Search Results

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

Page 47/66 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

  • Swing modal dialog refuses to close - sometimes!

    - by Zarkonnen
    // This is supposed to show a modal dialog and then hide it again. In practice, // this works about 75% of the time, and the other 25% of the time, the dialog // stays visible. // This is on Ubuntu 10.10, running: // OpenJDK Runtime Environment (IcedTea6 1.9) (6b20-1.9-0ubuntu1) // This always prints // setVisible(true) about to happen // setVisible(false) about to happen // setVisible(false) has just happened // even when the dialog stays visible. package modalproblemdemo; import java.awt.Frame; import javax.swing.JDialog; import javax.swing.SwingUtilities; public class Main { public static void main(String[] args) { final Dialogs d = new Dialogs(); new Thread() { @Override public void run() { d.show(); d.hide(); } }.start(); } static class Dialogs { final JDialog dialog; public Dialogs() { dialog = new JDialog((Frame) null, "Hello World", /*modal*/ true); dialog.setSize(400, 200); } public void show() { SwingUtilities.invokeLater(new Runnable() { public void run() { dialog.setLocationRelativeTo(null); System.out.println("setVisible(true) about to happen"); dialog.setVisible(true); }}); } public void hide() { SwingUtilities.invokeLater(new Runnable() { public void run() { System.out.println("setVisible(false) about to happen"); dialog.setVisible(false); System.out.println("setVisible(false) has just happened"); }}); } } }

    Read the article

  • Servlet that starts a thread only once for every visitor

    - by user858749
    Hey I want to implement a Java Servlet that starts a thread only once for every single user. Even on refresh it should not start again. My last approach brought me some trouble so no code^^. Any Suggestions for the layout of the servlet? public class LoaderServlet extends HttpServlet { // The thread to load the needed information private LoaderThread loader; // The last.fm account private String lfmaccount; public LoaderServlet() { super(); lfmaccount = ""; } @Override protected void doPost(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response) throws ServletException, IOException { if (loader != null) { response.setContentType("text/plain"); response.setHeader("Cache-Control", "no-cache"); PrintWriter out = response.getWriter(); out.write(loader.getStatus()); out.flush(); out.close(); } else { loader = new LoaderThread(lfmaccount); loader.start(); request.getRequestDispatcher("WEB-INF/pages/loader.jsp").forward( request, response); } } @Override protected void doGet(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response) throws ServletException, IOException { if (lfmaccount.isEmpty()) { lfmaccount = request.getSession().getAttribute("lfmUser") .toString(); } request.getRequestDispatcher("WEB-INF/pages/loader.jsp").forward( request, response); } } The jsp uses ajax to regularly post to the servlet and get the status. The thread just runs like 3 minutes, crawling some last.fm data.

    Read the article

  • Looking for suggestions about an architecture of a MultiThreaded app.

    - by Dimitri
    Hello everyone. I am looking to develop a multithreaded application that will be running in unconditional loop and processing high volume of data. High volume is 2000+ records per minute. Processing will involve data retrieval, calculations and data updates. I need the application to perform so that there is virtually no back log, meaning i need to be able to finish up all of the 2000 points in one minute or even faster. Our current implementation features a multithreaded application that is spawn multiple times (from 10 to 20) and we are noticing that it's not handling data as expected and i even feel that instances of the application compete with each other for processor time and eventually if not slowing, not benefiting each other for sure. I would like to know what would be the best approach: have a single instance running but maximize threads that can run simultaneously? or is there other ways i don't know? I'm open to suggestions. Thank you in advance

    Read the article

  • How do I wait for all other threads to finish their tasks?

    - by Mike
    I have several threads consuming tasks from a queue using something similar to the code below. The problem is that there is one type of task which cannot run while any other tasks are being processed. Here is what I have: while (true) // Threaded code { while (true) { lock(locker) { if (close_thread) return; task = GetNextTask(); // Get the next task from the queue } if (task != null) break; wh.WaitOne(); // Wait until a task is added to the queue } task.Run(); } And this is kind of what I need: while (true) { while (true) { lock(locker) { if (close_thread) return; if (disable_new_tasks) { task = null; } else { task = GetNextTask(); } } if (task != null) break; wh.WaitOne(); } if(!task.IsThreadSafe()) { // I would set this to false inside task.Run() at // the end of the non-thread safe task disable_new_tasks = true; Wait_for_all_threads_to_finish_their_current_tasks(); } task.Run(); } The problem is I don't know how to achive this without creating a mess.

    Read the article

  • How do I stop Ant from hanging after executing a java program that attempted to interrupt a thread (and failed) and continued?

    - by Zugwalt
    I have Ant build and execute a java program. This program tries to do something that sometimes hangs, so we execute it in a thread. actionThread.start(); try { actionThread.join(10000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { System.out.println("InterruptedException: "+e.getMessage()); } if (actionThread.isAlive()) { actionThread.interrupt(); System.out.println("Thread timed out and never died"); } The ant call looks like this: <java fork="true" failonerror="yes" classname="myPackage.myPathName" classpath="build"> <arg line=""/> <classpath> <pathelement location="bin" /> <fileset dir="lib"> <include name="**/*.jar"/> </fileset> </classpath> </java> And when this runs I see the "Thread timed out and never died" statement, and I also see the main program finish execution, but then Ant just hangs. Presumably it is waiting for the child threads to finish, but they never will. How can I have Ant be done once it is done executing main() and just kill or ignore dead threads?

    Read the article

  • dao as a member of a servlet - normal?

    - by EugeneP
    I guess, DAO is thread safe, does not use any class members. So can it be used without any problem as a private field of a Servlet ? We need only one copy, and multiple threads can access it simultaneously, so why bother creating a local variable, right?

    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

  • 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

  • REST WCF service locks thread when called using AJAX in an ASP.Net site

    - by Jupaol
    I have a WCF REST service consumed in an ASP.Net site, from a page, using AJAX. I want to be able to call methods from my service async, which means I will have callback handlers in my javascript code and when the methods finish, the output will be updated. The methods should run in different threads, because each method will take different time to complete their task I have the code semi-working, but something strange is happening because the first time I execute the code after compiling, it works, running each call in a different threads but subsequent calls blocs the service, in such a way that each method call has to wait until the last call ends in order to execute the next one. And they are running on the same thread. I have had the same problem before when I was using Page Methods, and I solved it by disabling the session in the page but I have not figured it out how to do the same when consuming WCF REST services Note: Methods complete time (running them async should take only 7 sec and the result should be: Execute1 - Execute3 - Execute2) Execute1 -- 2 sec Execute2 -- 7 sec Execute3 -- 4 sec Output After compiling Output subsequent calls (this is the problem) I will post the code...I'll try to simplify it as much as I can Service Contract [ServiceContract( SessionMode = SessionMode.NotAllowed )] public interface IMyService { // I have other 3 methods like these: Execute2 and Execute3 [OperationContract] [WebInvoke( RequestFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json, ResponseFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json, UriTemplate = "/Execute1", Method = "POST")] string Execute1(string param); } [AspNetCompatibilityRequirements(RequirementsMode = AspNetCompatibilityRequirementsMode.Allowed)] [ServiceBehavior( InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.PerCall )] public class MyService : IMyService { // I have other 3 methods like these: Execute2 (7 sec) and Execute3(4 sec) public string Execute1(string param) { var t = Observable.Start(() => Thread.Sleep(2000), Scheduler.NewThread); t.First(); return string.Format("Execute1 on: {0} count: {1} at: {2} thread: {3}", param, "0", DateTime.Now.ToString(), Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId.ToString()); } } ASPX page <%@ Page EnableSessionState="False" Title="Home Page" Language="C#" MasterPageFile="~/Site.master" AutoEventWireup="true" CodeBehind="Default.aspx.cs" Inherits="RestService._Default" %> <asp:Content ID="HeaderContent" runat="server" ContentPlaceHolderID="HeadContent"> <script type="text/javascript"> function callMethodAsync(url, data) { $("#message").append("<br/>" + new Date()); $.ajax({ cache: false, type: "POST", async: true, url: url, data: '"de"', contentType: "application/json", dataType: "json", success: function (msg) { $("#message").append("<br/>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;" + msg); }, error: function (xhr) { alert(xhr.responseText); } }); } $(function () { $("#callMany").click(function () { $("#message").html(""); callMethodAsync("/Execute1", "hello"); callMethodAsync("/Execute2", "crazy"); callMethodAsync("/Execute3", "world"); }); }); </script> </asp:Content> <asp:Content ID="BodyContent" runat="server" ContentPlaceHolderID="MainContent"> <input type="button" id="callMany" value="Post Many" /> <div id="message"> </div> </asp:Content> Web.config (relevant) <system.webServer> <modules runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true" /> </system.webServer> <system.serviceModel> <serviceHostingEnvironment aspNetCompatibilityEnabled="true" multipleSiteBindingsEnabled="true" /> <standardEndpoints> <webHttpEndpoint> <standardEndpoint name="" helpEnabled="true" automaticFormatSelectionEnabled="true" /> </webHttpEndpoint> </standardEndpoints> </system.serviceModel> Global.asax void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { RouteTable.Routes.Ignore("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); RouteTable.Routes.Add(new ServiceRoute("", new WebServiceHostFactory(), typeof(MyService))); }

    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

  • Noise with multi-threaded raytracer

    - by herber88
    This is my first multi-threaded implementation, so it's probably a beginners mistake. The threads handle the rendering of every second row of pixels (so all rendering is handled within each thread). The problem persists if the threads render the upper and lower parts of the screen respectively. Both threads read from the same variables, can this cause any problems? From what I've understood only writing can cause concurrency problems... Can calling the same functions cause any concurrency problems? And again, from what I've understood this shouldn't be a problem... The only time both threads write to the same variable is when saving the calculated pixel color. This is stored in an array, but they never write to the same indices in that array. Can this cause a problem? Multi-threaded rendered image (Spam prevention stops me from posting images directly..) Ps. I use the exactly same implementation in both cases, the ONLY difference is a single vs. two threads created for the rendering.

    Read the article

  • Multiple things at once (Threads?)

    - by Jonathan
    All, What is a really simple way of having a program do more than one thing at once, even if the computer does not necessarily have multiple 'cores'. Can I do this by creating more than one Thread? My goal is to be able to have two computers networked (through Sockets) to respond to each-other's requests, while my program will at the same time be able to be managing a UI. I want the server to potentially handle more than one client at the same time as well. My understanding is that the communication is done with BufferedReader.readLine() and PrintWriter.println(). My problem is that I want the server to be waiting on multiple readLine() requests, and also be doing other things. How do I handle this? Many thanks, Jonathan

    Read the article

  • Neat way of calling InvokeRequired and Invoke

    - by ho
    I seem to remember seeing some neat way of calling InvokeRequired and Invoke to avoid repeating too much code in every event handler but I can't remember what that was. So does anyone know a neat way of writing that code? Preferably for VB.Net 2005.

    Read the article

  • Cocoa: NSOpenPanel Threads

    - by Craig
    I am monitoring my application using Activity Monitor and whenever NSOpenPanel is called the application appears as having 9 threads and stays like that until the application is closed. Is there a way to release those threads?, Or am I simply misunderstanding what the threads number means?, surely it isn't a good thing to have them open for no reason. Any help would be appreciated

    Read the article

  • Cross Thread problem C#

    - by Frederik Witte
    Hello people - I got this code (lg_log is a listbox, and i want it to log the start_server.bat) Here is the code i got: public void bt_play_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { lg_log.Items.Add("Starting Mineme server .."); string directory = Directory.GetCurrentDirectory(); var info = new ProcessStartInfo(directory + @"\start_base.bat") {UseShellExecute = false, RedirectStandardOutput = true, CreateNoWindow = true, WorkingDirectory = directory + @"\Servers\Base"}; var proc = new Process { StartInfo = info, EnableRaisingEvents = true }; proc.OutputDataReceived += (obj, args) => { if (args.Data != null) { lg_log.Items.Add(args.Data); } }; proc.Start(); proc.BeginOutputReadLine(); lg_log.Items.Add("Server is now running!"); proc.WaitForExit(); } When i run this, i'll get an error .. Anybody can help me? I'll rate the answer up! :D Edit: The error i get is this: System.InvalidOperationException Hope it helps :) The error comes at the lg_log.Items.Add(args.Data); code line

    Read the article

  • Issue with GCD and too many threads

    - by dariaa
    I have an image loader class which provided with NSURL loads and image from the web and executes completion block. Code is actually quite simple - (void)downloadImageWithURL:(NSString *)URLString completion:(BELoadImageCompletionBlock)completion { dispatch_async(_queue, ^{ // dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_HIGH, 0), ^{ UIImage *image = nil; NSURL *URL = [NSURL URLWithString:URLString]; if (URL) { image = [UIImage imageWithData:[NSData dataWithContentsOfURL:URL]]; } dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{ completion(image, URLString); }); }); } When I replace dispatch_async(_queue, ^{ with commented out dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_HIGH, 0), ^{ Images are loading much faster, wich is quite logical (before that images would be loaded one at a time, now a bunch of them are loading simultaneously). My issue is that I have perhaps 50 images and I call downloadImageWithURL:completion: method for all of them and when I use global queue instead of _queue my app eventually crashes and I see there are 85+ threads. Can the problem be that my calling dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_HIGH, 0) 50 times in a row makes GCD create too many threads? I thought that gcd handles all the treading and makes sure the number of threads is not huge, but if it's not the case is there any way I can influence number of threads?

    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

  • boost thread pool

    - by Dtag
    I need a threadpool for my application, and I'd like to rely on standard (C++11 or boost) stuff as much as possible. I realize there is an unofficial(!) boost thread pool class, which basically solves what I need, however I'd rather avoid it because it is not in the boost library itself -- why is it still not in the core library after so many years? In some posts on this page and elsewhere, people suggested using boost::asio to achieve a threadpool like behavior. At first sight, that looked like what I wanted to do, however I found out that all implementations I have seen have no means to join on the currently active tasks, which makes it useless for my application. To perform a join, they send stop signal to all the threads and subsequently join them. However, that completely nullifies the advantage of threadpools in my use case, because that makes new tasks require the creation of a new thread. What I want to do is: ThreadPool pool(4); for (...) { for (int i=0;i<something;i++) pool.pushTask(...); pool.join(); // do something with the results } Can anyone suggest a solution (except for using the existing unofficial thread pool on sourceforge)? Is there anything in C++11 or core boost that can help me here? Thanks a lot

    Read the article

  • Using the windows api and C++, how could I load an exe from the hard drive and run it in its own thread?

    - by returneax
    For the sake of learning I'm trying to do what the OS does when launching a program ie. parsing a PE file and giving it a thread of execution. If I have two exe's one called foo.exe and the other bar.exe, how could I have foo.exe load the contents of bar.exe into memory then have it execute from there in its own thread? I know how to get it into memory using MapViewOfFile or by simple loading the contents on the hard drive into a buffer. I'm assuming simply copying the contents of bar.exe on disk into its own suspended thread and running it wouldn't work. I am semi-familiar with PE file internals. All help is very much appreciated, of course :)

    Read the article

  • What are common uses of condition variables in C++?

    - by jasonline
    I'm trying to learn about condition variables. I would like to know what are the common situations where condition variables are used. One example is in a blocking queue, where two threads access the queue - the producer thread pushes an item into the queue, while the consumer thread pops an item from the queue. If the queue is empty, the consumer thread is waiting until a signal is sent by the producer thread. What are other design situations where you need a condition variable to be used?

    Read the article

  • Will this make the object thread-safe?

    - by sharptooth
    I have a native Visual C++ COM object and I need to make it completely thread-safe to be able to legally mark it as "free-threaded" in th system registry. Specifically I need to make sure that no more than one thread ever accesses any member variable of the object simultaneously. The catch is I'm almost sure that no sane consumer of my COM object will ever try to simultaneously use the object from more than one thread. So I want the solution as simple as possible as long as it meets the requirement above. Here's what I came up with. I add a mutex or critical section as a member variable of the object. Every COM-exposed method will acquire the mutex/section at the beginning and release before returning control. I understand that this solution doesn't provide fine-grained access and this might slow execution down, but since I suppose simultaneous access will not really occur I don't care of this. Will this solution suffice? Is there a simpler solution?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >