebrot example and have 3 instances of it in my program. So the program would look like a mainwindow that has 3 mandlebrot widgets in it, one besides the other. Is it possible that GDB doesnt support debugging multiple intances of a classe that derives from qthread or is it thread-unsafe to do so? I don't have any problems at run-time but when I put breakpoints in a function called by the QThread run() function I get a segmentation fault. I can clearly see that the function doesn't complete before returning to the breakpoint ie I the program stops at the breakpoint, I step into the lines of codes one by one but after a couple of instructions another thread startS using the function(even though they are different instances).

  Read the article

• What is the absolute fastest way to implement a concurrent queue with ONLY one consumer and one producer?

  - by JohnPristine

  java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentLinkedQueue comes to mind, but is it really optimum for this two-thread scenario? I am looking for the minimum latency possible on both sides (producer and consumer). If the queue is empty you can immediately return null AND if the queue is full you can immediately discard the entry you are offering. Does ConcurrentLinkedQueue use super fast and light locks (AtomicBoolean) ? Has anyone benchmarked ConcurrentLinkedQueue or knows about the ultimate fastest way of doing that? Additional Details: I imagine the queue should be a fair one, meaning the consumer should not make the consumer wait any longer than it needs (by front-running it) and vice-versa.

  Read the article

• C++ WIN32: Short multitasking example

  - by Con Current

  I searched for examples on how to create a simple multithreaded app that does something similar to this: #include <iostream> using namespace std; int myConcurrentFunction( ) { while( 1 ) { cout << "b" << endl; } } int main( ) { // Start a new thread for myConcurrentFunction while( 1 ) { cout << "a" << endl; } } How can I get the above to output a and b "randomly" by starting a new thread instead of just calling myConcurrentFunction normally? I mean: What is the minimal code for it? Is it really only one function I have to call? What files do I need to include? I use MSVC 2010, Win32

  Read the article

• Cocoa multhithreads, locks don't work

  - by Igor

  I have a threadMethod which shows in console robotMotorsStatus every 0.5 sec. But when I try to change robotMotorsStatus in changeRobotStatus method I receive an exception. Where I need to put locks in that program. #import "AppController.h" @implementation AppController extern char *robotMotorsStatus; - (IBAction)runThread:(id)sender { [self performSelectorInBackground:@selector(threadMethod) withObject:nil]; } - (void)threadMethod { char string_to_send[]="QFF001100\r"; //String prepared to the port sending (first inintialization) string_to_send[7] = robotMotorsStatus[0]; string_to_send[8] = robotMotorsStatus[1]; while(1){ [theLock lock]; usleep(500000); NSLog (@"Robot status %s", robotMotorsStatus); [theLock unlock]; } } - (IBAction)changeRobotStatus:(id)sender { robotMotorsStatus[0]='1'; }

  Read the article

• Why is my BeginInvoke method not async?

  - by Petr

  Hi, In order to avoid freezing of GUI, I wanted to run method connecting to DB asynchronously. Therefore I have written this: DelegatLoginu dl = ConnectDB; IAsyncResult ar=dl.BeginInvoke(null, null); bool result = (bool)dl.EndInvoke(ar); But it is still freezing and I do not understand why - I though BeginInvoke assures that method it references is run in another thread. Thank you!

  Read the article

• multi-threading in MFC

  - by kiddo

  Hello all,in my application there is a small part of function,in which it will read files to get some information,the number of filecount would be utleast 50,So I thought of implementing threading.Say if the user is giving 50 files,I wanted to separate it as 5 *10, 5 thread should be created,so that each thread can handle 10 files which can speed up the process.And also from the below code you can see that some variables are common.I read some articles about threading and I am aware that only one thread should access a variable/contorl at a me(CCriticalStiuation can be used for that).For me as a beginner,I am finding hard to imlplement what I have learned about threading.Somebody please give me some idea with code shown below..thanks in advance file read function:// void CMyClass::GetWorkFilesInfo(CStringArray& dataFilesArray,CString* dataFilesB, int* check,DWORD noOfFiles,LPWSTR path) { CString cFilePath; int cIndex =0; int exceptionInd = 0; wchar_t** filesForWork = new wchar_t*[noOfFiles]; int tempCheck; int localIndex =0; for(int index = 0;index < noOfFiles; index++) { tempCheck = *(check + index); if(tempCheck == NOCHECKBOX) { *(filesForWork+cIndex) = new TCHAR[MAX_PATH]; wcscpy(*(filesForWork+cIndex),*(dataFilesB +index)); cIndex++; } else//CHECKED or UNCHECKED { dataFilesArray.Add(*(dataFilesB+index)); *(check + localIndex) = *(check + index); localIndex++; } } WorkFiles(&cFilePath,dataFilesArray,filesForWork, path, cIndex); dataFilesArray.Add(cFilePath); *(check + localIndex) = CHECKED; }

  Read the article

• Multithreaded update of multiple ProgressBars

  - by ClaudeS

  I have developped an application that can process data (in my case image algorithms performed on videos). I have developed different ProcessingMethods. Sometimes several videos are processed in parallel. Each process runs in a seperate thread. I have a GUI with several ProgressBars, one for each thread that is processing data. What is a good way to update the ProgressBar? Today my GUI is creating all the processing threads and one progressBars for each thread. Then I pass those progressBars to the threads, which pass them to the ProcessingMethod. The ProcessingMethod will then update the progressbar (using Invoke(..)). I have different processingMethods. Within each of these methods I have copy-paste code to update the progressBar. Although I am a new to programming, I know copy-paste is not good. What is a good way to make it better?

  Read the article

• Will lock() statement block all threads in the proccess/appdomain?

  - by MikeJ

  Maybe the question sounds silly, but I don't understand 'something about threads and locking and I would like to get a confirmation (here's why I ask). So, if I have 10 servers and 10 request in the same time come to each server, that's 100 request across the farm. Without locking, thats 100 request to the database. If I do something like this: private static readonly object myLockHolder = new object(); if (Cache[key] == null) { lock(myLockHolder) { if (Cache[key] == null) { Cache[key] = LengthyDatabaseCall(); } } } How many database requests will I do? 10? 100? Or as much as I have threads?

  Read the article

• Manually Increasing the Amount of CPU a Java Application Uses

  - by SkylineAddict

  I've just made a program with Eclipse that takes a really long time to execute. It's taking even longer because it's loading my CPU to 25% only (I'm assuming that is because I'm using a quad-core and the program is only using one core). Is there any way to make the program use all 4 cores to max it out? Java is supposed to be natively multi-threaded, so I don't understand why it would only use 25%.

  Read the article

• Multitasking how to make worker thread gain control after calling infinite loop function

  - by user353573

  assume creating 3 worker threads by pthread_create, in these worker thread routine, each call a simple infinite loop function which do not have a return to do counting how to make worker thread gain control after calling infinite loop function and save the context of infinite loop function for calling in worker thread again?

  Read the article

• Does the Java Memory Model (JSR-133) imply that entering a monitor flushes the CPU data cache(s)?

  - by Durandal

  There is something that bugs me with the Java memory model (if i even understand everything correctly). If there are two threads A and B, there are no guarantees that B will ever see a value written by A, unless both A and B synchronize on the same monitor. For any system architecture that guarantees cache coherency between threads, there is no problem. But if the architecture does not support cache coherency in hardware, this essentially means that whenever a thread enters a monitor, all memory changes made before must be commited to main memory, and the cache must be invalidated. And it needs to be the entire data cache, not just a few lines, since the monitor has no information which variables in memory it guards. But that would surely impact performance of any application that needs to synchronize frequently (especially things like job queues with short running jobs). So can Java work reasonably well on architectures without hardware cache-coherency? If not, why doesn't the memory model make stronger guarantees about visibility? Wouldn't it be more efficient if the language would require information what is guarded by a monitor? As i see it the memory model gives us the worst of both worlds, the absolute need to synchronize, even if cache coherency is guaranteed in hardware, and on the other hand bad performance on incoherent architectures (full cache flushes). So shouldn't it be more strict (require information what is guarded by a monitor) or more lose and restrict potential platforms to cache-coherent architectures? As it is now, it doesn't make too much sense to me. Can somebody clear up why this specific memory model was choosen? EDIT: My use of strict and lose was a bad choice in retrospect. I used "strict" for the case where less guarantees are made and "lose" for the opposite. To avoid confusion, its probably better to speak in terms of stronger or weaker guarantees.

  Read the article

• Serialized task distribution: use thread or epoll?

  - by hpsmouse

  Now I'm in such a situation that there is a group of predefined tasks for multiple clients to do(any client can take any task). When a client connects to the server, server choose a task from the uncompleted tasks and send it to the client. It takes a while for the client to finish the task and send the result back to the server. Since a task should be sent to only one client, server should process requests in a serialized way. Now I have two plans to do it: create a thread for each client connection and all the threads take turns accessing the task pool, or use epoll listening on all the connection and process for each event of clients. Which one is better for the job? Or is there any other ideas? The server will be run on a multi-core machine.

  Read the article

• Delphi - Is there any equivalent to C# lock?

  - by CaldonCZE

  I'm writing a multi-threaded application in Delphi and need to use something to protect shared resources. In C# I'd use the "lock" keyword: private someMethod() { lock(mySharedObj) { //...do something with mySharedObj } } In Delphi I couldn't find anything similar, I found just TThread.Synchronize(someMethod) method, which prevents potential conflicts by calling someMethod in main VCL thread, but it isn't exactly what I want to do.... Edit: I'm using Delphi 6

  Read the article

• Is thread-safe to use the 'yield' operator inside an extension method'?

  - by SDReyes

  Would be thread-safe to use the yield operator inside an extension method? For example: public static CartItem GetItems( this Cart cart ) { { while( cart.hasNext() ) yield return cart.GetNextItem( ); } }

  Read the article

• How do I best write my own background-working and communicatible (sending progress updates and getti

  - by Ivan

  I have to develop a class which can run it's own hard-coded task in a background thread and communicate with container class sending him progress updates and taking messages from it. I believe I am going to extend BackgroundWorker class but it looks a bit weird to extend and I haven't managed to find a good example wit Google. Can you share a link to a good example of solving such a task? Please don't offer placing a BackgroundWorker visually on a form and reading the standard tutorial, it's not for my case. Maybe I'd better not extend but encapsulate a BackgroundWorker, but I hardly understand how to use it outide WinForms designer either :-(

  Read the article

• Design for fastest page download

  - by mexxican

  I have a file with millions of URLs/IPs and have to write a program to download the pages really fast. The connection rate should be at least 6000/s and file download speed at least 2000 with avg. 15kb file size. The network bandwidth is 1 Gbps. My approach so far has been: Creating 600 socket threads with each having 60 sockets and using WSAEventSelect to wait for data to read. As soon as a file download is complete, add that memory address(of the downloaded file) to a pipeline( a simple vector ) and fire another request. When the total download is more than 50Mb among all socket threads, write all the files downloaded to the disk and free the memory. So far, this approach has been not very successful with the rate at which I could hit not shooting beyond 2900 connections/s and downloaded data rate even less. Can somebody suggest an alternative approach which could give me better stats. Also I am working windows server 2008 machine with 8 Gig of memory. Also, do we need to hack the kernel so as we could use more threads and memory. Currently I can create a max. of 1500 threads and memory usage not going beyond 2 gigs [ which technically should be much more as this is a 64-bit machine ]. And IOCP is out of question as I have no experience in that so far and have to fix this application today. Thanks Guys!

  Read the article

• context deadlock switching in a windows service

  - by JD

  Hi, Is it possible to get a context deadlock switching exception in a windows service? JD.

  Read the article

• How to have a run in an Service?

  - by user1497664

  I have implemented an service that runs in a seperate process. This service contains a separate thread where i have a socket connection. This thread has a run() where it is continuously sending data to the port. My problem is after triggering the run() in the thread i don't get any contact with it anymore, i can see in the program that have open the socket that it consciously sends the data but the idea was that i while it is running i could change data that it sends for an example time. here is my run in the external thread: public void run() { if(run) { // Team and player names message is sent when entering in a game setBaseMessage(); SendMessageToCOMPort(base_message + CalculateCRC(base_message)); sleep(); // waits for 100 ms } } Anyone have any idea what might be wrong ?

  Read the article

• Start a thread using a method pointer

  - by Michael

  Hi ! I'm trying to develop a thread abstraction (POSIX thread and thread from the Windows API), and I would very much like it to be able to start them with a method pointer, and not a function pointer. What I would like to do is an abstraction of thread being a class with a pure virtual method "runThread", which would be implanted in the future threaded class. I don't know yet about the Windows thread, but to start a POSIX thread, you need a function pointer, and not a method pointer. And I can't manage to find a way to associate a method with an instance so it could work as a function. I probably just can't find the keywords (and I've been searching a lot), I think it's pretty much what Boost::Bind() does, so it must exist. Can you help me ?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297  | Next Page >